Ubiquiti Wireless Reviews

We use it mostly for our office network.

It helps the employees in doing more work. While moving from one place to another, especially for the meetings, it is really important to have a reliable and stable internet connection. Ubiquiti gives them a comfortable feeling while working in the office.

I like the fact that you can set it up like a wireless connection. Previously, we used to connect from one SSID to another. When we started using Ubiquiti, everyone was so happy because even if they moved from one place or another, say from the pantry to a meeting room, they didn't need to connect manually to another SSID. This is one of the features that I really like about it. It is doing a great job.

It offers a free controller that you can use to see if the devices are connected or not and if they are up or down.

There should be an easier way to contact the support. If we need to do something on it, it will be easier and faster if there is a support number to call. Currently, their support is mostly through email or chat. If there is a hotline that you can call directly, that would be good. It will really help a lot. They should also include more after-sales support.

They can maybe also provide more details on what's happening with the network.

I have been using this solution since 2013. That's roughly eight years.

It is really stable. We've been using it for the past eight years, and so far, everyone is loving it. We have no complaints. Now, all our offices use Ubiquiti, which proves how stable it is.

It is pretty scalable. It is easy to scale. Whenever we need more access points, it is easy to set it up. 

We have roughly 200 users with mixed roles. We have engineering, finance, HR, customer service, and CEO. In terms of increasing its usage, we just upgraded last year. We are in a good position right now. If our company expands, we might add or upgrade our network.

Currently, their support is mostly through email or chat. It would be good and helpful if there is a hotline that you can call directly. They should have direct contact numbers just like other enterprise companies. For example, Cisco provides a dedicated person with whom you can speak. 

It is pretty straightforward. Even non-technical people can set it up by following the videos on YouTube.

I like the fact that it offers enterprise features at a cheap price. If you compare it with Cisco, it has most of the features that Cisco has been offering but at a lesser price. I am satisfied with its price.

We did evaluate other products. One of the reasons why we chose Ubiquiti was its pricing and licensing. For other enterprise brands, you need to pay on a yearly basis. The controller has a cost as well. With Ubiquiti, we got enterprise features for a cheaper price. It was more than enough.

I would recommend this solution to others. You can never go wrong with Ubiquiti because it is already proven and tested, and there is no need to do POC on it.

I would rate Ubiquiti Wireless a nine out of ten.

We use the product for site-to-site connectivity.

I'm using wireless radios. There are features like wireless bridging that are quite useful. We're using wireless bridging. That's the primary purpose as to why we have the equipment. 

They are reliable in terms of wireless connectivity.

The initial setup is easy.

The availability could be better. Currently, the equipment is always out of stock due to the amount they're pricing. It's quite cheap, so people want to buy it. Their stock is a bit low compared to others, making it difficult to purchase.

I've been using the solution for ten years.

The stability is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We find it reliable. 

In terms of scalability, I cannot say at this time how it is. If it is a very small one, it may have one or two points only. We only have maybe three to four antennas. That's not very much. I cannot grade scalability with such a small deployment.

We have 20 users at a maximum on this product. They are all in operations. The engineering department doesn't use it that much.

In the advent of fiber, it's unlikely we will increase usage. 

I don't find technical support very useful. I usually use forums or community support. I haven't tried to call technical support in the past.

You just need to read the manual. For some concerns that are not seen in the manual, I go to the forums. The only time I would like to go to support is if there is a feature maybe that doesn't exist in the system. Currently, I am not into those things, so I'm only currently using the current features of their package.

I have Ubiquiti Wireless, MikroTik Wireless, and MikroTik Wired.

The only brand we have considered for this particular purpose was Ubiquiti since all others are very expensive brands. For our use case, we cannot afford to implement expensive antennas as it's difficult to afford for purchasing,

The initial setup is easy. The complete deployment took one week. 

We have three people involved in the deployment and maintenance. 

I noted an ROI after five years.

You can use the equipment for five years without any problems before you need to replace anything. Or, if an incident occurs that you can't control - like calamities or lightning strikes that really damage the dish. That's the only time you have to have problems. They last a long period of time. Your return investment is good for the price they give.

The pricing is very, very reasonable. It was quite cheap. We buy them outright. There is no licensing. 

Support is not included with that, as the equipment itself is already usable as it is.

I was looking into Cambium. I was trying to see how much the difference in prices were. Since it was a very big jump in price, I know I could not justify its purchase for the capacity that we only have.

We use a mixture of versions. We're constantly upgrading, so there is some old equipment and new equipment.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use it to set up wireless WANs ranging from a single access point in a small business to 100 apartments in an accommodation complex.

The solution offers us good situational awareness by providing information on user activity, signal strength, and all the data that you need to manage the system and understand issues. 

The strength of the routers could be improved. When it comes to serious routing, the solution doesn't measure up to the big guys like Juniper and Cisco, but we don't expect it to.

I have been using Ubiquiti Wireless for three years. 

The stability isn't perfect, but that's the nature of a leading edge technology and you learn through working with it.

We've run into a few limitations in what we call large accommodation environments where we've got about 100 wireless devices, trying to do things with USG type routers, onsite controllers, where they run out of capacity. This could have been our technicians making incorrect estimates of what was possible, but we're having to put in small local service to do that function. It would be preferable to have everything occurring in the core router. When that happens, the core device is overloaded and it's difficult to access it remotely. That's been one of the issues we've run into as we've pushed the limit on the number of devices on a single site.
We maintain over 1,000, probably 2,000 devices with just three people.

I can't comment on that as we haven't had to use it much at all.  

I don't do the setup personally, but I can see that once you understand how to roll the solution out, the process is relatively straightforward. Being able to adopt the device, see it on the management system and configure it, are all easy to implement.
Complexity also depends on what you're implementing. Setting everything up in the lab prior to on-site deployment means that you can complete the installation in less than an hour, which makes it look efficient and professional. If adjustments need to be made later it can all be done remotely, this is one of the benefits of cloud management and remote access equipment. 

We have absolutely seen a return on our investment.

We don't have any licensing costs in our use-case. It's low cost, perhaps not the leading edge in the industry, but for the type of industry we work in, the cost suits us perfectly. It's aggressive on price so we can make a margin deploying it, and we can make money managing it for our clients. 

We are a virtual organization with a number of people working from home and coming together to provide solutions.
Most of the equipment switches, wireless equipment cameras etc. work pretty well.
Once everything is up and running, the solution doesn't need much attention at all. That's why we like it. We want to run an efficient business and scale the business well, and not have to hire too many people to do the job. That's working out very well.

Setting it up wasn't so complicated. It is reliable. Security-wise, we didn't have much trouble, but that could be due to our environment. We haven't had so many attacks, at least up till now.

The range and maybe the quality of the signal can be improved. I had a feeling that the range wasn't long enough. Unfortunately, beyond a certain range, the signal was too weak. If I'm not mistaken, it must have been something like 100 or more than 100 meters, but I'm not sure. So, one improvement I wish for this equipment is to have a longer range, but that could mainly be due to the model we're using.

In Ubiquiti NanoStation, we have some problems with the reset button. The way the reset button is placed can be very uncomfortable. We lost some of our access points due to the fact that we eventually damaged the reset button. I would prefer a simpler reset button. There could be a kind of toggle button, but that's a matter of engineering.

I have been using this solution for five to six years. We are working with Ubiquiti NanoStation, but they are relatively old now, so we need to renew our equipment.

It is reliable.

It wasn't complicated to set it up.

We don't buy directly. We have our finance department that buys things. My speculation on the price is that because we buy from private companies and because the product is imported, people tend to give us at higher prices. This is due to the fact that it is government procurement. So, sometimes, they are not paid directly, and they have to go through the whole administrative process before they are paid. So, they tend to compensate by increasing the price, but I won't be able to say what is the exact price.

I would rate Ubiquiti Wireless an eight out of 10.

We use the solution for small operations, for example, offices and hotels.

We have problems with conductivity with the product. When we move around the connection is not stable and drops off.

We have not been using the solution for very long.

The production is not very stable in our experience.

The product is scalable.

The customer support was decent, we had no issues.

We have used Aruba wireless products as well, and they are better.

The setup is easy and user friendly.

The product could allow for more controls for the user and an overall upgrade on the product as a whole. It could be a lot better.

The product is expensive.

The solution has an easy installation but we have many problems with the advanced configuration.

I rate this Ubiquiti Wireless a five out of ten.

We mostly use Ubiquiti Wireless for small business wireless solutions.

I like the price, quality, and consistency of manufacturing.

Tech support is mostly remote and could be better. 

When you need to get into certain different levels of configuration, you'll need to understand the network a little better. It can get a little complicated with their higher-end gear.

I have been using Ubiquiti for about five years.

Ubiquiti Wireless is stable. I'm unaware of any issues at this point.

Ubiquiti Wireless is very easy to scale.

Tech support is alright. They do get back to you within a certain timeframe, but their tech support is not via phones. It's mostly remote. I prefer phone support, but it depends on where they're based. Whether or not there's a language barrier, whether they're fully up to speed with the actual product itself. 

Numerous vendors decided to shift their support to a third-party company, within the country or out of the country. But they don't train them properly, and then you run into problems.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Ubiquiti technical support an eight.

We used a number of different applications, specifically Cisco, in the prior years. We switched because of the cost and quality.

It depends. You can have a standard access point, which is very simple to install. It requires minimal configuration, depending on the typology of the customer. Or you could get into some of their higher-end gear, which could take two to three days to configure correctly.

Ubiquiti Wireless is affordable.

I would advise potential users of Ubiquiti Wireless to first purchase a couple of pieces and try them. They'll be happy.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Ubiquiti Wireless a nine.

The solution has an easy configuration. We use this solution for showcases at our organization. We use it in the case of UB-KIT for guests and production for the wireless WLAN segment.

The most valuable features are the double PA in 802.1X authentication and the radio server.

The mesh configuration and WiFi 6 coverage should be improved.

We have been using this solution for two years on private and on-premises.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution. We have approximately 15 users using this solution in private and 12 or 13 on guess connection. There are three people responsible for maintenance.

We used Cisco Meraki and Aruba in the past and switched to Ubiquiti because it has a better configuration.

The installation took two days to complete. It was complex to install because of the radio server authentication and integration with the active directory.

We did not use a third party to install it, and we completed it ourselves.

Ubiquiti Wireless is not expensive.

I rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We have offices scattered around the building and some of them may be used for phoning in to access conference calls. Also, when someone comes in with a laptop, they can be wirelessly connected to our network. This is easier than using a wired connection.

The range is usually pretty good, which is the most important thing to use because more or less, all wireless access points are the same.

The stability can be problematic but in general, it is okay.

Better security is important because we need to have some degree of control over who is connected and how we can restrict the level of connectivity. We have been catching people who are abusing their access.

Extending the ranger further would be even better for us.

We have been using Ubiquiti Wireless for between five and ten years.

It is not always stable, unfortunately.

In my office, we have approximately 100 people using wireless. Not all of them are using the service at the same time.

We have not been in contact with technical support. Rather, we rely on ourselves.

It takes between a few minutes and an hour to install an access point.

We have a technical team of trained people, in-house, for deployment and maintenance. We are a public institution, so we don't always have the best technicians due to salary issues. But, if we were to consider the technical aspect then I'd say that we need to strengthen our skills.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.