Aruba Wireless Reviews

We use the solution for corporate users and guest users who come to the company. We use it for IoT devices, like factory devices and cameras.

We have a multi-site design with Aruba. For small locations, we use Aruba Remote Access Point. We can open a VPN tunnel to the controllers, and the users can connect their servers securely. For example, we used a captive portal solution from Aruba. The guest users could log in using web portals without any tools.

We manage all wireless devices from Aruba Central. Aruba AirWave is an on-premise solution. If we have our own servers, we can use AirWave and troubleshoot wireless networks. It's a good management system. It enables easy troubleshoots and management. The solution is secure. It has all the security options.

The support should be faster.

I have been using the solution for four or five years.

The tool is stable.

The tool is scalable. We have about 3000 users.

The support was better before. Now it is not good. It should be improved.

The setup is complex for new users. Cloud deployment is easier than on-premise deployment. The deployment can be done in one to two days.

The deployment can be done in-house. We can deploy devices from the cloud for remote locations. We need not go there. Aruba has a solution for zero-touch provisioning.

The product is expensive. We need to renew the license to use the tool.

I will recommend the solution to others. Overall, I rate the product a seven out of ten.

I have found the most valuable features are the new Wi-Fi six technology and it also integrates with triple-A solutions. It has good bandwidth and virtual control.

I would like to see the management improve.

I have been using Aruba Wireless for the past two to three years.

The stability is excellent and ranks a nine on a scale of one to ten.

The scalability is very high with Aruba Wireless.

Technical support is very helpful and response time is good.

Positive

I have used all three solutions Aruba Wireless, Cisco, and Ruckus.

The initial setup is straightforward and easy to set up. Simply plug and play and it will automatically block calls. You can change it every Friday or by favorites.

The setup is generally in-house and we support it.

When you look at the price it is a higher price than Cisco.

I have used all three and Cisco is more complicated than Aruba Wireless.

I would rate Aruba Wireless an eight on a scale of one to ten.

Aruba Wireless does not have too many distinguishing feature sets. However, tunneling is more flexible in this solution than other solutions, such as Ruckus.

Aruba Wireless could improve the dashboard. It is not straightforward or intuitive to use and could be more user-friendly. For IT employees the dashboards are fine but when it comes to the end-user it is difficult. The Mobility Controller dashboard is not meant for non-IT employees.

I have been using Aruba Wireless for approximately 12 years.

Aruba Wireless is a stable solution. The controllers have been working well for over four years, but I have replaced a few APs.

I rate the stability of Aruba Wireless an eight out of ten.

Aruba Wireless is scalable. However, you need to purchase certain models of the solution to have high limits. For example, the 7210 model has hard-coded limits that I cannot increase.

We primarily support hotels and I have completed 500 rooms. The system can handle approximately 500 to 1000 users.

When we need to escalate to a priority one case it is difficult.

I rate the support of Aruba Wireless a two out of five.

Neutral

I have used Ruckus previously and when I compare this solution to Ruckus, they are both very similar. I implement both of them.

The initial setup of Aruba Wireless is a lot easier to do than on other solutions.

The price of Aruba Wireless could improve. It is expensive. However, I am able to reduce my costs because I do not use all the features in the controller, such as the AD integration and other enterprise features.

I prefer Ruckus over Aruba Wireless.

I rate Aruba Wireless an eight out of ten.

The most valuable features of Aruba Wireless are the seamless feature and the concurrent user.

Aruba Wireless can improve the assigning of access points. We have times that the nearest access point is not assigned but one far away. The integration between access points could improve.

I have been using Aruba Wireless for approximately one year.

Aruba Wireless is very stable among all the other access points I have used.

The scalability of Aruba Wireless is good.

We have approximately 1,000 to 1,300 users using the solution. We plan to increase the usage of the solution. There are plans to install 150 access points in January.

We have a partner in Indonesia that we use for support that is called Agiva and they sometimes escalate issues to Aruba Wireless. I do not have direct experience with the support of Aruba Wireless.

I do not have any experience with other vendors other than Aruba Wireless.

The initial setup of Aruba Wireless is simple, including a wireless plan used. If we have instant access points and change them to computer access points, it is simple to do.

We have a license for the source mobility controller.

The price of Aruba Wireless is expensive.

I rate the price of Aruba Wireless a two out of five.

We have four people for the maintenance of the solution.

I rate Aruba Wireless a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for access points. 

The solution is very complete. 

The portal has been very helpful for us. 

It's easy to set up the solution. 

We have found the product to be stable. 

It's scalable. 

They need to increase the number of routers on the controller. The VSSIP needs to have at least 25 access points. I just need them to increase the access points without the controller.

Other than that, it has everything we need, and we do not need any new features. 

The downside is right now there is a shortage of hardware. It's hard to acquire switches and access points. 

I started using the solution one year ago.

The stability has been good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is scalable. 

We have ten people using the solution right now. 

I've never called technical support. I haven't needed any assistance so far. 

I've also used Juniper.

The product has been very easy to set up. It's straightforward to implement. It did not become overly complex. Under ten access points only takes about five minutes to set up. 

We only need one person to manage the solution. 

It is free to use. It is open source. We do not have to pay for a license. 

We're an Aruba partner. 

We are using version 11. In 2022, it might be now version 12. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

Aruba Wireless could improve the interface, it does not have a smart web interface. Other solutions have smart web interfaces, such as Cisco Meraki.

I have been using Aruba Wireless for approximately six years.

Aruba Wireless is stable.

Aruba Wireless is scalable for the needs of my customers. Some of my customers have approximately 1,500 users using the solution and it works well.

The price of Aruba Wireless is reasonable.

I rate Aruba Wireless a seven out of ten.

Our team handles the Aruba controller. We have four senior and two junior engineers.

AirWave is a valuable feature.

We're using the Aruba Sensor, but sometimes the sensor isn't talking to AirWave or the AP. If something happens, we need to receive an email directly from the sensor, but the controller doesn't know. If there's something like the high channel utilization from the sensor we send to the controller, the controller can change the channel because they're all in the same environment.

Also, the controller can not do active/standby mode. It only works in active/active. I haven't seen any option for active/standby because we want to put one in the backup center. However, with the active/active mode, the traffic must go to the primary and the backup center.

I would like it if Aruba had a mobile app so I wouldn't need to log in on my laptop. They should also simplify the solution, so there aren't so many layers. It would be nice if the solution double-checked your configurations. For example, it could warn you if a configuration change in one layer conflicts with your current settings. 

I have been using Aruba Wireless since 2018.

Aruba is stable. 

Aruba is pretty scalable. 

I've called Aruba support directly for several tickets. It is quite good most of the time.

I work with Cisco and Aruba. We are more familiar with Cisco because we've been using it for more than 15 years. It is stable and available in active/standby. We can put one in the backup dial center and one in the primary dial center.

Cisco's controller is also stable, and they're using DNA to monitor. It sends us an alert if something happens and tells us what caused the problem. It can identify the root cause and solution. 

Deploying Aruba is somewhat complex. There are many layers. It's easy to make mistakes because the same setting will appear in different layers. Various parts of large buildings can have different settings.

We don't like the subscription model. We need to adjust our budget every time we renew the license.

I rate Aruba Wireless eight out of 10. I would recommend it to a small or medium-sized company. It depends on your budget because Aruba is slightly cheaper than Cisco. 

Our company has a conference center and we use the solution for all our conferencing needs. 

The solution has been helpful in improving the way our company functions. 

The solution is easy to configure on-premise. We always got complaints about support for our prior solution so handling configuration in-house is easier. 

Configuration could be made easier with more bandwidth than they offer at the moment. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

The solution's stability is good. 

The solution is very flexible and scalable. We have about 10,000 users and are at about 50% of maximum capacity. 

We used to contract with outside, local vendors for technical support, but found them picky about their ability to respond. We now handle support on-premise. 

Neutral

Our company uses a few solutions for our conferencing needs including this solution and Ruckus Wireless. We added Aruba because we expanded and needed two solutions. 

The initial setup was easy compared to other solutions. We have two staff members who maintain the solution. 

We hired a third party for setup and it took about four months. I rate the setup experience an eight out of ten.

We have received a good return on investment. I would rate our ROI a six out of ten. 

Licensing for the solution is based on number of users. There was also an initial setup fee, but I don't have those details. 

Our company looked at a few other options, but chose Aruba based on recommendations from other large businesses that compare in size/scope to ours.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

I have implemented Aruba for a few small customers. 

Price is one of the most important factors. We have a solution that's reasonably cost-effective when balanced against all the areas we need to cover. 

Aruba doesn't match some competitors in wireless signal strength. It isn't in the same class as Cisco Meraki, so I would use Cisco Meraki in situations where I need to cover a large open space. Meraki has more powerful signals going out.

Coverage and penetration have been the biggest disappointments. You should be able to connect to a visible Wifi access point. Often, people 20 meters away from an Aruba external access point need to move closer to get into the coverage radius. 

I have used Aruba for the past couple of years.

Aruba Wireless is stable. 

Aruba is scalable. I'm not doing dealing with the management or licensing, so I'm not aware of the costs compared to some other products.

I would be using it through a third party, so I wouldn't go to Aruba for support directly.

I rate Cisco Meraki higher than most others I've used in the same price range. Ruckus is stable, but it can be difficult to implement an external Wifi connection without some kind of problem with the cabling or something else.

Aruba is in roughly the same class as  Ubiquiti, which carries no licenses that I'm aware of. Ruckus is an excellent product to use for local government clients when I'm not planning to go back there. Plus, it has the advantage of being an HP-branded product. 

All wireless solutions are relatively pricey in my experience. The cost of a Wifi access point is only part of it. The implementation cost is bigger. I'm paying just over €200 for an additional internal access point. An external access point costs us €676 plus VAT, so that's about €840 for an external AP.

I rate Aruba Wireless about six out of 10. When planning for the cost of a project, you consider the price of different products, including operational and implementation costs, and make a judgment call. It's different if you have a portal. If you need to invest in a portal, it's difficult to transition away from that portal's brand. For example, if I have Ruckus access points in certain buildings and a Ruckus gateway handling all of those, I'm probably going to stick with Ruckus for any additional Wifi points. I'm not going to deviate from that.

I've been a consultant for six years.

Aruba is easier than Juniper.

The stability and management could be improved.

I have been working with Aruba Wireless for five years.

We are currently working with Aruba Wireless but will be changing to Juniper later this year.

When it comes to stability, Cisco is number one. Aruba and Juniper are similar.

Aruba Wireless is a scalable solution.

Technical support is good.

I have been working with Juniper WLC Series for one year. We plan to implement Juniper next month.

The initial setup is very easy.

The pricing is fine.

Cisco is more expensive than Aruba or Juniper.

Aruba has pricing for a Virtual license with a VLAN package.

We decided to change to Juniper because it looked right, and because of the easy management.

I would rate Aruba Wireless a nine out of ten.