Aruba Instant On Switches Reviews

I mainly work with Aruba Wireless. With Cisco, it was more than a year ago. Within the last 12 months, I've been working with some of those technologies. I mainly work with Aruba Wireless. I have been working with some of the HP switches. I work with Aruba Instant On Switches. I am an end user of this tool. I am currently using the Aruba Instant On Switches 1930, 2930 models. I usually use Aruba Instant On Switches generally for our network, in the distribution switches and the access layer switches.

The most valuable feature I have found in this tool is socket. These switches are very easy to handle and there are no issues. Both the CLI and the web management are available, making it easy to handle. It is compatible with some other brands and switches also. I utilize the VLAN support feature in Aruba Instant On Switches. It is VLAN-based and generally, there are around 40 to 50 VLANs that help our organization in terms of network segmentation. The flexibility of Aruba Instant On Switches is at the top level.

I cannot say exactly whether I have employed the Quality of Service feature in this solution. Considering security at the switch level, we have not employed any kind of special security methods for layer 2. Our layer 3 firewall mainly handles the security layer. I haven't integrated security protocols IEEE or MAC authentication. I tried MAC authentication in one location with the HP switches, and I was unable to do it after trying for one or two days. We didn't use cloud management in Aruba Instant On Switches.

Within the last 12 months, I've been working with some of those technologies.

The performance of Aruba Instant On Switches is good. Earlier, Cisco was much better than Aruba. But considering the price and the ease of management, Aruba Instant On Switches is good to use for us. We don't have issues with performance. We have been using it for a few years now without any real issues. I would evaluate the stability of this solution as a seven out of ten.

I would rate the scalability of Aruba Instant On Switches as an eight regarding the ability of the product to adapt to our needs. As previously explained, we can set it up on any network anywhere.

I have communicated with the technical support for Aruba Instant On Switches. I would rate them a six out of ten. It would be good to have our own account so we can access and deal directly with technical support, for example, in the community. With Cisco, if we have an account, we can go there and get technical help. I want more direct communication with the technical support.

I haven't used another solution for the same use cases before Aruba Instant On Switches. With Cisco, we were able to manage it easily by using the command level. However, in that case, we had to be professional in that area. Price was another issue that prevented us from choosing Cisco. That is one of the reasons I switched, along with compatibility considerations, though compatibility isn't a real issue because currently both Cisco and Aruba are in our network.

I participated in the initial setup of Aruba Instant On Switches. Because the web management is available, the initial setup was not difficult. It's mainly straightforward when comparing with Cisco.

I did everything with my internal team and some other team members. Generally, we have our internal team, and our partners or vendors support us always.

We mainly go for Aruba Instant On Switches since our network has Aruba switches, especially considering the compatibility and as previously explained, the familiarity and easy management. Economically, its price is acceptable for us. It is cost-effective.

I evaluated some switches, but Extreme is not among them.

Sometimes some features are not available. For example, the network discovery protocol, LLDP, is not available on some of the switches. When we look at the CLI management, we are considering Cisco, and we are familiar with the Cisco commands. In that case, at the command level, Cisco is much better than Aruba Instant On Switches. Considering the configuration and the CLI level and some of the features, Cisco has better offerings than Aruba Instant On Switches. There are Netgear and some other low-cost switches, but the quality of those is not aligned with our organization's requirements. Overall, I rate Aruba Instant On Switches a seven out of ten.

Aruba Instant On Switches are primarily used for SME customers with environments such as 20 branches and headquarters that are not large, typically around 50 to 150 users. This kind of environment does not require a famous brand and customers are looking for something affordable.

We cloud manage Aruba Instant On Switches, and I believe most of our deployments, approximately 90%, involve cloud management to handle configurations for the switches.

The first valuable aspect of Aruba Instant On Switches is the price because it is affordable, and it is easy to deploy and not complicated regarding licensing because when you purchase it once, you can enjoy it for more than five years or lifetime.

I usually utilize the VLAN support feature in Aruba Instant On Switches because typically customers have requirements for different VLANs, usually less than 10 VLANs, to create different zones for their users and to increase security.

The VLAN support is mostly to have different segments for different users, which creates security and helps to avoid any unforeseen risks in the network.

I do not employ the quality of service (QoS) feature in Aruba Instant On Switches much because usually, quality of services will be applied in the gateway firewall instead of the switch itself.

If they can apply more security features to Aruba Instant On Switches, such as network access control including ClearPass, then that would be great.

I do not have much experience with Aruba Instant On Switches; I have experience with them for approximately half a year.

In terms of stability and scalability, I have not faced any performance issues with Aruba; it functions very well, with only one case related to how the Aruba network does not have a router, but since they acquired Juniper, I believe that will be resolved soon.

I find Aruba to perfectly fit alongside Cisco. Discussing Aruba itself, the product scalability can be deployed on a very large network scale.

I do not know much about Aruba technical support because my role primarily involves solution deployment, while troubleshooting and escalation are typically handled by another team.

Neutral

I am not currently working with NetMon as I did not work on any company or use any solutions called NetMon.

For network monitoring from LogRhythm, I used to work with a company that was selling the network monitoring solution, and I have since quit that company.

I believe that every single product's initial setup process is not that complicated; it depends on what the customer wants and it can become very complicated.

The setup process can get complicated based on customer requirements, as they may want something that addresses their specific problems, making it less straightforward.

Cisco has their advantages within the technology they offer that can integrate with many things; for example, their switches can utilize ThousandEyes, and Cisco has a huge roadmap for customers with the whole product lifecycle for big enterprises.

We are working with Cisco, we are working with Aruba, and including the China brand as well.

Currently, I am mostly doing troubleshooting and focused on the network solution, such as the network switch and then network control, wireless, and so on.

Mostly, we are proposing the Catalyst from Cisco to our clients because Nexus is not used as much because that is more for data center usage.

From the Catalyst, we mostly work with the smaller box, such as the 3000s or 5000 series, and we do not use those big boxes because our company is not that large and our customers are also small SMEs or perhaps education customers.

I do not have experience working with ACI solution or Meraki MS switches as that belongs to another colleague, so I cannot really comment much on that.

We are proposing and also deploying Aruba switches, Aruba Wi-Fi, and also their controllers.

That is not just Aruba Instant On Switches; Aruba itself actually has the Aruba brand and also includes Aruba Instant On Switches, which is another brand targeting very small SMEs.

The integration of robust security protocols helps ensure data integrity and protection in the network, as we usually apply Aruba ClearPass, but not much in Aruba Instant On Switches because the clients do not really have those requirements.

I cannot really assess the flexibility in terms of deployment options for cloud-managed solutions versus on-premises because I do not have use cases to share.

The performance and cost-effectiveness balance of Aruba Instant On Switches is most appreciated regarding their cost because if you classify them as enterprise-grade switches, then they are very affordable.

My advice for other organizations considering Aruba Instant On Switches is that if they are looking for affordable network switches, Aruba Instant On Switches have good functionality for enterprise use cases as they support VLAN and routing. I would rate this review seven out of ten.

My use case for Aruba Instant On Switches is for small business.

The best features of Aruba Instant On Switches include the ability to remotely monitor the access points and any troubles on the network. The flexibility of deploying on-premises or cloud-managed was important to me, and I used cloud-managed primarily for viewing the network. I tested it in my home for about a year before taking it down and getting other products.

Aruba Instant On Switches could be improved by utilizing more AI features. They are starting to use some AI capabilities, though I haven't kept up with developments since I left.

I have dealt with Aruba Instant On Switches for four years.

I dealt with support from Aruba in general, and I would rate them an eight on a scale of one to ten because the support was good. The engineers and technical people were helpful.

Positive

I did not use other LAN switching before choosing Aruba Instant On Switches. I had only a basic setup for my home network before I started working with Aruba and testing the product.

The initial setup for Aruba Instant On Switches was straightforward because I have enough technical knowledge to handle it.

The pricing was good because they do not nickel and dime on costs.

I could not compare the main differences between Aruba Instant On Switches and other LAN switching options, which is why I joined a peer group to see what others were doing.

I use wireless access points on the LAN. I did not utilize the VLAN support feature with Aruba Instant On Switches. I did not employ Quality of Service to prioritize traffic because it was for a home office. I did not use any security protocols such as MAC authentication or IEEE with Aruba Instant On Switches because my home network was already solid regarding security with VPNs. Through cloud-managed solutions, I did not use AWS or Azure or another cloud provider for this application, although I have used AWS in other contexts. I did not work directly for them as I was more of an outsourced consultant, and I needed to get familiar with the product because representing, selling, or consulting on a product requires thorough knowledge. I was more hands-on with the contracts and had to gather the contracts and pricing information because that was an important part of the process. Overall, I would rate Aruba Instant On Switches an eight on a scale of one to ten.

Almost everyone in our company is using Aruba Instant On Switches today.

Aruba Instant On Switches is a good product with nice solutions that are easy to configure. I appreciate that Aruba Instant On Switches is reliable and stable, and it is also easy to integrate with other solutions. They represent the latest offerings on the line network.

I believe Aruba Instant On Switches improves the user experience by providing simplicity and reliability.

I would not like to improve something; the only thing is what occurred last week.

I have been using Aruba Instant On Switches for just three months.

I would rate the stability of Aruba Instant On Switches as an eight out of ten.

Aruba Instant On Switches is a scalable solution with no problems. For me, I rate it a six on scalability out of ten because I am quite new to it; it is a learning process.

My impressions of the support for Aruba Instant On Switches are that it is difficult; it is not fast or knowledgeable.

I have not developed other switches before. I could guarantee that I worked with different solutions, but not on HNA.

The setup for Aruba Instant On Switches is straightforward and quite easy to use.

For the deployment to maintenance of Aruba Instant On Switches, it is the same as video developer work. You need to install the IP address, create a remote connection, and then it requires configuration of what you need to configure to find any other requirements.

We need engineers for the deployment to maintenance of Aruba Instant On Switches; it sounds an enterprise solution.

With Aruba Instant On Switches, you need to pay for a yearly license. If you have yearly support, you have to pay for that.

For Aruba Instant On Switches, there are not really any extra costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

I would rate Aruba Instant On Switches on pricing as a six.

I will buy Aruba Instant On Switches as it is the same product I have seen for now. If you cannot collect the one of Jennifer, you cannot collect the On.

I do not know how Aruba Instant On Switches can support the transition to remote work. I am not an expert on most types of questions.

I have no idea how the mobile application for Aruba Instant On Switches can add convenience to manage your network. I have never worked with them.

It is not a ten for Aruba Instant On Switches because there is always room for improvement, and I think IBM was also with other components from other vendors.

Based on my experience, I would recommend Aruba Instant On Switches because they work fine for them, always.

Regarding security features of Aruba Instant On Switches, when security features are far above, I did not know that they have a security product.

Regarding additional features of Aruba Instant On Switches, it is not something related to me, but I am pretty sure there are many people trying to see, especially for customers that work as well with trader, and they have algorithm devices.

I rate this review an eight overall.

The client does not choose the devices. The switches and modems are chosen by the presales unit. For example, I would like to have this product because the customer has 14 stores, and some of the stores have one or two access points. It is better to have an Aruba Instant On switch. It is an 84-port switch that is manageable in the cloud. This is why our presales unit has chosen the Aruba Instant On switch.

It will be layer 2. There is no configuration required. There are no specific requirements for the switches.

One of the most valuable features is that the product is centrally managed. You neither have to visit the customer nor do any troubleshooting as long as you have access.  Manageability is one of the powers of the Aruba devices. 

The solution does not have any console access. For example, if you do not have internet access on your side and you need to configure anything, you should at least have CLI access to do something or manage the solution to put to some IP. It will only work if we have a TSCT on the network. We can port and configure the initial settings before we get the Instant On Switches.

I am not working deeply on Instant On devices. I have only installed it in a couple of accommodation sites. Even today, one customer has ordered to install 80 pieces of Instant On. I’ve to order additional 94 access points. I was confused about whether to go with Aruba Instant On or AP-505. Instant On has limited accessibility but AP-505 have cloud or local access on normal infrastructure. This would be better and easier to configure. So, there are further improvements in regard to console access and some limitations with access.

I have experience with Aruba Instant On switches. I have been working with them internally for three or four years, but not in large quantities. I have not found them to be cheaper than other switches, so I have not used them extensively.

Now, for example, I'm working on a project for one customer. It has 14 stores. In those 14 stores, there are 32 access points. The access point is 615, which will be working on the central. And the switch is in the central. So I'm working on both of them together.

The stability is fine. I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. Almost a ten on a ten.

I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. 

I would not rate it ten because it doesn't have CLXs, and no console access. You must have DXCP and Internet on it for the initial setup. This can be a problem if you are trying to install the switch in a new location that does not have internet connectivity yet.

I would recommend Aruba Instant On switches for small and medium businesses. It is not a good fit for enterprise-level companies because it lacks some of the features and scalability that enterprises need.

And for small business purposes, obviously, you cannot have a device or product that will support everything together. So you should have a variation of the product with some limited features, that will be fine.

Aruba Instant On is a good choice for small businesses. It is easy to set up and manage, and it offers a wide range of features that are suitable for small businesses. It is also very cost-effective.

Every 15 days, I need to contact Aruba Support. For example, last two weeks, they resolved two issues. Two days ago, one of our customers had an Aruba 7205 controller. He had purchased the license and support as well. The payment was made. Everything was done to receive the license only. I received the controller. To receive the license, it took more than two weeks. There is a distributor, a general partner, and a business involved in the process. I even received confirmation yesterday that the controller serial number has been activated with HPE support. When I checked last night, the serial number was still not eligible to receive support.

It reflects that the workflow is delayed in updating each other. If I get confirmation with an HPE certificate that this device is unlisted for support and I try to open a ticket using this serial number, I get an alert that this device is not under warranty. However, I already have a certificate that was supposed to be updated on the server itself. The coordination between the departments is taking time, which has a negative impact. For example, I need to open a ticket for a customer, but I cannot do so now for any emergency support. This is one incident that I have been facing for two weeks.

Another thing is that I was going to start configuring ClearPass on Monday. I opened a ticket for ClearPass licenses on August 15. Normally, you receive a notification within an hour of opening a ticket that the ticket has been created. According to your agreement with HPE, they will get back to you with a solution or action plan within a certain period. I received that notification email on August 20, five days after I opened the ticket saying “Thank you very much for a point in the ticket”. This was weird and unexpected. I was surprised that I had opened the ticket correctly or followed the procedure correctly. When you click on "Submit," the ticket number appears on the next page. I did not take a screenshot because I thought I would see it in my list. I did not see it there, and I was expecting that I had done something wrong. I did not know that the ticket was not opening correctly. After five days, I received a notification email thanking me for opening a ticket with Aruba support.

It took five days for me to receive another notification that I had opened a ticket. Normally, every time it is within an hour, we see the notification. But this ticket, it took five days, from August 15th to the 22nd. I do work with Aruba tech guys, and they are very good. I'm normally talking to the Bangalore team since I'm in the Middle East. They're fine, excellent, on time. It's only during working hours. Some of them are very knowledgeable, while some of them are new joiners, they will have some issues, but it's fine.

Cisco offers all its services separately, while Aruba offers an integrated service with good performance and is cost-effective. I am working on performance, installation, further installation, design, and troubleshooting all are led by me. I was alone in the whole company. Now I have an assistant. For example, I recently worked on a project where I used Aruba Instant On Switches to provide wireless coverage in a warehouse with three floors and a lot of metal. The customer was previously using Cisco switches, but they were not able to provide consistent connectivity throughout the warehouse. I was able to reduce the number of access points needed by using Aruba Instant On Switches, which saved the customer money.  The warehouse is about 80/200 meters, and the customers were using PDAs. I was expecting that the metal would interfere with the wireless signal. Earlier, the client was using another wireless device. I offered him Aruba and looked for design tools in each store, but the Aruba Instant On Switches were able to provide consistent connectivity with only 25 to 30 access points (APs).

I was expecting that the number of APs would be 62-70 in the whole area. I asked the customer to have a POC with four Aruba 505 access points. He would go with Aruba and asked me to reduce the number of APs according to the current situation. We reduced the number of APs. We are now offering them 30 APs, which is a bit more than what is required; around 18 to 24 access points will provide full coverage.

I also have experience with Synapse. 

I am working with Aruba 5055, 1561, and 635 access points and some of the Aruba switches. I am also working with the Aruba Instant On product. I am working with all three scenarios, which are software-based virtual controllers, cloud-based, and hybrid.

I am not familiar with all the features of Aruba switches, as my main task is as a Wi-Fi person. If there are one or two switches, I can configure them as a layer 2 plug-and-play.

The pricing is fine. It is not very expensive.

I am not familiar with all the features of Aruba switches, as my main task is as a Wi-Fi person. If there are one or two switches, I can configure them as a layer 2 plug-and-play.

You cannot use the solution at an enterprise level. You can use it for small business purposes, like Coffee shops or media.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

Aruba Instant On switches are very good to use. They can be quickly deployed by just connecting to the Instant On cloud and can be accessed over the Internet. No issues with that.

Aruba Central provides various AI features that we can use. It collects data on health and performance issues for wireless and wired clients. It observes and identifies issues that I wasn't aware of before. Adding more AI features, like product or service learning, would enhance the product.

The GUI is easy to use. You can set it up easily and bring it onto the cloud easily if the Internet is available. The GUI features are easy, and the configuration is also easy. You can enable or disable features as needed.

If Aruba can provide guidance on features through sessions or explanations, it would be helpful. We have to search and work online. 

More AI features could be developed, especially to help clients in detail. It could provide information on connected wireless clients, their health issues, and any errors they are experiencing. Increasing the feature set would be helpful.

I have been using it for five years. 

The stability of the hardware switches is a key feature. They can't be damaged easily. They are reliable, easy to manage, install, and deploy. 

Additionally, they have the necessary features for network configuration and policies.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten.

There are around 40 end users using it. We implement it a lot for our customers as well. So, we have many customers. 

I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten. 

The customer service and support are okay. They have improved a little now, but my last interaction (three months back) was not so good.

Neutral

There are different solutions like Cisco Meraki, Juniper, and Commavault. The choice depends on our customers. If they pick a product, we implement it for them. 

The installation is quite easy.

On average, the deployment doesn't take long. With 1 to 10 switches, it can be installed within half an hour. If there are more switches, it can take half a day. Sometimes, there might be issues, but that's about it.

It is deployed both on-premises and cloud. The cloud version is accessed via Aruba Central. It's a public cloud from Aruba.

We do regular maintenance as well, including patches and upgrades. Normally, two to three engineers are enough for maintenance. 

The pricing is quite low compared to other products, which is good for the customer. Customers ask for Aruba products because they are competitively priced compared to other brands. It's a good selling point, as it allows customers to revamp their network infrastructure at a lower cost. 

During the revamping process, organizations have to justify the cost to stakeholders. If a product is cheaper, it's easier to justify the purchase. This is the main advantage.

I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten, with ten being a good price and one being a bad price. 

It is good value for money.

The features like AI, stability, and ease of use are enough to increase daily productivity.

I would recommend it to other users. Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten. Aruba products are great, but they should have more stability. In some products, we have observed that the wireless access points (APs) don't come online quickly. Sometimes there are issues with the APs taking a long time to turn on after a reboot or upgrade. 

In the wireless perspective, compared to other OEMs, Aruba APs can be slower to deploy. Other than that, even the deployment of the switches is faster with other OEMs. But the Aruba Instant On switches themselves are great.

I use Aruba Instant On Switches in my company to ensure connection between different locations.

Aruba Instant On Switches offer features that are close or near to what Cisco offers, like VLAN, SCP protocol, and inter-VLAN routing, which are really good, especially nowadays.

Speed is an area of the product with certain shortcomings where improvements are required. The product's startup speed is very bad, as it is very slow. It takes around eight minutes to start up the firmware. The tool has to be easy to configure, especially when compared with NETGEAR, Cisco, and HPE. There is an easy way to configure with vendors other than Aruba.

I have been using Aruba Instant On Switches for ten years.

It is a very stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a six out of ten.

There are around 1,600 users of the solution in my company.

I am not sure whether my company plans to increase the use of the solution.

Though I don't have experience with the product's technical support team, I think they provide better support services in the market.

I rate the technical support a seven or eight out of ten.

Neutral

I work on a lot of infrastructures involving products from HPE and Aruba, NETGEAR, and a whole lot of switches and routers.

I rate the product's initial setup phase a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is a difficult setup process, and ten is an easy setup phase.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

Though the solution can be deployed in a short time, Aruba Instant On Switches needs a lot of time to take care of the initialization and deployment phases. The tool's deployment time takes around forty-five minutes or one hour.

The product is not cheaply priced, especially when compared to the other vendors in the market. The product would cost me a lot of money. If I wanted to purchase the product, it would cost me 35,000 EGP. I think the product's price is high, even though it may be because of the exchange rate of the currencies from USD to EGP.

I think that Aruba should include details online to let the customers know the new features of the tool and how they can connect between Aruba devices and other solutions, which would be great for our company's technicians. With proper details online, it would be easy for technicians to deal with the switches offered by Aruba, and they can even try to run the solution via cloud, like Cisco or Huawei.

I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten.

I use Aruba Instant On Switches to support our network. We have anywhere from three to seven hub rooms in each school.

I have enjoyed the switches. They are fairly easy to use. I haven't really run into any major problems. They're not very diagnostic, which could be an improvement, but they are easy enough to add more to the stack. The switches are easy to use because they have been reliable and user-friendly.

I have run into a couple of problems with the switches. Recently, one of the newer stacks stopped working and had to be rebooted individually. They don't have a lot of diagnostics tools, which could be an area for improvement.

The switches are generally stable. Occasionally I encounter issues like when one of the switches in our newer stacks stopped working. It was easy to fix with a reboot yet requires a manual unplug on-site.

It is easy enough to add more to the stack.

Their support is great. I would rate it at eight point five out of ten.

I mostly used Cisco Catalyst. One of the main differences has been language. With the newer Aruba switches, they are making it a bit closer to Cisco, however, there are still some differences.

The setup is straightforward. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate the ease of setup as a seven.

I think the pricing for the switches is reasonable.

I have mostly used Cisco, specifically Cisco Catalyst, and not Ruckus. There are some language differences between Cisco and Aruba.

I would rate the overall solution as a seven out of ten. For the most part, I would recommend Aruba Instant On Switches, as they have been good.

We use the solution for a small number of users.

The solution's pricing is slightly cheaper than that of Cisco.

The solution’s initial setup is very complex. We need to limit the number of Aruba Instant On Switches to certain areas because they sometimes cut off the link. The solution has to be more stable.

I have been using Aruba Instant On Switches since 2019.

Aruba Instant On Switches can be recommended for small-scale businesses.

I rate the solution a six out of ten for scalability.

The solution’s technical support is good.

Positive

The solution’s initial setup is very complex.

Aruba Instant On Switches is slightly cheaper than Cisco.

I would recommend Aruba Instant On Switches to users if they are familiar with Aruba. Otherwise, I suggest using Cisco.

Overall, I rate the solution a six out of ten.

I use it for my cameras. Specifically, I'm installing it because of the 48 and 24 ports. I use it for a few cameras, telephones, and PBX connections. It make easy for you to manage all the telephone apps.

You immediately receive a notification when a device is lost, such as an access point losing connectivity with the network. For the switches, it is easy to program VLANs for phones. You can switch networks for my customers, change networks for any user, or combine VLANs easily, all from a remote location.

The app's user interface is the best aspect. Initially, it took some time to understand how it works. However, once you figured it out, it became straightforward. 

The app's simplicity, particularly the interface, could be improved. Despite this, the functionality is robust.

I have been using Aruba Instant On Switches for two to three years.

The product is stable. 

I haven't had any issues yet with how it manages the number of devices. At this point, I'm just using a few cameras and telephones on it.

Aruba Instant On Switches are better than others because, unlike Ubiquiti, they provide greater flexibility without requiring the installation of a controller. With Ubiquiti, you probably have to install additional hardware. With Aruba, there's no need for new hardware or a new app. Just one single app can manage all devices, which is extremely useful.

Aruba Instant On Switches can be complex to set up based on your understanding of networks. If you understand how VLANs and networks work, you shouldn't have a problem. However, sometimes, new users might struggle with programming these switches.

I have set it up using a deployment and resource tool. Depending on the number of devices connected to it, it usually takes me two to three days to properly set up a switch with forty-eight ports, as I manage each device individually.

It is a variable return on your investment.

Aruba products are slightly more expensive than Ubiquiti and Cisco Linksys.

As I've experienced with other devices or managers, nothing is happening with Aruba Instant On Switches. I often have to reboot the device to clear the MAC address memory. Additionally, I've never had access to my Outlook through these devices.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.