Aruba Networks Wireless WAN Reviews

Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is deployed for communication, and we have about 13 sites controlled in a centralized location. We have next-step security authentication, and it supports end-user secure connectivity. The combination and mechanism of multiple servers are used to authenticate the user to connect to the network securely.

Our whole company uses this network, providing wireless connectivity on all sides. So this solution impacts our day-to-day tasks.

The most valuable feature is security, which is important to the company and end user. In addition, the solution's strong security mechanism and user-friendly web console are great. The software and hardware are excellent, and we can efficiently deploy and manage these devices.

Regarding additional features, the solution currently has a Windows update problem. As a result, the solution requires daily Windows updates and installations as well as launches of new patches. It also requires updates to the iOS firmware to support the day-to-day patches submitted by Windows.

Because we work out of Pakistan, we sometimes have to deploy this solution in areas with a lot of dust. So, it would be great if Aruba improves the environmental hardware materials to mitigate troubleshooting and decrease the amount of dust it accumulates.

We have been using this solution for seven years and recently deployed the latest version. It is deployed on a local network.

It is a stable solution.

The solution is scalable. We have a lot of users, most of whom are IT specialists. For example, we have four people required for maintenance in the IT department and two junior network engineers continuously controlling the solution.

The technical support for this product regarding the vendor is great. Our principal or local vendor is available to facilitate any issues that arise.

Before using Aruba Networks Wireless WAN, we had been working on Cisco and Awale, which are somewhat competitors of this solution. We also deployed Awale, which works fine, but Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is widely used in our company.

The initial setup was straightforward, and it took about two days to deploy. We used a third party to deploy the network and performed day-to-day tasks easily. There was no issue with installation, and deployment on a large scale was painless.

Regarding licensing costs, our procurement and finance departments are directly involved, and we evaluate the functionality of this product. Based on the market comparison, Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is cheaper than Cisco, and the web experience is great. As a result, its functionality and performance are practical.

If we were not using Aruba Networks Wireless WAN, we would use Cisco. Cisco and Aruba have the same solution and provide a controller-based network and ISE. The functionality of both devices is the same, and the key difference is the vendor and branding. The dependability and scalability of both products are good too.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

We have used Aruba Networks Wireless WAN a lot for retail, manufacturing, and deployments on educational campuses. Most of the deployments I've done are enterprise-grade across multiple sites, utilizing the ClearPass solution so that all the enterprise sites are managed at one location. The use cases can vary.

The most valuable feature of Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is centralized management capability. You don't have to have wireless LAN controllers at every location.

Aruba Networks Wireless WAN could improve the solution availability. The selection of mounting hardware for the various radios is limited and poor. Often, you have to create and manufacture your own mounting hardware in certain situations. 

The specific information available for external dB gain antennas is virtually non-existent or poor. You have to do a lot of research to find out what external antennas are going to suit your environment. Aruba Networks Wireless WAN doesn't do a good job of helping, and that's one of their downfalls.

If you're using external antennas, you want to accomplish some gain by using external antennas. There's not a lot of information specific to Aruba Networks Wireless WAN, even on the Aruba platform, that provides you with solid information and recommendations about antennas that would best suit their solution.

I have been using Aruba Networks Wireless WAN for approximately 10 years.

Aruba Networks Wireless WAN stability is good. It has a low failure rate. I don't typically do service, but the failure rates are less than or equal to their largest competitors. It's a pretty stable environment.

I have found Aruba Networks Wireless WAN to be scalable. If you use either the ClearPass or the AirWave, it's very easy to scale.

I typically don't use technical support of Aruba Networks Wireless WAN. There's been a few instances where I've had to make a call, and they were fairly responsive.

The initial installation of Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is easy. The enterprise-level deployments are straightforward. 

The maintenance of Aruba Networks Wireless WAN depends on the size of the enterprise solution that you have deployed. However, typically, it's relatively easy, because if you use ClearPass or AirWave, you can have one person monitor an entire enterprise. It's not difficult.

Different sectors have their own set of ROI indicators that they follow. For example, retail has a set of ROIs and manufacturing and another different set than retail. You can make your own algorithms to determine our ROI, I typically don't focus on that.

The price of Aruba Networks Wireless WAN depends on how you buy it. From a pricing perspective, if you choose to buy Aruba Networks Wireless WAN as an MRC, it's dependent upon the radio and the solution that you choose what your MRC is. If you choose to buy it outright, they're competitive with their competitors, and they're probably four percent or five percent lower than their largest competitor.

I rate Aruba Networks Wireless WAN an eight out of ten.

My clients use it for the employees to log in to the Internet.

Once we install it, we don't get any complaints or adverse feedback from the client. They use it. It's seamless connectivity. And in case any failure happens, there is a long warranty period. So once we've got the access point replacement also done for one of the clients, that experience also was good.

There is room for improvement in the pricing, it's quite a premium. There are a few other brands that are coming up which are offering lower pricing. So maybe Aruba could think about being a more competitive price point.

I'm a system integrator. I've been selling it to my clients who use it in their offices.

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. It is very scalable. There are more than a thousand users in my client's organisation.

The initial setup is easy. If we need to deploy 10 to 15 devices, that can be set up in about half a day.

It is expensive. I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten.

I would highly recommend using the solution. Aruba is one of the best. 

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

I like the solution's ability to add multiple SSIDs on different levels such as enterprise and guest networks. 

Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is expensive. 

I have been working with the product for five years. 

I would rate Aruba Networks Wireless WAN's stability a ten out of ten. 

I would rate the tool's scalability a ten out of ten. We have 542 clients using the products. 

The product's lifetime warranty is second to none. They will replace a system that has gone down with an identical unit. 

The tool's setup was easy. 

You will need to pay an annual subscription cost. 

I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. Try to negotiate the best price that you can get. 

I use the solution for cloud operations.

It's just a normal tool. I would really say nothing is valuable to me about its features. It's not special.

It had been working in the past few years, but after aging, it has dropped down.

The solution has bugs. It really has bugs, and you have to wait until it happens, then you realize it. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement.

I have been using Aruba Networks Wireless WAN for five years. I am a customer of the solution.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a five, six, or seven out of ten. It's not bad.

I rate the support an eight out of ten since it is good.

Positive

Regarding the initial setup, if one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate its setup a three to five. You have to be a big technical person to deploy the solution.

I rate the solution a six or seven out of ten.

We use the solution to access the internet connection.

The solution's most valuable feature is the ease of use.

The solution's technical support service could be better.

We have been using the solution since 2011.

It is a very stable solution.

I rate the solution's scalability as an eight or nine.

The solution's customer service team needs to be more responsive.

Negative

The solution's initial setup process is a little complicated. But it gets easier after a certain point. I rate the process as an eight or nine. It takes half an hour to complete.

We implemented the solution with the help of our in-house team.

The ROI for the solution is over 50% for us.

It is a costly solution. I rate its pricing as a nine or ten.

The solution is easy to set up. I rate it as a seven.

Warehousing and manufacturing are the primary ones that I've been in, but we also do campuses, schools, and healthcare.

I believe their Adaptive Radio Management (ARM) in its current form provides the best automated management of transmit power and channel. It does a really good job of managing proper design and wireless environment.

It is a little bit cumbersome to configure. If you're designing a WLAN and you want to do and cover certain types of clients, you really have to know different settings and how they interact with one another. If they could automate that so that if you are designing for one type of equipment, you could, in essence, run a wizard. That would certainly save on a lot of calls to tech support.

I have been working with this solution for 10 years.

Its stability is good. I've not seen major failures.

It is absolutely scalable.

It is pretty straightforward. Setting up the environment is fairly straightforward, adding access points to the environment is fairly straightforward, and the upgrade process is relatively straightforward. It comes down to when you're doing something specific in the design for the client that you're trying to deal with. That's where it becomes a little bit more complex. You need to know where to go and look, but the standard setup is very straightforward.

That's really subject to the type of environment you're deploying. If you're doing a full controller model with 200 APs, the initial deployment could be 150 grand. Maintaining that or maintaining support for that per year could be something like 10 to 15 grand per year.

In the cloud sense, the cloud is by the number of APs. So, everything is readily available.

I would not hesitate to implement it. It is a good product. I would rate it a nine out of ten.

We're basically using the solution to replace our StarVPN connectivity. Prior to this, we had a bunch of VPNs that were creating our WAN that would link back to our central office. It simplified our network. That's what we used it for. We installed one in every office to create the WAN between offices. In the potential next phase, we were looking to then possibly decrease our internet connectivity to each site, however, we didn't do that quite yet.

The two most valuable features for us were the fact that we were able to simplify and recreate our WAN with a similar security presence and also the ability to run a single WiFi SSID across the entire company with authentication.

It worked as delivered, and therefore, there's nothing to really add. If you were asking me what they could do better, unfortunately, I quite honestly can't think of anything right now. It doesn't mean that if I was in the middle of using it, there isn't something that would be annoying to me. However, right now, it’s absolutely fine.

The integration, pricing, and configuration could always be improved upon.

I’ve used the solution for two years.

It's quite stable. It didn't come down yet. We didn't have any issues for the past year or so. We did execute a couple of updates. Those were clean and it worked just fine. It’s reliable. The performance is good.

It worked for the scale that we asked it to. That said, we installed it and we didn't grow it. The whole company, about 175 people, use the product.

The technical support was great. We’ve been satisfied with their service.

I’ve also dealt with Cisco and found Aruba more affordable with better support.

It was straightforward to set up. It worked as advertised. I didn't do the actual deployment myself. However, my deployment team was able to roll it out earlier than projected. Prior to making the selection, I had estimated more time than it took for us to deploy. In that sense, it was fantastic. The deployment was very quick.

We've got five people supporting all of our networking and hardware requirements. We don't have any one person dedicated to it.

I’m not sure of the exact pricing of the product.

This solution is more than worth considering. I've used Aruba in different organizations. It historically has, to me, been an easier install than Cisco wireless solutions have been. It consistently gives similar services at a lower price point. I have found that their pre-sales teams and support have been better than similarly situated Cisco WiFi and WAN products.

I’d rate the solution an eight out of ten.