Aruba Wireless Reviews

We use Aruba Wireless to give wireless network coverage to users without any requirement of connecting PCs or laptops to the network.

The most valuable feature of Aruba Wireless is multi-tenancy. You can have a multi-tenancy setup with the same setup, and the same access points can be used for multi-tenancy.

The solution could be improved on the security side.

I have been using Aruba Wireless for a few years.

I rate Aruba Wireless ten out of ten for stability.

Aruba Wireless can scale up to 22,000 access points. We have more than 250 customers for Aruba Wireless.

The solution's technical support is excellent.

The solution's initial setup is very straightforward.

You are good to go once you set up the controller and the policies. You need to connect the access points, and it will automatically provision to the groups, and all the access points will start working on it.

Controller one-time configurations take 45 to 50 minutes or one hour maximum. Then, putting access points to the groups takes another five minutes.

Customers have to pay for perpetual licenses with Aruba controller licenses, depending on the features they are looking for. The features they need to pay for are wireless access points and connectivity. Customers need to pay for the Layer 7 firewall on the wireless. Customers need to have an RFP if they want to have a wireless IPS.

Aruba Wireless can be deployed on both cloud and on-premises.

Aruba Wireless is a good solution for customers who are looking for a multi-tenancy setup and want to segregate their guest traffic from their employees' traffic. Aruba Wireless is a more secure setup.

Overall, I rate Aruba Wireless ten out of ten.

We use this solution for wireless infrastructure. We completed the upgrade of our Wi-Fi this year.

It's a hybrid solution. Our controller is in the cloud, and there are devices installed in the offices. Our provider is a local telco.

Between 400 and 500 people are using this solution in our environment.

In terms of customer experience, the Wi-Fi signal in the office is a lot better right now compared to in the past.

Aruba Central is a valuable feature because I can monitor access points remotely, even if I'm not in the office.

We would like to declare a specific number of devices that an employee or a user can use to access their Wi-Fi. Right now, it's a free for all.

The other features that I would like to explore are alerting and auto reporting of users accessing the internet. I want proactive alerts on the usage of these applications because I have to go to Aruba Central every time to see what's going on.

I have been using this solution for one year.

 It's a matter of experiencing the benefit of the solution in our environment.

Since we have a lot of branches, the scalability is open. For now, the scope is really in the head office and I think the promise is that we can scale. We can incorporate this to our branches across the Philippines.

Part of our agreement is that we would receive technical support. I would rate them 4 out of 5.

Initial setup was complex. The vendors have to perform due diligence and heat mapping in the height of the pandemic. The project started last year in September and it was completed last February. Deployment took less than a year.

We had a software and hardware implementation plan. 

Aruba provided an implementation partner who helped us on the project. Fewer than 10 people were needed for deployment.

The return on investment is subjective because we're trying to improve the host experience. IT is not host centered in the company; we are just providing solutions. This is an initiative and the benefits aren't convertible into an amount of money. It's really an investment, and I think the promise is to improve the hosting experience, speed up the internet browsing, etc.

The price is low. There is an additional cost for maintenance. We had a local partner, so we signed a five year deal to support our Wi-Fi infrastructure, including the hardwares.

We evaluated Cisco Meraki and Ubiquiti. The price of Cisco is very high compared to Aruba and Ubiquiti.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

For someone who is looking into implementing this product, they need to understand what the objective is of that project. It could be coming from the IT modernization strategy. You have to evaluate different vendors offering different solutions. Then perform that pitch to the management and the usual project management. If there is a winning vendor, of course implementation comes in. Make sure that the target date will be completed as planned in the project plan.

Our company uses the solution for wireless service. We currently use the latest version but have been using the solution since version six. 

The solution is hybrid because it is deployed on-premises but managed in the cloud. 

Our company currently has 300 users and we plan to grow by 100 more.  

The solution is well designed so you can easily integrate it in an infrastructure network. 

The APs can be implemented as a campus AP, remote APS, or instant APs. As soon as you buy the solution, you can instantly use APs. You don't need anything external because you can use the virtual controller inside the APs.

It is easy to create clusters using the controller that comes inside the AOS of the APs. 

You can add an external controller at any time because the solution is resilient and very upgradeable. 

The security components are very, very, very well designed and strong. 

The Aruba Central portal allows you to centralize all management for your infrastructure and security. It is not a monolithic solution. 

The solution's documentation could be better organized in an information portal. There are many assets on the technical side so there is a lot of documentation. Sometimes it takes work to find what you need because of the vastness of information. You need to know the products to find things. The solution could offer some kind of portal for documentation to better organize things. 

The cloud CHS and remote APs could be improved faster. The solution has already been integrated with the cloud and there are plans for other product integrations but they could occur faster. 

I have been using the solution for five years. 

The solution is very stable and reliable. I rate stability a nine out of ten. 

The solution is very scalable. I rate scalability a ten out of ten. 

The technical support is very useful and good. Every time we need help and open a case, they solve our issues. Technical support is very knowledgeable about the solution.

Most of our issues are regarding upgrading versions or firmware. We sometimes need assistance finding new versions. The process for solving our issues is very straightforward. 

Technical support is rated a ten out of ten. 

Positive

We previously used Cisco. 

The setup is very easy. All the APs come from the manufacturer so you can start right away with configurations. The features make configurations and upgrades very easy. 

I rate setup a ten out of ten. 

Three in-house engineers implemented the solution with help from an integrator. Deployment took one week to ten days. 

There is no ongoing maintenance because the solution is very, very reliable. 

The pricing is fair and similar to other products. It might be a bit cheaper than Cisco. 

I rate pricing an eight out of ten. 

Cisco is a good product but is old and very monolithic. They are working to improve but their mindset is different.

The solution is the future because it integrates with the cloud and addresses new needs. We prefer the design and strategy of the solution over Cisco. 

When you are looking for a wireless option, it is important to pay attention to key points that include resilience, expandability, security, and integration.

The solution is one of the best available and is very valuable for centralizing management. It is very resilient and expandable so you can grow it to the needs of your company. Even if you buy the small solution, the features of the big solution are there. This is a great benefit over Cisco. 

For example, you buy a switch from Cisco that includes 48 ports but only 16 of the ports have licenses. If you need more ports, you need to buy more licenses. With the solution, you don't need to buy additional licenses. What you buy is what you get with all the included features like AOS and security. This is very important because you can start small and grow using the same device with no extra licensing costs. 

It is important to find a solution that already implements security. The solution has all these features included so that is why we moved away from Cisco. 

The solution also integrates very well with nearly every other vendor. 

The solution is a very good product and I rate it a ten out of ten. 

We are a system integrator that specializes in providing complete network infrastructure for wireless solutions. This includes Aruba Wireless, Huawei Enterprise Solutions, and Extreme Networks. 

The customers are seeking cloud implementation. Currently, all our deployments are done through the cloud, which is a strong selling point for positioning Aruba Instant access points. As a result, companies with multiple branches often prefer deploying Aruba Instant access points via the cloud.

With Aruba Instant, we can use the access points independently, allowing us to position them in many places. This is a great feature as it helps us save costs on access controllers and licenses.

The Return Material Authorization procedure is time-consuming and needs improvement.

I have been using Aruba Wireless for six years.

The solution is stable and I would rate it an eight out of ten.

The solution is scalable, especially with cloud implementation, which has not presented any challenges for me thus far. I would rate the scalability at eight out of ten.

The technical support is excellent, but the Return Material Authorization procedure is time-consuming.

Neutral

I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten. While the implementation may not be instant, it is relatively simple.

The deployment time depends upon the organization. So, even if it's a big organization with multiple branches, their network, availability, and other factors can differ. However, if it's a single-site implementation, it will not take much time. The only thing that we need to ensure is that the prerequisites are ready, which may take a few days. That's it. Two to three people, including a project manager and one or two engineers, are required for deployment.

We implement the solution for our customers.

I would rate the cost as an eight out of ten, with ten being the most expensive. Aruba Instant is more affordable compared to other solutions, and we also appreciate its features.

Some of the products from Aruba Networks are covered by a Limited Lifetime warranty. To ensure customer support, we maintain extra stock and include this in our integrator fees, which are separate from the product cost.

I give Aruba Wireless an eight out of ten.

We currently have six clients using the solution. My clients include small, medium, and enterprise-level organizations. 

Aruba Instant is highly recommended for organizations with multiple branches and office locations. Based on client feedback, it is easy to implement and configure, making it accessible anytime and anywhere. The solution is expensive for a single-entity organization.

My primary use case is mainly for trying to find out which device is where and which device is in fault, or for guest access.

I can have a clear picture of what's happening in my Wi-Fi cellular networking environment. One feature that stands out is that it's quite simple to have a clear situation on my network. When the device is switched on, it automatically sees it, which is nice.

I had some problems with Wi-Fi coverage in the workshop, which required purchasing more devices.

I have used Aruba Wireless for about four years.

The stability is good. I don't remember it going down during the years it existed.

I don't have a big problem. I had nine access points in the beginning, then added six more, and the transition was smooth.

I had a good support experience. I only needed support once or twice for a replacement, and it was handled smoothly without any difficulty.

Positive

There was a switch from the Cisco solution due to several reasons, including only having WEP security, physical control instead of cloud control, and frequent downtimes. We often had to restart the wireless system.

We had another solution, a Cisco solution, that was much less stable. Wireless security with the previous system used WEP, however, now we have a more secure environment.

It is straightforward to set up Aruba Wireless. It is simple to use, and when you switch on the device, it automatically configures itself within the network.

I had a network specialist on the phone who guided me. It was just myself and that one other person.

I would say the price is good. It was a key point in decision-making relative to Cisco.

I would give Aruba Wireless a rating of around eight out of ten. The overall experience is satisfactory.

At our company, we use the solution on a daily basis for our customers in the healthcare sector. 

Aruba Wireless has its own protocols in the controller that are managed by the firewall of our company.  

The vendor should include multiple additional protocols for basic applications and advanced tech that are absent in Aruba Wireless. Overall, the product needs further development by introducing new tech features. 

I have been using Aruba Wireless for five years. 

The solution offers satisfying stability. I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

Aruba Wireless has adapted to the scaling needs of the customers of our organization. As our company works with clients in the healthcare sector, we need to manage diverse management systems and supplies. At our company, we segregate all the systems based on Aruba Wireless's performance in integration with the firewall of the systems. I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. 

In the beginning phase after purchase, the vendor provided us with support, but later on, we didn't require much support for Aruba Wireless. For any issues that arise for the customers of our organization, we try to resolve them in-house and minimize the downtime. The Aruba Wireless vendor tries to rectify any issues or bugs that arise in our organization. I would rate the customer support an eight out of ten. 

Positive

During the product's initial setup process in our organization, we faced numerous obstacles at the configuration level because, in some cases, complete configuration was not possible only using the GUI. Some configurations need to be implemented using the command line.

Nowadays, for other solutions, all configurations can be implemented using GUI, and it makes the setup more user-friendly and manageable, removing the need to memorize commands. I would rate the setup of Aruba Wireless as four out of ten. 

The deployment of Aruba Wireless using GUI should ideally take one or two days, but in our organization, due to the configuration obstacles, it took five days. The deployment process took an entire team because the solution needed to be deployed separately for more than 500 access points to join the network loop. 

In our organization, Aruba Wireless is used for on-prem environments because the majority of our customers belong to the healthcare segment and thus have their own private medical data and records that cannot be shared in the cloud. Even for disaster recovery, our customers avail local resources, and any private data is not shared. 

I would rate the pricing a five out of ten. 

There are many options in the market, and in our company, we evaluated them based on budget. In the past, when our organization was starting out and there were quite a limited number of employees and clients, we didn't need any solutions from Aruba, but when the company expanded, a reliable and budget-friendly solution like Aruba Wireless was required rather than small solutions with limited users.

Our company had the option to choose a similar solution from Cisco, but Aruba Wireless was finalized due to its cost-effectiveness, user-friendly interface, and easy integrations. 

I would rate the performance and reliability features of the solution an eight out of ten. At our company, we have achieved certain cost savings by using Aruba Wireless because the competitor tools from vendors like Cisco are more expensive. At our company, from the core to the ERS network we are using backbone switches from Cisco. 

I would definitely recommend Aruba Wireless to others. I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We are using Aruba Wireless for land ports for customs. The inspection guides use the solution while walking around with tablets.

The most valuable feature of Aruba Wireless is the controller. It is easy to use.

We have an issue with the integration of Aruba Wireless with our LDAP servers.

I have been using Aruba Wireless for approximately six years.

I rate the stability of Aruba Wireless a ten out of ten.

Aruba Wireless is a scalable solution.

We have approximately 200 users using this solution.

I rate the scalability of Aruba Wireless a nine out of ten.

The support is good. However, they sometimes take some time to respond.

I rate the support from Aruba Wireless a seven out of ten.

Neutral

I have previously used Cisco and Huawei solutions. The major difference with Huawei is it provides one single platform for the management of all of your features.

The initial setup of Aruba Wireless is of a medium level of difficulty. However, it is not simple to configure. It took approximately one month to deploy.

We installed the devices everywhere on-premise and had the field engineer from Aruba Wireless first power up all the access points. We then tried to integrate it with the LDAP, but they found some problems. They had to change it with another system for it to work.

I rate the initial setup of Aruba Wireless a five out of ten.

Two of our engineers had help from the two Aruba Wireless engineers for the implementation of Aruba Wireless.

Aruba Wireless is the best for the price. Aruba Wireless is the least expensive, the second is Huawei, and the most expensive is Cisco. 

For every device, you need to get a license which is charged separately to add to the control for Aruba Wireless.

I rate the price of Aruba Wireless a nine out of ten.

There is no maintenance required for the solution.

I recommend others who want to use Aruba Wireless should first determine the integration of which server they want. There can be some issues with devices that they connect to the switches.

I rate Aruba Wireless a nine 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.