Cisco Wireless Reviews

Our main customer of the Cisco wireless is in the retail sector, for example, Walmart.

The customer always feels confident with the solution because of its reliability. 

In the future, it would be great if the solution had a GPS feature that could have the ability through access points to locate cell phone users inside a local wireless network, for example in a stadium. 

I have been using the solution for approximately twenty years.

The stability is very good.

We have never had an issue with scalability with this product. Our customers are medium to large size organizations. We have found that small businesses discontinue using the solution more often than larger companies who tend to remains using it.

The support has been good for us.

The initial setup was easy, the documentation is good.

The deployment can take one day if the network is small but if it is a larger network it could take a while longer. When we have issues with security the process becomes more complex, taking more time.

The product could be priced better.

I would recommend before implementation, administrators must know the exact number of users.

I rate Cisco Wireless a ten out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for the internal network connection.

The management solutions the product has on offer are the most valuable aspects of the solution. It makes everything easy to manage from the perspective of an IT administrator.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The solution can scale well.

We've found the product to be very stable and quite reliable.

So far, we've found that the product offers everything we need it to.

I don't see any features that are really lacking.

The technical support could be better. They aren't as helpful as they need to be when we run into issues.

I've been using the solution for the last ten years at this point. It's been about a decade. We've used it for quite a long time now.

The solution is quite stable. It doesn't crash or freeze. There aren't bugs or glitches.

The solution is pretty scalable. If a company needs to expand it, they can do so fairly easily. It's not hard.

We have between 300 to 400 people on the solution currently.

We aren't fully satisfied with technical support at this time. They are getting better, however, they need to improve their services still.

The implementation process is not complex at all. it's very straightforward. We didn't face any issues.

The deployment process was also very quick. It didn't take long to have everything up and running.

Our procurement team handles the contracts for this solution. Therefore, I don't have any insights into pricing.

We're just end-users. We don't have a business relationship with Cisco.

Currently, just doing the upgrade. I'm just doing the upgrade in order to have Wi-Fi 6 enabled, which is the new technology. 

I would recommend the solution to others.

Overall, I would rate the solution nine out of ten. We've been pretty happy with it.

We are implementing Cisco Wireless in various environments including hospitality (controller-based deployment along with room AP in 90+ room property), and corporate (both standalone and controller-based).

The wireless system has been integrated into the hotspot for guest access and enterprise authentication has been used for the employees. For authentication, both the inbuilt database and integration to FreeRADIUS has been used. We have also used AD in the corporate environment for authentication. The controller has been deployed in HA.

It has helped to provide mobility with committed throughput and performance.

Additionally, Cisco wireless solutions are very stable. This, with its rugged nature, has helped for overall efficiencies in information processing and daily operations.

It has enhanced the security of the enterprise and has given single-pane visibility for network monitoring.

It has provided excellent mobility and load balancing of the wireless endpoints to various APs, based on the built-in algorithms, both in 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz.

The most valuable features are the controller, single pane for the configuration, as well as the operation and monitoring of the wireless system.

Other important features are the detection of the rough AP, programmable API, network analytics, and the RF planning tool.

The product is very stable. The infrastructure is scalable and very durable.

With excellent support from the Cisco support team, this solution can be deployed in no time.

It is easy to troubleshoot and zone-based profiling is another excellent feature. Auto power calibration between AP sensing the environment is also a valuable feature. 

The regulatory domain seems to be hardcoded into the system and we need a simple way to change it in wireless APs.

Power level improvements and increased antenna dBi are needed when compared to other competitor vendors like Ruckus and HP Aruba.

The product pricing should be competitive compared to other vendors, as many products are coming up with good features like Cambium, Edge, and Core.

The controller pricing is high compared to other vendors like Ruckus. Pricing should be lowered to target the SMB market, where many other vendors have dominance. 

We have been using Cisco Wireless for 10 years.

The stability is excellent.

Cisco Wireless is very much Scalable, based on the forecast you have and the controller you choose. It's just about adding the license.

The technical support is excellent.

We have been using other products like Cambium, Ruckus, and HP. Before we implement Cisco, we had read a lot of reviews of its stability and durability, and indeed, it was true.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The installation team was highly skilled and certified.

The ROI is excellent.

The pricing depends on the requirement, so proper planning and an RF analysis help to properly size the solution and get the best pricing.

We previously evaluated Cambium and Rukus.

My advice is that this product should be the first choice to adopt when deploying a wireless solution. If cost is a factor then proper sizing will help to reduce it.

The ability to do mesh and bridge is the solution's most valuable aspect.

The multiple VLANs and their wireless LANs are great. 

The solution offers very good stability.

The new GUI interface and the newer version OS are a little bit more complex than the older version, however, it just might take some getting used to.

There's room for improvement when it comes to setting up 802.1 authentications, their user authentication with the AAA. It's too difficult and not intuitive.

The solution is extremely expensive.

We've been using Cisco for a number of years. It's likely been seven or eight years since we started using it. It's been quite a while.

We don't have issues with stability. It's been quite reliable for us. We don't have issues with bugs or glitches and it doesn't seem to crash or freeze. We've had a good experience with it overall.

The solution is scalable, however, it becomes expensive. Organizations should keep that in mind if they are searching for a solution that can expand in the future.

The solution's online documentation is very good. There are always answers somewhere in the forums as well, so you can go there in order to find the answers to the questions you might have on how to troubleshoot or use the product.

We're actually doing a test with Aruba Wireless right now. We want to use both. THe POC has been going on for one month.

Cisco has changed their licensing mode and they've become very expensive.

We are a customer and end-user. We don't have a business relationship with Cisco.

As a product itself, I would rate it around an eight or nine out of ten, however, due to the fact that it's so expensive, I'd knock off a few points. Therefore, on a scale from one to ten with all things considered, I'd rate it at a six. If money were not an object, I would highly recommend the solution.

The FlexConnect feature is the most valuable.

It would be great if it is compatible with other products.

I have been using this solution for almost six years.

Until now, it has been stable in spite of some upgrades.

It is scalable. Our clients are large companies.

Their technical support is great.

We worked with Cisco Prime and Cisco Controller.

The initial setup was quite straightforward.

It is quite simple. Even if you are not a wireless network expert, you will be able to use it by doing some research. It is not difficult or super complex.

I would rate Cisco Wireless a nine out of ten. I am satisfied with this solution.

We have twenty switches in our corporate office.

The most valuable features are that it is easy to install and the range is good.

The price should be reduced. It should be cheaper.

I have been using this solution for five years.

We have upgraded to the newest version.

It's a stable product.

We have close to 600 users in our organization who are using this solutoin.

I do not have experience with technical support. We have not had to contact them.

Previously, we did not use another solution.

It's easy to install. 

It can take 15 to 20 minutes to complete the installation.

I completed the installation myself.

We have a team of three to maintain this product.

This is an expensive product.

We plan to continue our usage of this product and I would recommend it to others.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The mobility that it provides is really helpful. It's one full network of about 15 APs and they're all connected together; the users can move seamlessly between them.

Overall, it's a pretty good solution; however, it's end-of-life, it will be end-of-support in the next two years. The APs are also end-of-life. I was considering upgrading this year, however, we're planning to move to a new office and I don't want to buy new equipment just to install it in our current office, and then have to dismantle everything and move it to the new office. We just want to buy something that is useful for us.

The model that we have is about eight or ten years old; I'm sure the marketplace has changed a lot since then. It's good but outdated, there are other features that could be better.

The latest models, of course, have better WiFi capabilities. Our access points support 2.4 and 5 GHz. We're looking for the new AX or AC models for WiFi. I believe there is more speed with those kinds of connections.

I have been using Cisco Wireless for about three years.

It's stable. It's working fine. There are some issues regarding moving the equipment. Otherwise, every three months or so we have an AP that hangs and we just restart it, that's it. Otherwise, everything's working fine.

We haven't contacted support from Cisco.

We have some other access points, but they are normal, standard APs. For our branch office, we use fat APs, just normal wireless outlets from off-the-shelf, like D-Link and so on. 

I haven't set them up myself. There was an IT team before I started administering this network and they set up everything before me. I just received the network as it is. I just added the APs and moved them from one area to another.

Cisco Wireless is good. On a scale from one to ten, I would give them a rating of seven, although to give a more accurate rating, I would need to experience something else to compare it to. I'm considering sticking with Cisco, unless I find other models that can give better performance. Cisco has a few types of models: the standard Cisco, the normal Cisco, and the Meraki one. I'm not sure if Meraki would be a better solution for us, or if the standard Cisco Wireless controller would be better. That's why I went to your website — to find other solutions and read comparisons about them.

I like many of the features that Cisco Wireless has to offer.

Code stability is something that needs to be improved.

I have been working with Cisco Wireless for 10 years.

The technical support is fine.

The price of this product is reasonable.

My advice for anybody who is implementing Cisco Wireless is that they need to know the products. There are a lot of features that you can turn on and off, so they need to know the product itself. It's not as simple as it seems.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.