Cisco Wireless Reviews

No configuration required on access points and better monitoring.

We have been deploying in different companies and their wireless communication has improved.

Access Points are unable to handle huge traffic and if one user start downloading other user bandwidth speed is affected.

Multiple Times.

4402, 4404, 5508

Yes we did have issues. The start access points were unable to join the controller but we managed.

There was an issue with User Authentication with lDAP.

None encountered.

None encountered.

It was good.

It was good.

Our customer used Linksys access points and they had problems with their connection so they decided for WLAN.

Start the controller. The initial setup process will start the you need to configure multiple parameters, and the configuration is done.

I implemented myself for multiple companies.

No day-to-day cost.

Yes different WLAN Controller models.

Good product and good reliability

Unified management, reporting, stability, and most importantly seamless roaming

Network wide SSID’s and passkeys help the day to day function of the IT staff. Simple to have a guest network.

The cost could be improved.

2 Years

Deployment for the WLAN controllers is very simple with a proper plan of your organization’s requirements. I have deployed this across large university campuses, vpn tunnels, and small businesses.

I have had very few issues with appliances or access points dropping off.

This goes back to properly planning your deployment. The smaller WLAN controller’s don’t grow well.

10 out of 10

10 out of 10

I haven’t switched anyone but we do often deploy Ubiquiti Unifi equipment for our smaller clients

Like all things Cisco, this can be as simple or complex as you want it. Most implementations are very simple to start.

It is done in-house.

We evaluated Aruba, Ruckus, and Ubiquiti.

Do your research! Make sure this product fits your needs.

There are many valuable features including security, availability, scalability, integration With Cisco products, WEB Portal for guest users, and Cleanair.

The main improvement was the mobility of Notebooks, Tablets, SmartPhones and Warehouse functions.

Management, and Monitoring features need to be improved and the inclusion of a Cloud-based solution.

4 years

Remote APs cannot work without Main Controller when using 802.1x Authentication.

No issues encountered.

No issues were encountered.

It was OK! We had some problems and always checked them with the TAC.

We used MOTOROLA/SYMBOL. It is an solution with no innovation and less features than Cisco Wireless Solution.

No, It was simple.

I am an consultant and I implement for our clients.

Motorola and Aruba.

That is a good solution, pay attention on Compatibility Matrix with some APs.

I utilize it as a Wi-Fi solution for personal use. 

The solution is easy to use and its stable. I like its quality. 

The price could be better.  

I have been using Cisco Wireless for two or three years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is certainly scalable. 

Cisco support is good.

Prior to using the solution, I used Aruba.

The installation was easy. It took around ten minutes. 

We handled the installion on our own. 

The solution does not come with a licensing fee. 

There are many users making use of the solution in Taiwan. 

The solution offers fast response time. 

I rate Cisco Wireless as an eight out of ten. 

Cisco Wireless has improved in terms of the Tri-Band and the Two-Band, those types of two antennas. We've been happy with the architecture and the solution for some time. 

Obviously there are new requirements around WPA-3 and Wi-Fi 6, more wireless assurance, and those types of things. So we're looking at all of those options in terms of their next product suite.

I'm not a wireless engineer but we've had Cisco Wireless at the company for a long time, about 20 odd years. We're now looking at replacing the Wireless architecture.

Cisco Wireless is stable.

From a scalability point of view, there is a cost component which needs to be looked at and reviewed, but from a technical scalability point of view I think it ticks all the boxes.

Cisco's technical support is very good, I've never had an issue with their technical support.

Cisco has several pricing models. I think things have gotten more expensive due to the economic climate around COVID and things like that for most vendors now.

Everybody is price-sensitive. I'm just the partner, so I'm looking at the solutions for the client. I'm not the customer. The customer, obviously, would say cheap is better and because a lot of people are price sensitive now they're trying to get as much value as they can at a good price.

I'm not a wireless expert, but we've been running Cisco Wireless for a long time. On a scale of one to ten, I would definitely give them an eight.

I think the licensing models need to be reviewed in some instances. Obviously Cisco's licensing models are quite challenging, and it can be costly. Those are the two things to check.

Our customers use Cisco Wireless for networking and WiFi.

It is a stable solution.

Installation is complex and should be easier. 

I've been dealing with Cisco Wireless for two years. We have two customers who use it.

It is a stable solution.

Technical support is average.

The initial setup is complex and took about one day.

I would recommend this solution.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cisco Wireless at five.

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 use Cisco Wireless for wireless connection.

The most valuable feature of the solution is reliability.

The solution could be cheaper and have a better web interface.

I have been using Cisco Wireless for ten years.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for stability.

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

The solution’s technical support is average.

The solution’s initial setup is complex, and an average user will not be able to do it. You need to know the command line to deploy Cisco Wireless.

Users have to pay a yearly licensing fee for Cisco Wireless.

The solution can be deployed both on-premises and on the cloud. You need to be very technical to deploy and maintain the solution. I would recommend the solution to other users.

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