

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and Cambium Networks Wireless LAN compete in the wireless LAN solutions market. Cisco Meraki has an advantage due to its cloud-managed solutions and centralized management, while Cambium Networks stands out with its cost-effectiveness and stability without licensing constraints.
Features: Cisco Meraki offers centralized cloud management, high security features, and extensive management tools. It is valued for its ease in configuration and monitoring capabilities across varied organizational sizes. Cambium Networks is known for its stability, ease of configuration, and autonomy from controllers and licenses, making it suitable for customizable environments.
Room for Improvement: Cisco Meraki could enhance its licensing flexibility and integration capabilities, and expand the depth of technical support. Cambium Networks would benefit from better scalability, more efficient cloud configuration options, and improved pricing models.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Cisco Meraki provides flexible deployment options in cloud and on-premises setups with varying quality of technical support. Cambium Networks offers consistent and accessible support praised for its straightforward initial setup.
Pricing and ROI: Cisco Meraki's costs are tied to frequent license renewals, making it expensive with strong ROI in management ease and scalability. Cambium Networks offers a cost-effective option without ongoing license fees, providing favorable total cost of ownership and positive long-term ROI.
The local team helps with issues primarily, and if they can't resolve them, they connect to the technical support team in the US, who are very much trained on resolving issues and providing support.
They were always available when needed, which we appreciated.
Cisco's support is very good and ranks 10 out of 10.
I would rate Cisco support a 10, as the response time and process via the dashboard are easy, and response times are always within the SLA.
It would be better if the SLA of technical support was less than four hours.
There are some problems with their technical support when it comes to the whole Meraki system.
Ruckus provides better area coverage and interference withstanding capacity.
Allowing deployment of fewer access points while covering more area.
Meraki is not scalable enough since it straightforwardly maps its products to segmented specifications.
I believe the hardware used in Cambium Networks is pretty robust, and the radios are strong in terms of signal and performance.
In the last six months, we have never had any issues.
We have experienced many instances where we have experienced a lag in our network, and I am not sure if it is due to their devices or our network.
Stability is not an issue for me because it comes with Cisco's proven manufacturer quality.
I would want more WiFi products, specifically WiFi indoor access point products.
Channel management required manual intervention, especially in environments with multiple floors, leading to potential signal interference issues.
Cambium currently lacks such extensive analytics capabilities.
The most important improvement needed is to eliminate the limitation of uplinks.
Some of the newer models of the Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN access point have encompassed the new wireless protocols and increased the strength of their antennas.
The solution supports Wi-Fi 6.
Even though people said Cambium Networks Wireless LAN is cheaper, I assumed it was cheaper at one point, but they changed the way how subscription works, and there is no difference compared with Meraki at the moment.
Cambium Networks Wireless LAN was well-priced, comparable and not the most expensive nor the cheapest option available.
Cambium's pricing is better compared to Ruckus, which has multiple components with associated costs, like license support and access point support costs.
The pricing of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is not competitive enough for the SMB market compared to other brands.
Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is on par with other devices in that category, offering competitive pricing.
My experience with the pricing of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is that it is competitive with other providers offering paid subscriptions.
Meraki products are better than Cambium Networks Wireless LAN because the quality of the Wi-Fi is better, and it is easier to manage.
The product was scalable, allowing for fewer access points to cover more area, and supported a high number of clients.
Ruckus offers a more extensive coverage range and has better capacity to withstand interference, which I have experienced with Ruckus products.
It also manages security clients and switches, providing a single dashboard to manage multiple network infrastructures.
Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN has helped optimize network traffic very effectively, as we do prioritization for streaming and web conferencing apps, resulting in a clear, visible improvement in performance.
All auditing and event logs are centralized in the dashboard.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN | 10.3% |
| Cambium Networks Wireless LAN | 2.0% |
| Other | 87.7% |

| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 14 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 3 |
| Large Enterprise | 2 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 69 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 27 |
| Large Enterprise | 31 |
We monitor all Wireless LAN reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.