We performed a comparison between Aruba Networks Wireless WAN and Fortinet FortiExtender based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Wireless WAN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup of Aruba Networks Wireless WAN can be done quickly, and everything functions smoothly."
"It's quite stable."
"I would rate the stability a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable feature is reliability."
"Aruba is a very stable system."
"Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is stable and good."
"In the event of a controller appliance failure or downtime, the system seamlessly transitions control to any access point acting as a backup controller."
"The installation process was easy."
"The solution is extremely user-friendly."
"You don't need to have two different vendors to interoperate and get into comparability issues or inter-operability issues."
"For me, the best feature of Fortinet FortiExtender is its integration with an external solution such as a 5G LTE broadband modem, wired modem, and cellular network. I also like that the product can be integrated into one device or a unified device, and that is one of its best features because it allows you to manage and centralize the control of every device."
"The initial setup was was just beautiful. It was straightforward."
"The most valuable feature will be that it works."
"Management can be carried out from a central point."
"The product is easy to use and easy to integrate."
"We appreciate that this solution can be used as an active secondary link as well as a backup."
"They have to work on their Aruba Central cloud platform. There are still some glitches such as not showing proper user details. When we removed the AP from the Aruba Central cloud, it showed up as being connected to Aruba Central. They need to fix these issues."
"The solution should be cheaper."
"The product should improve Aruba Central."
"In a meshed environment, the handoff between access points is sometimes not smooth when users are mobile. For example, a connection is occasionally interrupted when a user takes their laptop from the gym to the cafeteria."
"The internet signal and the connection can be better."
"Deployment can take some time if you haven't planned well."
"The solution has bugs. It really has bugs, and you have to wait until it happens, then you realize it."
"The solution currently has a Windows update problem."
"The engineering of the solution has some negative points, especially in terms of troubleshooting. It's difficult to troubleshoot when we have a problem. It's not like other products like Cisco or Palo Alto which make troubleshooting much easier."
"We would like to see some improvement in the price for 5G models, as they are currently very expensive."
"The support could be faster and more responsive."
"There is a huge downside because we need to remove and insert the SIM to get it working."
"Though Fortinet FortiExtender has some security features, the product could still be improved by adding features similar to those in FortiGuard, such as antivirus, intrusion, prevention, and detection, as well as web filtering features. The product is also not as user-friendly, so that's another area for improvement. In the FortiGate UTM solution of Fortinet, there's software-defined or SD-WAN, and in the next release of Fortinet FortiExtender, I'd like to see SD-WAN embedded in the product. Most of the communication in Fortinet FortiExtender is related to WAN and Edge, so having an SD-WAN function in the product would be useful for integrating and controlling WAN communication."
"The solution would be a lot better if it was a little bit more intuitive. Additionally, the help menu would be a lot better if it was easier to identify the items that I was looking for. I find the graphical interface a little bit difficult to navigate. And I find the font that is used on the HTML interface not conducive to being able to be read in low light situations."
"I would like to see them make it smaller in the next release so that it has a smaller footprint for mobile clients."
"What most of my clients are telling me is the price is a problem."
Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is ranked 5th in Wireless WAN with 47 reviews while Fortinet FortiExtender is ranked 6th in Wireless WAN with 8 reviews. Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is rated 8.4, while Fortinet FortiExtender is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Aruba Networks Wireless WAN writes "It's reliable, cost-effective, and easy to troubleshoot". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiExtender writes "Seamless with excellent integration capabilities and flexibility". Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is most compared with Cambium Networks Wireless WAN, Ubiquiti Wireless and Fortinet FortiWLM, whereas Fortinet FortiExtender is most compared with Cisco Wireless WAN. See our Aruba Networks Wireless WAN vs. Fortinet FortiExtender report.
See our list of best Wireless WAN vendors.
We monitor all Wireless WAN 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.