We compared Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is praised for its stability, performance, and visibility, with positive reviews on customer service and ROI. In contrast, Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points are highlighted for reliability, performance, and security, with positive feedback on customer service and ROI. Areas for improvement vary, with Meraki users focusing on signal strength and support, while Mist users mention reliability and performance enhancements.
Features: Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is praised for stability, good performance, complete visibility, IoT integration, cloud management, and granular device control. Juniper Mist emphasizes reliability, performance, advanced security, seamless integration, and robust coverage.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost difference between Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points is minimal. Both products have been praised for their affordability and straightforward setup process. Customers have reported that there are no additional expenses or complex procedures involved in setting up either system., Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN has a positive ROI, with improved network performance and enhanced security. It offers ease of deployment and management, reducing operational costs. Users consider it reliable and scalable. On the other hand, Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points provide significant value and benefits, including increased connectivity and network reliability. It offers improved user experiences and seamless connectivity for employees and visitors. Users appreciate the ease of management and configuration, saving time and resources. Overall, it has proven to be a worthwhile investment.
Room for Improvement: Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN has room for improvement in enhancing signal strength and coverage, improving network stability and reliability, enhancing user interface and management features, increasing compatibility with third-party devices, addressing firmware update issues, and providing better customer support. On the other hand, Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points require enhancements in reliability and stability, speed and coverage, setup and configuration processes, and compatibility with various devices and operating systems.
Deployment and customer support: Based on user feedback, the duration required for establishing a new tech solution with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN varied among users, with some taking a week and others taking three months for both deployment and setup. For Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points, users also reported varying timeframes, with some taking a week for deployment and setup, while others took three months., Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is known for its exceptional customer service, with prompt and effective assistance from knowledgeable and friendly staff. Users appreciate their efficient issue resolution. On the other hand, Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points also provides highly regarded customer service, offering prompt and effective solutions with a knowledgeable and responsive support team. Users highlight the level of attention and support provided by Juniper Mist.
The summary above is based on 59 interviews we conducted recently with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The settings of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN can be very granular. You can lock down and block devices with the controls. For example, we have four different wireless settings, such as guest, employee, security, and backup. For example, the settings for the employees, if they use laptops, they're required to have certain settings, such as an antivirus installed. If they do not then Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN will not let them connect. This is very good protection because the network works on the bringing your own device(BYOD) principle. It's a BYOD environment now, and you also don't want them to bring infection into the environment because these people are connecting to the LAN via wireless connections. We have to be careful because we're managing it, we have to be very strict with regards to the rules and policies."
"The captive portal feature is my favorite. It allows us to keep track of how many people are entering our client's businesses."
"I really don't have any problems with the stability of the product."
"I really love their cloud-based dashboard which allows me to see all my locations from one location."
"It enables quick deployment within all branches for the users."
"The most valuable thing to me is the stability of the product."
"The most amazing part is that their Access Points have the ability to connect to multiple conference devices at different times, and it shows you the very in-depth Wi-Fi analytics through their dashboard."
"The product has been very stable over the years."
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"The most valuable feature of Juniper Mist is the Virtual Network Assistant, powered by artificial intelligence."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Marvis, the AI-driven network management system."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"The artificial intelligence feature is very good."
"The most valuable feature of Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) is the ability to troubleshoot ports on the network. Additionally, when there is an update on the APs they are able to reboot quickly reducing downtime. Other solutions have a longer downtime when updates are done."
"The solution is stable."
"With Mist, every Wednesday they roll out new features."
"Currently, only a limited number of clients can connect to these devices."
"The licensing model is a terrible idea."
"Its pricing could be better."
"Recently I have seen that the Meraki access point, maybe due to congestion, just kicks off my customers, mostly when they are in Zoom meetings or Teams meetings and they have to reconnect."
"It is expensive. Juniper seems to have a lot more to offer for future expansion. Juniper has some features that are not there in this solution."
"I would like to see Cisco Meraki improve the accessibility by region level here in Latin America."
"The technical support for Meraki needs improvements made to the waiting times."
"I would like to see them improve their support where an assigned engineer can take the case all the way to closure. Usually, you get a different engineer calling regarding the same ticket."
"The pricing is very high in the Indian market."
"Improving third-party integration is key for Juniper Mist's next release."
"The pricing should be made cheaper."
"It would be helpful to have even stronger security features to help protect against interference from other nearby access points that aren't part of our network."
"Juniper Wireless AP can improve by continually improving its reporting and integration with other systems."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support and installation."
"The solution is expensive."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is ranked 4th in Wireless LAN with 115 reviews while Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points is ranked 10th in Wireless LAN with 16 reviews. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is rated 8.2, while Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN writes "Offers good mobility, stability and scalability ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points writes "Offers good performance, good solution and smooth implementation ". Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti Wireless, Mist AI and Cloud and Cisco Wireless, whereas Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Cisco Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN and Mist AI and Cloud. See our Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN vs. Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points report.
See our list of best Wireless LAN vendors.
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.