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."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is reliability."
"Aruba Central seems to be a good way to go in cloud management. However, compared to Cisco Meraki, it's still very early days."
"An engineer with enough experience can tune the network however they want. It's crucial. It's good to customize our information security how we like it and configure the solution to achieve the level of stability we need."
"The product keeps up with leading-edge technology so we have dependability and scalability."
"The solution's strong security mechanism and user-friendly web console are great."
"I rate the stability an eight out of ten."
"Management can be carried out from a central point."
"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."
"You don't need to have two different vendors to interoperate and get into comparability issues or inter-operability issues."
"The solution is extremely user-friendly."
"We appreciate that this solution can be used as an active secondary link as well as a backup."
"The product is easy to use and easy to integrate."
"The initial setup was was just beautiful. It was straightforward."
"The most valuable feature will be that it works."
"The integration should be better."
"It works. We don't look at it any deeper than that and don't find any features ar missing."
"Support is a little expensive. It's also a little tricky to configure Aruba sometimes. For example, if we want to whitelist a device, it works in unexpected ways. I want to allow this device to connect somewhere, and it lets it connect to any device in the network. Let's say I want to allow my phone to connect to the network printer, but if I add my phone to the white list, I automatically allow my phone to connect to any other devices, and it's not secure."
"Support is not good...The support can be improved, especially in India, since whenever I require support, it takes some time."
"The solution should be cheaper."
"The support needs improvement because it is not very good in terms of response time."
"The customization options could be improved."
"When it comes to configuring rules for file security tests, any issues that arise can be referred to as "glitches". Despite the extensive configurations required, the process itself is not overly complicated."
"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."
"I would like to see them make it smaller in the next release so that it has a smaller footprint for mobile clients."
"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."
"We would like to see some improvement in the price for 5G models, as they are currently very expensive."
"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, Fortinet FortiWLM and Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, 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.