We performed a comparison between Cisco Wireless and Omada Access Points based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Wireless LAN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The AI capabilities of Mist Wireless are superior to other OEMs."
"The solution is very secure."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Marvis, the AI-driven network management system."
"Juniper Mist offers valuable features like comprehensive network insight, granular policy control, fast device setup, strong security, and efficient SSL traffic management."
"Overall, we've been very pleased with the performance."
"The solution is stable."
"The artificial intelligence feature is very good."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"With Cisco Wireless we have DNA technology for the frequency in which it operates, so that in case of any frequency interference it can look for and switch to another frequency, where there no interference."
"The ability to disable RRM or set hybrid RRM provides a more granular design of RF in the environment."
"It is a reliable and robust solution. Access and Mobility Groups are useful. We don't use anything very fancy."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"Overall, Cisco was stable and worked well for all our needs until we started having more and more students and teachers using YouTube and Zoom — what with classes being isolated and everything — which put a lot of strain on our Wi-Fi network."
"The most valuable features of Cisco Wireless are security and the ability to manage everything easily. Other solutions, such as Aruba are not as simple."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The tool is mainly improving our productivity."
"The solution has been dependable and has kept up with modern technology."
"When this solution is set up, it is solid. It offers fast deployment."
"The most valuable feature of TP-Link Auranet EAP is its high performance."
"We use Omada Access Points for the network and Wi-Fi."
"The performance and availability of Omada Access Points have met our business needs, particularly in improving network control and facilitating direct access for developers to branch services."
"This product is easy to use."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"We don't have any issues 90 percent of the time. It works fine in most situations. It has been a success story for delivering WiFi services in Romania. Our customers are happy, and I've been satisfied with Omada's performance as an engineer."
"The product should include adaptive Wi-Fi to show a more accurate location."
"Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) could improve if the MIST platform had a built-in master key. This would be an advantage."
"Improving third-party integration is key for Juniper Mist's next release."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support and installation."
"The price could be better."
"The pricing is very high in the Indian market."
"The pricing should be made cheaper."
"Juniper Wireless AP can improve by continually improving its reporting and integration with other systems."
"Even though the tool offers a cloud-based central management option, the product needs to work on improving the security part a bit since it is an area of concern."
"In Latin America, Cisco is very expensive in comparison to other technologies."
"The GUI could be made more user-friendly. There should also be a dashboard where it can showcase how many end-users are connected to a particular access point."
"The media stream and Mojo settings are not sufficiently supported."
"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."
"Older versions are complex to configure and implement."
"For pricing, Cisco has to make an effort, or Cisco has to improve the distribution channel."
"There is a problem with the controller. When we have to restart the controller, it does not show the time. We have to manually configure the time when we restart it. I have read about this issue, to get some information, and all answers are about having to connect it with a time server, which is very difficult."
"We have some issues with stability. It is not so fast. That is the main problem."
"It's better for smaller organizations. This would not work for enterprises. It is not very scalable."
"The solution takes a long time to switch to another connection, which should be improved."
"Omada could add some API integrations that would help with our automated solution. We're trying to integrate, and we're having some issues because some of the calls are not there. The API still needs some development."
"There is room for wider improvements and additional features to enhance managing capabilities."
"It is less affordable for smaller businesses."
"TP-Link Auranet EAP is not very efficient, they need to improve it."
"Aruba has better scaling capabilities."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Wireless is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 146 reviews while Omada Access Points is ranked 15th in Wireless LAN with 14 reviews. Cisco Wireless is rated 8.2, while Omada Access Points is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Wireless writes "Allows us to deploy a wide range of wireless products with stable WiFi". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Omada Access Points writes "They have good specs, and the price is lower than competing solutions". Cisco Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and NETGEAR Insight Access Points, whereas Omada Access Points is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Aruba Instant and NETGEAR Insight Access Points. See our Cisco Wireless vs. Omada 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.