We performed a comparison between Aruba Orchestrator and Cisco SD-WAN based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is optimization."
"The Business Intent Overlay is a great feature."
"The most important feature is WAN optimization."
"The technical support services are excellent."
"The product has reduced OpEx expenditure."
"We had to deal with separate management models for Wi-Fi and switches. With Aruba Orchestrator, it's now a unified solution, making things much easier for us. We log in and manage everything from a single console. It provides complete internal visibility from LAN to Wi-Fi, resulting in higher stability and easier troubleshooting. The management process is much quicker and more streamlined."
"Aruba Orchestrator has notably reduced enrollment setup times from several hours to within an hour if prepared and planned."
"It's a scalable solution."
"I have found the solution's main features are its ability to be customized, network traffic classification, and has a wide range of features that can be set."
"The solution provides good consolidation, centralization, and manageability for edge routers."
"Cisco SD-WAN is a good product."
"The most useful feature is centralized telephony."
"The solution can scale. We haven't had any issues doing so."
"The solution has great scalability."
"The most valuable feature is the application-level routing."
"The solution lacks sufficient security features."
"The solution can be improved by lowering the cost and making it more user-friendly for first-time users."
"The management menu should be simplified."
"Aruba Orchestrator should implement dynamic certificate changes for security."
"They could provide essential training to understand the product functionality."
"The initial setup is complex, depending on the overall planning for the entire environment."
"Since most user-data is going through the solution, we are concerned about security, as all the information is in the cloud and not on-premises. The user data authentification should be higher to better prevent malicious attacks."
"The solution is very costly."
"The cost is too high for certain countries, for example, those in Africa. The solution needs to be more cost-effective."
"The solution could be a bit cheaper."
"Better pricing and greater security would be nice to see."
"I would like to see features related to security compliance, including a view of compliance with standards. With this, I should be able to do an audit of my network with SDWAN."
"Cisco SD-WAN's clustering mechanism needs to be improved. If there are more than five milliseconds of latency time between installations of the VM manager, the cluster automatically breaks down."
"Some competitors are much faster in providing out-of-the-box solutions, more innovative solutions. In terms of innovation, in many cases, they're lagging behind."
Aruba Orchestrator is ranked 13th in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 7 reviews while Cisco SD-WAN is ranked 1st in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 86 reviews. Aruba Orchestrator is rated 8.6, while Cisco SD-WAN is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Aruba Orchestrator writes "Provides complete internal visibility from LAN to Wi-Fi, resulting in higher stability and easier troubleshooting". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco SD-WAN writes "A solution for integrating services to enhance up-time, performance and lower costs". Aruba Orchestrator is most compared with Juniper Session Smart Router and VMware SD-WAN, whereas Cisco SD-WAN is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Meraki SD-WAN, VMware SD-WAN, Juniper Session Smart Router and Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform. See our Aruba Orchestrator vs. Cisco SD-WAN report.
See our list of best Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions vendors.
We monitor all Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions 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.