We performed a comparison between Cisco Wireless and Fortinet FortiWLM 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 solution is stable."
"The AI capabilities of Mist Wireless are superior to other OEMs."
"The simplicity is great."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"The solution is very secure."
"It provides private network access, helping us protect our company’s devices."
"Juniper Mist offers valuable features like comprehensive network insight, granular policy control, fast device setup, strong security, and efficient SSL traffic management."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"This solution is highly stable. We have only had one issue in seven years."
"Creating policies is simple."
"Cisco Wireless is highly stable."
"We are using Cisco access point 2802, and they are very reliable."
"I find this solution easy to configure and use."
"It is tough, has a nice speed, and is quite reliable."
"Cisco Wireless gave us the ability to deploy and seamlessly manage wireless devices at our corporate office and remote locations."
"Our environment has many devices constantly moving within our environment—approximately 3,000 devices daily, many of which change locations every 45 minutes. Therefore, the tool's seamless handoff is valuable for us. It's one of the reasons we have stayed with the product."
"The security is a valuable feature."
"With Fortinet, there is a feature called Network-In-Control. It's the AP controller that decides what the clients are going to connect to... Even though your phone sees, let's say, two APs, since the wireless controller has visibility into and access across all the APs, it knows the best AP for the client to connect to. This way, the controller makes sure that none of the APs is over-crowded, and the spectrum is used properly."
"We can deploy a tunnel-based VLAN and SSID, for something that happens at the last minute, in a matter of minutes, because of the interaction between the FortiGate, the FortiSwitches, and the FortiAPs."
"Although there are a few steps, the initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to connect and broadcast to different networks without using a VLAN or a layer two switch, which allows you to easily create guest networks."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the management."
"Having the single pane of glass, by using the Fortinet Security Fabric, allows us to tighten security, and more easily and quickly create additional VLANs to help protect data. Rules in the firewall mean we can protect data and systems so that, should anything go wrong, any security issue is held to an individual device."
"Security is the feature we like most from Fortinet. In general, their security architecture is really great, because it involves everything: firewalls, wireless LANs, the user. Everything is really secure."
"Improvement is needed in the user-friendliness of Juniper Mist, particularly in enhancing the interaction with AI features."
"The pricing is very high in the Indian market."
"The product should include adaptive Wi-Fi to show a more accurate location."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"Juniper Wireless AP can improve by continually improving its reporting and integration with other systems."
"They should include SD-WAN features to it."
"Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) could improve if the MIST platform had a built-in master key. This would be an advantage."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support and installation."
"In this part of the world, support is the weak side of this solution."
"The integration with our CM and other technologies could improve this solution."
"It was expensive. Considering the challenges faced in third-world countries like Pakistan or India, cheaper solutions are preferred."
"The current issue with Cisco is I don't have centralized management."
"One thing which we really don't like about Cisco is that it is very expensive."
"There should be an option for a wireless bridge that can be used to join two access points."
"The solution is stable but it could be improved. However, this could be because there are not enough APs."
"Most definitely the cost."
"The solution should improve user capacity."
"Licensing is the only area that I think they are below average. They need enterprise licensing, an all-encompassing license to cover all products for a company."
"When using the FortiGate as the wireless controller, you cannot have automatic user registration, which is something that they should offer."
"The roaming of Fortinet FortiWLM could improve when comparing it to other solutions. We are missing some of the functionality in the controller. Additionally, they should offer more logs instead of using FortiAnalyzer because all the users will not be using the same thing."
"Areas for improvement would be the compatibility with Apple products and cross-platform integration."
"Documentation could be improved."
"The range needs some improvement and also the stability."
"In the next release, they could improve by adding a controller-less server, or architecture that is provided in other solutions, such as Aruba. This would be a great benefit for customers."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Wireless is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 147 reviews while Fortinet FortiWLM is ranked 16th in Wireless LAN with 22 reviews. Cisco Wireless is rated 8.2, while Fortinet FortiWLM is rated 8.2. 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 Fortinet FortiWLM writes "Impressive manufacturing quality, highly durable, and very easy to deploy". Cisco Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and Omada Access Points, whereas Fortinet FortiWLM is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ubiquiti Wireless and Omada Access Points. See our Cisco Wireless vs. Fortinet FortiWLM 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.
All are good selections, and this question is difficult to answer without knowing your throughput requirements, as each vendor has multiple models within there series.
Personally I recommend looking at Arista Networks’ cognitive Wifi, where controllers are a thing of the past.
Ruckus virtual smart zone will be your best bet allowing up to 300k connected devices and 30k access points. furthermore, Ruckus has time and again proven best in speed, throughput in high density environments by independent studies. I have over a decade of working with this product and none of the other competitors can beat the layer 1 connectivity of Ruckus WiFi
Hi,
Every one of the mentioned solutions is good but you need to check the needs which are security since the firms you are working with need protection and tracking of data. For this reason, I recommend:
- if you have FortiGate installed then go for Fortinet Wireless since they can be integrated with the Fortigate without buying a controller and they work perfectly together and you will get the advantage of applying rules to the client himself whether mobile or computer, easily managed & monitored, more visibility over your network and incident notifications.
If the above doesn't apply then you can go with the best one that fits your budget and security needs which for me doesn't fall on the mentioned solution but to go with ARUBA Instant Access Wireless Solution and the reasons are as such:
- Cisco is too much expensive and you got to pay smart support with some complexity in configuration and you need to buy a controller
- Ruckus is good but when you want to have the security you need to buy a controller with licenses and it won't give you the security needed since it is just a wireless solution
- Huawei is not a stable company since it had many ups and downs and they can reach with you to have all the solutions nearly free so that you install their brand.
Whereas Aruba you don't need a controller in the Instant access points and you will get the minimum security with radius integration and what is important a lifetime warranty on the access points.
In addition, if the number of access points increased and you want more detailed management and more advanced configurations, you can buy a controller either on-premises or on-cloud with Aruba.
The above information is based on my experience with all the solutions and their POC.
If you need any more details and consultancy, kindly feel free to contact me.
Regards.
Hi Imad,
Thanks for your input. Do you have any POC data for Cisco and Aruba?
Thanks in advance
Boa tarde
As soluções cada solução que você indicou tem pormenores que podem impactar tanto no funcionamento quanto em caso de disaster recovery.
Fortinet: Possui bons access points, aliado às funcionalidades de segurança do próprio UTM, porém será mais um serviço para o appliance gerenciar, e dependendo do que está rodando nele, corre-se o risco de degradar a performance da funcionalidade principal "segurança", por que tambem está gerenciando uma rede wireless, além do fato se houver alguma pane no appliance Fortinet, tanto os itens de segurança quanto a rede wireless irão ficar indisponível. Dê a Cézar o que é de Cézar, deixe a fortinet focada em segurança, que é o que ela faz de melhor.
Ruckus: Excelentes Access points, confiáveis e com alta performance, possui no mínimo 4 opções de gerência, sendo, controlerless Unleashed, appliance virtual, appliance hardware e cloud, ambas as opções não trará prejuizo à performance da rede wireless, porque não há tunelamento de dados para elas, além de possuir várias funções de segurança inerentes à rede wireless. licenças são perpétuas.
Cisco: Excelente access points, porém solução muito cara para aquisição e renovação.
Huawei: Pelo que conheço, tem bons access points, e controladoras virtuais e appliance físico, mas conheço poucas redes com esta solução.
É lógico que uma tem um recurso extra a mais do que a outra, mas considero mera perfumaria, pois o básico para uma rede wireless segura todas atendem.
Eu já atendi a mais de 40 universidades federais no Brasil, todas com Ruckus, e não há reclamação da solução.
Como recomendação pessoal, vá de Ruckus.
Hi,
It is all dependent on the size of the controllers in question. Though I would suggest getting a cloud base technology so you are limited by any controller and have much better redundancy. Take a look at Arista Cognitive Wireless