We compared Cisco Wireless and Huawei Wireless based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, Cisco Wireless is praised for its robust network connectivity, seamless roaming capabilities, and excellent security measures, while Huawei Wireless stands out for its strong connectivity, efficient performance, and reliable signal strength. Cisco Wireless receives positive feedback on customer service and support, setup cost, and licensing, leading to a highly satisfactory return on investment. On the other hand, Huawei Wireless users appreciate its sleek design, user-friendly interface, and long battery life, along with efficient customer service and competitive pricing. Areas for improvement for Cisco Wireless include signal strength, security features, and user interface, while Huawei Wireless could benefit from enhancements in signal strength and device compatibility.
Features: Cisco Wireless is valued for robust network connectivity, seamless roaming, reliable performance, excellent security measures, and user-friendly management interfaces. Huawei Wireless is praised for its strong connectivity, efficient performance, user-friendly interface, and reliable signal strength.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Cisco Wireless is reported to be manageable and user-friendly, while Huawei Wireless is acknowledged to have a straightforward and hassle-free setup cost. Additionally, users mention the flexibility and options provided by Cisco's licensing, while Huawei's licensing is easily obtained and offers usage flexibility., According to user feedback, the ROI from Cisco Wireless has been highly satisfactory, while Huawei Wireless has contributed positively to our return on investment.
Room for Improvement: Cisco Wireless may need improvements in signal strength, security features, user interface, reliability, and connection speed. On the other hand, Huawei Wireless could benefit from enhancements in signal strength, compatibility, user interface, and durability.
Deployment and customer support: The reviews for Cisco Wireless mention varying timeframes for deployment and setup, ranging from three months for deployment and an additional week for setup to a week for both deployment and setup. On the other hand, Huawei Wireless reviews also mention varying durations, with some users spending three months on deployment and an additional week on setup, while others spending a week each on both deployment and setup, suggesting that these terms may refer to the same period., Cisco Wireless products have received high praise for their customer service and support. Users have expressed satisfaction with prompt and helpful assistance, efficient and responsive support staff, and an overall positive experience. Similarly, Huawei Wireless products have also been highly praised for their customer service and support. Users appreciate the prompt and helpful resolution of issues, the expertise and knowledge of the support team, and the professional and efficient customer service experience.
The summary above is based on 66 interviews we conducted recently with Cisco Wireless and Huawei Wireless users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The most valuable feature of Juniper Mist is the Virtual Network Assistant, powered by artificial intelligence."
"The AI capabilities of Mist Wireless are superior to other OEMs."
"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."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"You can easily monitor, manage, and cover all your IT equipment."
"It provides private network access, helping us protect our company’s devices."
"The solution is very secure."
"Support is fantastic. They are helpful and responsive."
"Cisco Wireless is quite convenient for mobile and laptop access."
"Cisco Wireless is highly stable."
"The product is compatible with a lot of mobile devices."
"I like that it's a standard wireless solution that can be rolled out throughout the campus. I also like that it is easy to manage. It is a good end-to-end solution."
"Cisco's support team is the best in the industry."
"The solution is very good at supporting IoT applications."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the Cisco CleanAir and Cisco RRM."
"Huawei Wireless has controllers inside the switches."
"It can scale."
"We can use an access point to broadcast multiple SSIDs, assign dynamic VLANs, and configure dynamic access control lists (ACLs)."
"At the moment, I only have experience with the on-premise deployment of Huawei Wireless, but the cloud solution looks good on paper. It looks perfect. I can say that Huawei's cybersecurity is very good, stable, and works for long periods. My company has four devices running uptime for more than four years without stopping. I also like that the support for Huawei Wireless is swift, and support does precisely what you require, at least from the point of view of the technical engineer who communicated with Huawei support, as I'm more of a technical sales guy. Good technical support is vital to my company, partners, and customers. My company had this ongoing project with an ISP provider in Bulgaria that bought some routers. Still, the existing equipment was a completely different brand, so this provider wanted to migrate to Huawei Wireless and wanted help while migrating the existing infrastructure to Huawei, so the technical engineer assigned to raise the ticket with Huawei for checking and setting parameters correctly provided feedback about Huawei technical support being good quality-wise and TAT-wise. The technical engineer was also Cisco-certified and Juniper-certified and was not experienced with Huawei equipment. Still, he did mention that the Huawei Wireless router interface was straightforward, and even a person who's new to it would find it easy to configure. Huawei Wireless is user-friendly, which is another pro of the solution. It's easy to manage, and even the program language setting can be done with fewer commands than Juniper and Cisco equipment. Some of the features in Juniper need an external program, and the same features can be found in Huawei Wireless built-in, which I find remarkable."
"The solution is easy to set up."
"It provides high-speed network connections."
"The best feature of Huawei Wireless is the quick and fast setup."
"The solution is easily managed compared to other wireless solutions."
"Improvement is needed in the user-friendliness of Juniper Mist, particularly in enhancing the interaction with AI features."
"I need a bit more time with it before criticizing the features."
"Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points’ support services need improvement."
"Enrolling into the tool is a tedious process."
"Improving third-party integration is key for Juniper Mist's next release."
"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."
"The pricing should be made cheaper."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support and installation."
"The flexibility on the controllers isn't that great."
"Improvement needed in RRM, ATF, Ortho-Polarization, AP concurrent client processing."
"There is room for improvement regarding HA issues and Radius integration."
"The security must be improved."
"It's end-of-life, it will be end-of-support in the next two years. The APs are also end-of-life."
"The coverage provided by the solution is an area of concern in some cases, making it an area where improvements are required."
"Sometimes our customers do not get proper IP addresses from the DHCP pool."
"Controllers could be improved."
"The solution needs to include a captive portal."
"They should actually first test the equipment thoroughly and then launch it. Sometimes, things come out too soon, before they are ready."
"The solution should offer more integration with third-party servers and devices."
"The solution could be easier to use."
"As such, there are no problems. It has been good. There were some issues with the network design, but that is not specifically related to the product. We had to make some improvements in the network design. The product as such is fine, and there are no big issues. We are using the latest version having most of the features available in the industry, so the specs are very high. If something new comes up new in the industry, it needs to be incorporated into the product."
"There could be a console port for demonstration or configuration purposes."
"The technical support needs to be improved. They also need to produce some more technical guides."
"Huawei Wireless is not scalable. We have had a problem with the solution because it cannot integrate with other servers as the other competitors can."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Wireless is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 147 reviews while Huawei Wireless is ranked 9th in Wireless LAN with 33 reviews. Cisco Wireless is rated 8.2, while Huawei Wireless is rated 8.0. 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 Huawei Wireless writes "Customizable and has many unique features, such as encryption, spatial streams, and smart antennas". Cisco Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and Omada Access Points, whereas Huawei Wireless is most compared with D-Link Wireless, Aruba Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Ruckus Wireless and Fortinet FortiWLM. See our Cisco Wireless vs. Huawei Wireless 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