We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why
Solutions Architect at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 20
Good application visibility with great integration potential and capability to scale.
Pros and Cons
  • "The solution offers very good application visibility and control integration for other analysis software."
  • "The pricing of the solution is expensive if you compare it to other competitors."

What is our primary use case?

We provide seamless connectivity for the users in various locations. We can track a user and analyze them according to their behavior within the campus and according to their different locations. This gives us a full view of the locations that users gravitate towards and how they utilize the workspace areas within the campus.

What is most valuable?

The solution offers very good integration with a BYOD solution.

The solution offers very good application visibility and control integration for other analysis software.

What needs improvement?

We are looking for more interaction with end-users and need to use the engagement feature that is provided in the new series. We want interaction between the end-users and the software that we are deploying. Therefore, an integration that would use a user's mobile devices through some sort of engagement API would be a good enhancement.

We don't actually use the features to their full potential yet.  We're always exploring the features to see what we can add.

It would be great if, even if the solution is degraded, security-wise, if it could be integrated without extra overhead for the systems or wireless administrators.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for 13 or 14 years now through it is different series 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is very scalable using the options of the cluster-ID for the wireless. You don't have any limitations, even with one wireless controller. I haven't seen any limitations. It's very scalable and extendible. Performance-wise we can extend beyond the wireless controller through the FlexConnect feature. It's great.

On-premises, we typically have about 500 users.

Currently, our capacity is enough, so I don't foresee us expanding the solution in the near future. We'll see what happens after the COVID lockdown.

How are customer service and technical support?

We haven't faced a huge problem from a technical standpoint. However, overall, their response to any queries has been very good overall. They are quite supportive and we've been satisfied with their level of attention.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have only ever used Cisco.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was simple, however, to get the full features, those performing the set up need some sort of experience, regardless of the deployment, the analysis of the location, or for the deployment for the engagement to the API.

We will be going to do that part right now. I have a feeling it will be a complex part of the process.

Deployment takes about one day or so. It doesn't take too much time.

What about the implementation team?

We are an integrator. We handle the implementation for our clients.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The pricing of the solution is little expensive if you compare it to other competitors.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

A long time ago, we were comparing this solution against Aruba before the acquisition to HP. We also compare other products however, the main competitor was Aruba.

What other advice do I have?

We're a Cisco partner.

We use a variety of different versions of the solution, including the 800 Series, and 2800 Series. We are planning to go to the Catalyst 9000 Series soon as well. 

It's a centralized solution depending on the wireless controller and some access points have their own branches.

While not related to hardware, in relation to software capabilities, we're always looking for ways to better integrate solutions. This particular solution has been great thanks to the access technology provided. We have seamless integration with the infrastructure. The movement of the users is very easy to pinpoint. The user's onboarding onto the infrastructure is simple.

While the solution isn't perfect as a standalone, the integration capabilities on offer make it really special.

New users will really need to utilize features to get the most out of the solution.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. There are a few features that we would like to see added in the future that would make it perfect.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
MahmoudGhonem
Head Of Architecture Department at a university with 51-200 employees
Real User
High speed connectivity combined with 100% reliable hardware
Pros and Cons
  • "The features that I have found most valuable with Cisco Wireless is that the average connectivity for this WIFI access point is 2.5 gigabytes. That's the highest technology and highest connectivity. They started using the new technology and WIFI to get you a faster connectivity."
  • "In the next release, they should add a better reporting feature. The reporting will tell you if you have a problem. That will make the diagnostics easier."

What is our primary use case?

I use Cisco Wireless for education as I am managing a school. We use it for connectivity for students and teachers. It is an international private school. This is why we have to get high speed connectivity.

How has it helped my organization?

I have not used the solution for enough time to give a full evaluation but I will tell you the estimate - I estimate that it will reduce the time for a student to do their work and reduce the time for copying and transferring data through the local network. That's the reason that what we needed to get this hardware.

What is most valuable?

The features that I have found most valuable with Cisco Wireless is that the average connectivity for this WIFI access point is 2.5 gigabytes. That's the highest technology and highest connectivity. They started using the new technology and WIFI to get you a faster connectivity. All companies jumped from Wave 2 to WIFI 6 for the high speed.

What needs improvement?

I selected Cisco Wireless because I found they improved everything, but there is still a gap in Cisco reporting. It did not invest more into giving accurate reports. That's the missing thing in the solution. 

In the next release, they should add a better reporting feature. The reporting will tell you if you have a problem. That will make the diagnostics easier. Although, we have not had problems that required a lot of diagnostics.

For how long have I used the solution?

I just implemented the Cisco Wireless WiFi 6 last weekend.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I would be liar if I answered if it is stable because it has only been up for two days.

But the Cisco solution overall, and Cisco Wireless generally, are 100% stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is scalable. We have around 2000 students and teachers using it because we are an educational institution.

I'm the IT manager. My role as IT manager is managing the whole technology results.

We require three staff people for deployment and maintenance of Cisco Wireless - a network administrator and two IT specialists.

How are customer service and support?

They are good.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have been using the Cisco solution since 2011.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup right now of the access points to the WIFI, and to the switches are managed by FortiGate firewall and the wireless controller. So the routing is through the FortiGate firewall and the activity is through the Cisco switches managed through the wireless controller.

The plan was to upgrade the firewall and remove the old non-supported access point from the system because I used hybrid between these two and WIFI 6. Because this hardware is very expensive to get all at one time, we have a plan to replace all access points for these.

The development takes three days. But the delivery takes a long time. They take a lot of time to deliver hardware. 

What about the implementation team?

We implemented with a Cisco partner. They were experts. They did all they were supposed to do and it was active within the time as planned.

What was our ROI?

Two days is not enough to see ROI.

But for the previous experience, yes, I can see ROI. The old access points stayed with us since 2015. I have some working since 2017. I removed some from the system, so I have all 2017 access points still working. That is quite a reliable system.

What other advice do I have?

Any people who are looking to get a stable solution with and long life and long time connectivity should go with Cisco.

The big lesson is that when you invest in expensive hardware, you have to understand that it should be a trusted hardware to give you stability and to make sure that your investment will be returned soon. The cost of implementation and downtime with Cisco are less than with other solutions.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Cisco Wireless a nine.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Learn what your peers think about Cisco Wireless. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: January 2022.
563,148 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Network Architect at Summa Health System
Real User
Top 20
Great support, very stable, and offers great functionality
Pros and Cons
  • "The support offered by Cisco is excellent. They are very responsive and knowledgeable."
  • "Apple is definitely causing a lot of issues by turning on more security features on its equipment. It is causing more problems on the business side. One is what they call a randomized Mac address that Apple has put out. As far as I know, Cisco doesn't have a fix for that."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution for our handheld devices. We have about 30 most likely that are medical hand-held devices. We do have a lot of wireless devices out there, including carts. We've got Vocera Badges that we use.

What is most valuable?

The support offered by Cisco is excellent. They are very responsive and knowledgeable.

The functionality of the solution is very good.

What needs improvement?

The most difficult part of the solution is us juggling everything. There are eight access points that we have to deal with. They have a tendency to age out. After five years, they go off sale. Then, five years after that, that they're out of support. Usually, when you get a new access point, we have to get to a certain version to get everything to work. However, on top of that, the ones we had 10 years ago are no longer functioning. They make it a complicated battle to try to keep your equipment at proper revisions, all at the time. They kind of force you to upgrade now. 

Apple is definitely causing a lot of issues by turning on more security features on its equipment. It is causing more problems on the business side. One is what they call a randomized Mac address that Apple has put out. As far as I know, Cisco doesn't have a fix for that. In other words, it's there to protect the end-user when they're on a guest network or they use randomized Mac addresses. We were trying to implement an employee group that would track the individual via the Mac. Now that it's rotating, we don't have a way to configure that.

I need to figure out how to handle security features that product lines have that offer a non-standard type of security feature that is being turned on constantly by different vendors. iPad also gives us isses. They have it set up so that you don't see the Mac address and the wireless at all. You can't even track your device anymore. I just discovered that last week.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution for about 15 years at this point It's been a good long while.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is pretty solid in terms of stability. Out of a rating of ten, I would give them a nine. It's reliable and doesn't crash or freeze. It's not buggy at all.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I would describe the solution as scalable. If a company needs to grow it out they can do so pretty easily.

How are customer service and technical support?

We're big fans of technical support. It's one of the solution's big selling features. We've very satisfied with the level of support they provide us.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I also have experience with Aruba. I'd say that Cisco is a bit more complicated to set up.

That said, we went to Cisco from day one - even before they had wireless controllers. Cisco is our go-to solution.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is probably a little bit more complex than Aruba from what I've seen so far. It's not simple per se.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I don't handle the pricing. I don't have it in front of me. I'm not sure what the monthly costs are for our organization.

What other advice do I have?

We're just a customer.

The solution is fairly up-to-date, however, we aren't using the most recent version of the solution right now.

Overall, I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. We've used it for years and it's worked quite well for us with very little issues to speak of.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Enterprise Architect at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Reseller
Top 20
Easy setup with great technical support and reliable technology
Pros and Cons
  • "The technical support is excellent."
  • "They are a pretty expensive option."

What is our primary use case?

We use the solution purely for a wide extension, in over it to achieve the desired coverage. It's a structure for our employees, and it offers end-to-end coverage for our employees to gain access to our corporate environment when they need to.

How has it helped my organization?

If you look at the Cisco products, it's sort of like buying a Mercedes-Benz, in that you know you get a brand that's well known and has a reputation of reliability. The ease of access and the simple rollout make it a natural choice. 

What is most valuable?

The ease of rollout is one of the main reasons we ended up choosing Cisco as a solution.

The initial setup is very straightforward.

The technical support is excellent.

What needs improvement?

The pricing is above average. They are a pretty expensive option. If clients don't have the budget, it can be hard to afford. The company should work to reduce the price and make them more competitive.

The solution would be better if there was some sort of server type of tool that's included in the package. If there was something that could help you fine-tune the solution a bit easier, it would be helpful.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for eight or nine years at this point. It's been a while.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The technology of the product is excellent. The solution is very reliable and stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

In our organization, there are roughly about 500 people using the Wireless. They vary from entry-level to senior management.

How are customer service and technical support?

Cisco's technical support is very, very good. They are very knowledgeable and responsive. We're quite satisfied with the level of assistance they provide to us when we need it. It's quite professional.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We work as a service provider, and therefore we use a variety of products, including Cisco, Meraki, Ruckus, and Hadoop.

Although we've used other solutions, we've stuck with Cisco ourselves from the start.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was not complex. It was straightforward and very simple. The setup and deployment are one of its selling points as it is quite easy.

The deployment is pretty quick. Of course, we have a certain level of comfort with the solution after so many years, so it is easy for us. We haven't encountered any issues with the process. Other organizations should also find it relatively easy.

The solution doesn't need a lot of staff for deployment and there is very little maintenance required. Those that we do have would be fairly technical as we would require some of our CNPs to do the support and maintenance on the system.

What about the implementation team?

We don't need any consultants or implementors as we have sufficient in-house expertise. We can handle it ourselves.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I don't work with the commercial side, I don't have any estimate on the cost.

That said, I do know that it is more expensive than other options.

What other advice do I have?

We are a service provider.

Cisco is a well-known brand especially when it comes to technology. They're one of the market leaders and they're absolutely a no-fuss vendor. I would recommend it to anyone.

It did take me a few weeks or months to get used to some aspects of the system, however, once you learn it, you get very comfortable with the processes of deployment.

I would rate the solution at a ten out of ten. It's a superior option that's easy to implement and very reliable.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Private Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Reseller
Network Engineer at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Easy to set up with good filtering and a relatively fast deployment
Pros and Cons
  • "The initial setup is easy. It's fairly quick to deploy."
  • "The interface could be better."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution in order to provide wireless clients access to our hospital network.

What is most valuable?

The BCO is a great basic feature.

We enjoy having access to the security features and MAC filtering. 

All the files are standard and supported, which is a good thing.

The initial setup is easy. It's fairly quick to deploy.

The product scales well and expands quite easily.

What needs improvement?

The interface could be better.

It's a hospital network; we have a lot of X-ray machines and other machines which may interrupt the WiFi signals. They need to provide more stability with respect to the interference or help us can analyze what is causing the interference issues from the controller side so that we could more effectively troubleshoot.

The pricing of the product is quite high.

I've heard the WiFi 6 is in the market and I would like to explore WiFi 6 features. 

Having a single SSID and adding a personal device or an organizational device that an SSID can automatically pick and connect to would be great.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been working with the solution for over ten years at this point. It's been a while now. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

While the product is stable, in some areas when the user sees a disconnection, we are not able to identify whether it's an access point issue or if it is due to some interference in that area of the hospital (due to hospital equipment). We need help detecting issues via the controller.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have around 4,000 to 5,000 users on the solution. 

It is easy to scale as it is centralized. You just need to add more access points if you would like to expand the product.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is great. One time, we had a controller issue due to a hardware failure and they replaced it within two days. They are extremely helpful and responsive. We are satisfied with the level of support they provide. 

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is very simple. It's not overly complex or difficult. A company shouldn't have any trouble implementing it. 

Initially, we need to get the hardware and put the basic configurations of network settings in order. I don't think it will take more than one hour to do the basic configuration. More complexity, however, does take time. 

The solution doesn't require too much maintenance. Our access points are very old, however, they are pretty stable. For around 10 years, we have been running on the old hardware and it is time to renew, actually, as the product is almost end of support. However, so far, the maintenance has been quite minimal.

What about the implementation team?

The first time we implemented the solution, we did request vendor support.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The product is quite expensive, and it's making us reconsider staying with Cisco. 

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

As this solution is near its end-of-life, my company is looking into other solutions such as Aruba or Huawei. We have not decided yet on what we will do, however, the Cisco pricing is very costly. We would like to check out other options that are cheaper, and which can offer the same kind of stability and features.

What other advice do I have?

I'm just a customer and an end-user.

We aren't necessarily using the latest version of the solution. Some access points, for example, are so old we cannot upgrade them any longer. 

I'd recommend the solution to other users. If you have the money and budget, Cisco is a good, stable solution.

I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Ibrahima Thioub
Technology Manager at International School Of Dakar
Real User
Top 20
Highly stable, scalable, and secure
Pros and Cons
  • "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."
  • "Cisco Wireless does not have a dashboard that would make it easier for people to manage the solution, such as Cisco Meraki where you are able to monitor the network through the dashboard and everything is visible making it easier."

What is our primary use case?

We use Cisco Wireless for networking in an education center.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features of Cisco Wireless are security and the ability to manage everything easily. Other solutions, such as Aruba are differentiation.

If you use the EAP for wireless security it is good. The only setback is the user has to have their own login, it is easy to do. If you make a user group for many students because they do not know the password. Having everyone use a group user account is not good. It is best for every student to have their own login. The connectivity will be better.

What needs improvement?

Cisco Wireless does not have a dashboard that would make it easier for people to manage the solution, such as Cisco Meraki where you are able to monitor the network through the dashboard and everything is visible making it easier. There are many things you can do with the dashboards. With Cisco Wireless if you have to manage the switches, backbone, or update the controllers you have to have someone with Cisco certification or know someone who can support you with the management of the solution. I have colleagues that have difficulties when I am away making changes to the Cisco Wireless devices and this is one of the reasons we are switching this solution to Cisco Meraki.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Cisco Wireless for approximately 14 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is stable. However, I had some issues last month with older Cisco wireless solutions. The certificates for some access points had expired and did not want to connect to the WLC.
Finally, I found a solution and got them all to work fine.

Why did I say it is stable. Since, we had installed it from 2009 until 2020 we had no major problem.
We started with a single SSID then with 2 SSIDs then we went up to 4 SSIDs. All 3 used authentication with a radius server. The fourth was managed by the WLC as Guest wifi.
This situation had to be foreseen because Cisco had announced on June 30, 2016 the dates of discontinuation and end of life of the range of our access points. The end date of routine failure analysis and new service provision had been declared on December 29, 2017.
It took 4 years later to face this certification problem.
Our network system of Cisco was really user-friendly:
-With printing with google cloud before it is stopped.
Our new MYQ system is too
- With our IP phone system
- With all practices (Windows, Mac, Tablets, phones and chromebooks)
- With our accounting system.
We really say Alhamdoulila.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution has good coverage and people can have access quickly.

We have approximately 700 students with Chromebooks connecting to the network.

How are customer service and support?

I have not used technical support but if you want technical support it costs money.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have used HPE and Apple wireless solutions previously.

How was the initial setup?

The installation of the solution is easy but it might not be for others. I have used the solution for a long time.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Cisco Wireless solutions should have a price reduction for educations centers. Education centers are there to help people grow and there are not large budgets. The solution tends to be expensive and it can cause difficulties when purchasing them here in Africa.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I have evaluated other solutions, like Aruba through my nephew. This is the system he used at university in the US.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend this solution to anyone, Cisco is the best. We are migrating to Cisco Meraki next week.

I rate Cisco Wireless a nine out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Network and Security Engineer at SK international
Real User
A stable wireless networking solution with great documentation and technical support
Pros and Cons
  • "I like that Cisco Wireless is easy to implement. If you get stuck with any issues, they have ample documentation on the internet. It's easy to implement, and Cisco documentation is easily accessible."
  • "In the next release, I would like to see some AI capability deployed. Other competitors like Mist and Juniper already have it. So, AI features need to be introduced next year."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case is to provide enterprise wireless solutions for employees. We're a system integration provider, and we have a number of customers. Our customers deploy our wireless solutions in an active-standby mode for better network stability. We mostly have customers who have standalone wireless controllers.

What is most valuable?

I like that Cisco Wireless is easy to implement. If you get stuck with any issues, they have ample documentation on the internet. It's easy to implement, and Cisco documentation is easily accessible.

What needs improvement?

In the next release, I would like to see some AI capability deployed. Other competitors like Mist and Juniper already have it. So, AI features need to be introduced next year. Cisco is the defacto brand in wireless technology, and they're a little bit behind. They need to introduce some AI features so we can introduce the customer to these new features.

Some training will help because Cisco's new offering, 9800, requires a lot of hands-on experience. This is because the Cisco 9800 controller is new compared to the previous models, like 2504 and 3504. It requires more hands-on experience to get familiar with the terminologies used in 9800. This is because there are some AP profiles and site profiles, and all these things we aren't familiar with. It's a good tool.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been implementing Cisco Wireless for the last five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Cisco Wireless is obviously very stable, and there's no doubt about that. When you go for Airwave, it's very stable. The new IOx is going to be stable, and we're deploying it for a couple of customers.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

You can deploy it for whatever your user wants and their AP count. It's very good when it comes to scalability.

How are customer service and technical support?

Cisco technical support is great. Cisco is based in Texas and provides technical support in any manner. Cisco provides support to customers who require it for updates or break-fix IT.
Support is wonderful. We haven't had a problem.

How was the initial setup?

It's easy to set up and implement this solution. For a basic implementation, you can deploy it within two or three hours. This is for a basic deployment for publishing SSID and testing. At a granular level, you may need a week to deploy this solution. This is because, in wireless scenarios, you need to do tests and try different testing scenarios. It's a very good basic solution for deploying to the cloud.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

From a pricing point of view, it's a little bit expensive compared to competitors like Aruba and others. But the product is also very promising and very stable. The hardware is wonderful. As a system integrator, it's okay, but you'll probably see it as expensive as a customer.

What other advice do I have?

I would advise potential users to implement Cisco wireless if they're implementing Airwaves. The old models like 2504 and 5508 work well with Airwaves. But it requires some specific knowledge to take that to the controllers and unplug the device. Some connectivity is derived from the core to the controller. You need to know what type of connectivity is required, what kind of access, and all those things. Cisco 9800 is a pure IOx, and it has a very straightforward configuration. It's very easy when compared to Airwaves.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco Wireless a ten for stability and performance. I don't have any issues with that.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Integrator
Shrijendra Shakya
C.T.O at Sastra Network Solution Inc. Pvt. Ltd.
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Stable and secure with good throughput and performance, managed from a single pane of glass

What is our primary use case?

We are implementing Cisco Wireless in various environments including hospitality (controller-based deployment along with room AP in 90+ room property), and corporate (both standalone and controller-based).

The wireless system has been integrated into the hotspot for guest access and enterprise authentication has been used for the employees. For authentication, both the inbuilt database and integration to FreeRADIUS has been used. We have also used AD in the corporate environment for authentication. The controller has been deployed in HA.

How has it helped my organization?

It has helped to provide mobility with committed throughput and performance.

Additionally, Cisco wireless solutions are very stable. This, with its rugged nature, has helped for overall efficiencies in information processing and daily operations.

It has enhanced the security of the enterprise and has given single-pane visibility for network monitoring.

It has provided excellent mobility and load balancing of the wireless endpoints to various APs, based on the built-in algorithms, both in 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are the controller, single pane for the configuration, as well as the operation and monitoring of the wireless system.

Other important features are the detection of the rough AP, programmable API, network analytics, and the RF planning tool.

The product is very stable. The infrastructure is scalable and very durable.

With excellent support from the Cisco support team, this solution can be deployed in no time.

It is easy to troubleshoot and zone-based profiling is another excellent feature. Auto power calibration between AP sensing the environment is also a valuable feature. 

What needs improvement?

The regulatory domain seems to be hardcoded into the system and we need a simple way to change it in wireless APs.

Power level improvements and increased antenna dBi are needed when compared to other competitor vendors like Ruckus and HP Aruba.

The product pricing should be competitive compared to other vendors, as many products are coming up with good features like Cambium, Edge, and Core.

The controller pricing is high compared to other vendors like Ruckus. Pricing should be lowered to target the SMB market, where many other vendors have dominance. 

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using Cisco Wireless for 10 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is excellent.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Cisco Wireless is very much Scalable, based on the forecast you have and the controller you choose. It's just about adding the license.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is excellent.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We have been using other products like Cambium, Ruckus, and HP. Before we implement Cisco, we had read a lot of reviews of its stability and durability, and indeed, it was true.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward.

What about the implementation team?

The installation team was highly skilled and certified.

What was our ROI?

The ROI is excellent.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The pricing depends on the requirement, so proper planning and an RF analysis help to properly size the solution and get the best pricing.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We previously evaluated Cambium and Rukus.

What other advice do I have?

My advice is that this product should be the first choice to adopt when deploying a wireless solution. If cost is a factor then proper sizing will help to reduce it.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Other
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: we are system integrator and cisco partner.
Product Categories
Wireless LAN
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Cisco Wireless Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.