We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The support has been responsive and helpful."
"The main benefit of this product is the lifetime warranty, up to 99 years. For example, if your switch card fails after 10 years, and the hardware fails, it will be replaced with the very same switch or the equivalent model available at the time."
"We've found the scalability to be good."
"The most important is that the solution is stable."
"The performance is good."
"It's easy to use."
"HPE Wireless is easy to use. Integration is not an issue. It is easy to integrate HPE Wireless with any operating system and other brands of switches."
"The solution is easy to use."
"Setting it up wasn't so complicated. It is reliable. Security-wise, we didn't have much trouble, but that could be due to our environment. We haven't had so many attacks, at least up till now."
"I have found the most valuable features to be how user-friendly it is and how simple it is to do the configurations."
"Ubiquiti is easier to install than Mikrotik."
"Ubiquiti Wireless is extremely easy to set up."
"I like that it's very easy and very stable. It's easy to install as well."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of setup."
"Ubiquiti Wireless is easy to use, it's stable and flexible, and the performance is great. It is scalable as well."
"The solution is easy to use and flexible."
"In the next release of the solution, there should be better integration with other platforms."
"Technical support could be improved. They could respond a bit faster."
"It's very old-fashioned, which is why we have made the decision to replace it."
"HPE Wireless WAN could provide better access points and better pricing."
"The installation is easy. However, my implementation is complicated and you would need special training to complete it."
"The scalability and the support could be better."
"The HPE Wireless dashboard could be more user-friendly."
"Sometimes it can be difficult to find the right sizing."
"The range and maybe the quality of the signal can be improved. I had a feeling that the range wasn't long enough. Unfortunately, beyond a certain range, the signal was too weak. If I'm not mistaken, it must have been something like 100 or more than 100 meters, but I'm not sure. So, one improvement I wish for this equipment is to have a longer range, but that could mainly be due to the model we're using."
"The external devices, the outdoor devices, are not so rugged. For example, for the weather that we have here in Florida, it doesn't hold up well even though it is supposed to be designed for outdoor use."
"The solution should offer simpler management for guests. That would be helpful in the hospitality industry, for example."
"We use different models of the solution but in some cases, the security could improve in the adaptive portal, be a little more robust, and easier to use."
"The production is not very stable in our experience."
"This solution should be more robust when it comes to connectivity and improve wireless technology."
"I would like to see more cloud features that some of the other competitors such as Cisco Meraki have that are very nice."
"I would like local support from the parent company."
"We don't pay a licensing fee, we purchased the product."
"I find the price to be reasonable."
"We have been satisfied with the price."
"Price wise, it is on the medium end of the scale. It could be lower."
"There is a license for this solution and the license is normally paid annually but this depends on the contract."
"The solution is quite expensive. You have to pay for every node and it can get expensive fast, it is approximately £3,000 per month."
"We don't buy directly. We have our finance department that buys things. My speculation on the price is that because we buy from private companies and because the product is imported, people tend to give us at higher prices. This is due to the fact that it is government procurement. So, sometimes, they are not paid directly, and they have to go through the whole administrative process before they are paid. So, they tend to compensate by increasing the price, but I won't be able to say what is the exact price."
"I like the fact that it offers enterprise features at a cheap price. If you compare it with Cisco, it has most of the features that Cisco has been offering but at a lesser price. I am satisfied with its price."
"The product is expensive."
"If you do not have a big budget, you can use Ubiquiti, it is cost-effective."
"Ubiquiti Wireless is affordable."
"There are no licensing fees for this solution, but the cost is on the higher side."
"The price has been fair for what I have been using it for. There is no license for this solution."
"This solution is cheaper compared to others."
HPE Wireless WAN is ranked 4th in Wireless WAN with 10 reviews while Ubiquiti Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless WAN with 23 reviews. HPE Wireless WAN is rated 7.6, while Ubiquiti Wireless is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of HPE Wireless WAN writes "Provides network security, is user friendly, stable, and scalable, and has a lifetime warranty". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ubiquiti Wireless writes "Extremely easy to set up and has never failed on me". HPE Wireless WAN is most compared with , whereas Ubiquiti Wireless is most compared with Ruckus Wireless WAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Cambium, Aruba Wireless and Fortinet FortiWLM. See our HPE Wireless WAN vs. Ubiquiti Wireless report.
See our list of best Wireless WAN vendors.
We monitor all Wireless WAN 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.