Cisco 8540 Wireless Controller vs. Cisco Aironet 3800 Series Access Points (discontinued)

[Cisco 8540 Wireless Controller's] software quality has been shed in recent years. The only problem I have with it is its inability to work with older Cisco Access Points. However, that's to be expected for any deployment. While the controller's UI works well, some areas could be improved. API integrations lack flexibility. [I feel] it's time for policy redesign. It can be a little difficult to determine coding quality.

Incentivized

As any Cisco Aironet Access Points, the 3800 model is more for power users than beginners. It is for sure very more complex to maintain and trouble shoot than solutions like Cisco Meraki APs.

By the way, there are a lot of settings that can be customized and it is really interesting for difficult environments like industrial factories.

The 3800 model is also robust so it should stay durable and reliable.

But if you want to use the mesh mode or make a wireless bridge, this model is not appropriate as it is not supported for now.

Incentivized

• The GUI on the Cisco 8540 WLC is much better designed than other Cisco products. Its easy to navigate between the different settings to find what is needed.
• The AP groups allows touching multiple APs at one time.
• It also allows us to create standard SSIDs that can be used at all sites that connect back to it, this saves a lot of time instead of hitting each site with a local controller.

Incentivized

• Cisco APs are managed very easily from a Cisco WLC controller.
• Cisco APs provide lots of enterprise-grade options such as rogue detection and automatic power configuration.
• Cisco APs have many different mounting options, which makes them very versatile in a healthcare environment.

Incentivized

• Code quality is a bit hit and miss. This will be great for a while, then things will be bad for a while, then we'll do it again. The UI of the controller works, but could do with a refresh, and I would like to see some improvement on layout and organization.
• The constant code/firmware upgrades and the QA of new code could be better.
• Maybe the compatibility with old Cisco Access Points could be improved, but it's normal in all kinds of deployments.

Incentivized

• Outdoor capabilities. We have actually blown up a few outdoor units. Water got inside the outdoor units and had visible rust
• Costs compared to other AP’s in the market. Ruckus and EnGenius work out a bit cheaper
• Mounting options are limited

We are all happy with Aironet and Prime.

Incentivized

Very feature rich, easy enough for beginners to understand layout and initial setup. Need a good training (online, Cisco Leaning Network, etc.) to fully understand all features and product capabilities. Strict power requirements for APs are only major drawback for our specific implementation.

Incentivized

The Cisco 3802 product performance is excellent. Not only for the speed and range of the wireless it provides, but also for the fact that - when deployed in a large scale environment - the performance does not fail. It provides the same network connectivity for users ranging from 1 to 30-plus concurrent connections.

Incentivized

It is a better product. The evolution is positive.

Incentivized

We have [done] some work before with the Cisco 3504 product, but the more recent Cisco 8540 Wireless Controller provides a wider range of capabilities for managing the wireless network and each individual device [and] also being able to handle more users. Unfortunately, we didn't test and deploy equivalent products from other concurrent companies.

The usage scenario was different. I don't see this as a benefit versus harm comparison, necessarily. What happened was that, at a certain point, the implementation of the cisco solution was the winner of our public bidding process and with that, we implemented it and have used it ever since.

Incentivized

Contrary to a solution like the Cisco Meraki access points, the Aironet access points like the 3800 are linked to the Controler. And depending on the version of the controller, it will support only some models of access points.

For big sites, it may be difficult to upgrade the controler to support new ap models like 3800 because we still have old access points.

And it is also the same between new access points and old client devices so it is always a bit tricky.

After that, if the access point model is supported by the controller, it is really simple to install a new one

Incentivized

• The Cisco 8540 Wireless Controller allows you to reduce your hardware footprint of wireless controllers deployed in your environment. Instead of having a controller per site deployed, you can have a couple of 8540 controllers in your data center that can handle up 6000 Access Points.
• Some of the savings on hardware cost is offset by the cost of redundant WAN circuits. The access points will continue to function when connectivity to the Cisco 8540 Wireless Controller is unreachable, but it will not allow any new connections in that wireless environment.

Incentivized

• Users are able to carry on with their work while moving, changing seats, rooms or having an ad-hoc Skype meeting on the way to lunch. It is always hard to justify the value of connectivity but be assured, when it is not working the business impact is immediate.

Incentivized