Cisco 8540 Wireless Controller vs. HPE Juniper Access Points

[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

The Mist portal-controlled Juniper APs are great in an environment where clients are relatively stationary. Coverage is fantastic, and throughput is really good. I would be more concerned about placing these in a distribution-type warehouse where clients frequently roam between APs. While I've not had any issues, I could see where some APs might become sticky due to the cloud-controlled nature. In my experience, a local controller would be better suited to environments like that. I'm also concerned that support and quality may suffer due to the HPE merger.

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

• Mist APs are really good at self-adjusting power and channels.
• Mist APs provide quality bandwidth to all users.
• Mist Radius meets my authentication needs for production users.

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

• I wish there was a mobile app that allows configuration and health status checks
• The MIST UI could use some improvements - some things take more than 1 click to access
• Marvis doesn't impress me. I ask it questions and sometimes it doesn't respond or understand

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

We used a reseller to help set up and initially manage the Juniper APs. Templates are set up and deployed to sites, and at first, it may seem complicated, with a slight learning curve. Once created and deployed, the overall management and usability are great. In summary, the initial setup takes some advanced knowledge of the Cloud Dashboard setup with templates. After that, it's easy to use and manage moving forward.

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.

Mist has more features than meraki in regards to wireless management. Adding devices is still simple and licensing is much easier to undertsf

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

• Streamline our infrastructure so we don't have multiple brands to manage.
• Allowed for better placement with channel planning
• Saves time when configuring

Incentivized