Aironet: Not the best nor the worst.
September 13, 2019
Aironet: Not the best nor the worst.
Score 7 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Overall Satisfaction with Cisco Aironet and Catalyst Access Points
Cisco 3800 Series
Cisco access points are installed by one group in our organization, but used within all of our offices. We have a few hundred of these deployed across our enterprise to provide both internal and guest wifi presence. The biggest reason for this is that they provide a fantastic wireless coverage that integrates well into the Cisco ecosystem.
- Seamless Integration with existing Cisco Products.
- Good coverage.
- Consistent support.
- Overpriced.
- Installation can be finicky.
- Proprietary terminology can be confusing to newcomers.
- Enhanced wireless coverage.
- Consistent device management.
- Quick deployment time, leading to increased user satisfaction.
In a previous job, we used the CleanAir function to ensure that our users were unable to connect to foreign and rogue access points. The ability to use your network to provide an additional layer of security (and protection from malicious attacks) is a benefit worth weighing when picking a wireless access point.
Our organization has not used any of the modular add-ons.
Our selection of Cisco Aironet Access Points versus the Meraki Access Points was entirely on a political basis with our vendor. In the future, we are actually looking to migrate towards the Meraki system. Even though the Meraki feature-set is lacking, we really only require those features, and our cost would be largely cut by this migration. It would be a solid win, but maybe not recommendable to everyone.