TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers vs. HPE Aruba Networking Operating System

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers

    Score9.2 out of 10
    N/AThe Cisco Catalyst 9800-80 is a modular wireless controller with optional 100 Gigabit Ethernet (G) modular uplinks boasting seamless software updates for large enterprises and campuses, and security with ETA and SD-Access.N/A

    HPE Aruba Networking Operating System

    Score5 out of 10
    N/AArubaOS is the network operating system from Aruba Networks, an HPE company. ArubaOS includes AirMatch and ClientMatch, capabilities that monitor and optimize Wi-Fi power, channels, connections and bandwidth across the entire wireless network to improve user experience. Users can manage up to 10,000 APs, cluster up to 12 controllers, and segment traffic from one AP to multiple controllers with MultiZone.N/A
    Pricing
    Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless ControllersHPE Aruba Networking Operating System
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless ControllersHPE Aruba Networking Operating System
    Free Trial
    NoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details——
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless ControllersHPE Aruba Networking Operating System
    Considered Both Products
    Cisco
    Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
    Working with Aruba and clearpass was an easier transition but the cost was the roadblock for us.
    Incentivized
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    No answer on this topic
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    99%
    Would buy again
    97 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Delivers good value for the price
    97%
    Delivers good value for the price
    88 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Happy with the feature set
    97%
    Happy with the feature set
    95 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    93%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    71 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Implementation went as expected
    85%
    Implementation went as expected
    77 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Best Alternatives
    Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless ControllersHPE Aruba Networking Operating System
    Small Businesses
    WatchGuard Secure Wi-Fi Cloud
    Score9.5 out of 10
    No answers on this topic
    Medium-sized Companies
    Cisco Aironet 1800 Series Access Points (discontinued)
    Score9.8 out of 10
    No answers on this topic
    Enterprises
    Cisco Meraki MR Wireless Access Points
    Score9.1 out of 10
    Cisco NX-OS
    Score9.3 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless ControllersHPE Aruba Networking Operating System
    Likelihood to Recommend
    9.7
    (88 ratings)
    7.0
    (1 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    6.4
    (2 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Availability
    9.1
    (87 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Performance
    7.1
    (88 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Support Rating
    9.1
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless ControllersHPE Aruba Networking Operating System
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Cisco
    I think any size organization can benefit from them. The smaller "L" models work well for a smaller organization and of course, the same answer for the larger platforms. The failover/redundancy options are quite nice and the unified setup and UI is always nice for consistency.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    Aruba Wireless works quite well and is stable for enterprise. Once it's running, it works. Once you have it set up, you don't normally need to go in and make changes. Aruba is particularly good on pushing clients to use 5ghz (they say they use some kind of a proprietary algorithm). It may not be appropriate for smaller businesses due to cost and complexity
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    Cisco
    • I think the updates are great. ISSU upgrading code is fantastic. I think the speed with which CAPWAP converges or reconverges, I think the redundancy mechanisms for roaming APs to other controllers is very good. I think overall, getting away from more of a monolithic processor where subprocesses handle what they call the WNCD tasks, I think fundamentally is an improvement in performance.
    • The radioactive tracing, all of the troubleshooting and all of the logging and all of the importing and exporting features for logging and analytics within the controller itself is really, really good compared to the predecessor AireOS.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    • Wireless Access
    • Security/Role Management
    • Firewalling
    • Centralized Management
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    Cisco
    • The only downside I would say is the GUI performance is a little bit slow, even with a newer 9800, performance still lags a bit even compared to the previous generations. So I would like to see that improved. But aside from that, that's really the only issue that we have with it.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    • Documentation on Aruba website is very lacking
    • Support is hit-or-miss - they may waste a lot of time before you get to someone who has a solution
    • Some configuration items are very non-intuitive
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Likelihood to Renew
    Cisco
    Despite common software and hardware issues this is still the best product on the market for large scale enterprise deployments. Cisco has worked with us extensively to reduce the amount of bugs in every iteration however new bugs are introduced or new incompatibilities always arise with major releases. Thus, while I'm hesitant to recommend the product it's still much better than all the other competitors such as Aruba and Juniper in the WIFi space. There is also extensive integration with DNAC/Catalyst Center and ISE in an SDA deployment. Recently there has been a number of critical issues with the controller software and Cisco has proved themselves to be incapable of timely troubleshooting and diagnosis. This has reduced our confidence in the product and it's current and future stability and maintainability. At it's current state the product is taking up too much of our engineering resources to maintain despite also paying for premium support from Cisco. As such I have reduced by rating as we are likely to look at alternative vendors for our long-term wireless management solution
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    No answers on this topic
    Usability
    Cisco
    It's not simple, but this is the result of being very deeply configurable
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    No answers on this topic
    Reliability and Availability
    Cisco
    Due to our HA set up we have always managed to access our wireless networks without problems, when issues occur. When we have lost access to the GUI, due to internal network problems, console access is always welcomed and brings with it the normal Cisco CLI syntax. From previous versions of CLI, it is now a lot simpler and reflects other Cisco products, making it easier to troubleshoot and navigate when necessary.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    No answers on this topic
    Performance
    Cisco
    Monitoring is very good Seamless integration with Cisco ISE RRM configuration very easy. It has REST API support IOS-XE is very powerful operation system. Multicasting and mDNS features are really good and very easy to configure. It supports Pyats and Genie so getting constructed data from python script calls very helpful.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    No answers on this topic
    Support Rating
    Cisco
    When it's a config issue, TAC is usually useful. If it's some bug and BU needs to be involved, it might take forever.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    No answers on this topic
    Implementation Rating
    Cisco
    You need to understand wifi basics
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    No answers on this topic
    Alternatives Considered
    Cisco
    Ubiquiti WLAN is very much a consumer platform. It is not production ready, it is buggy, it has issues. It is cheaper than Cisco, but you get what you pay for. Aruba doesn't integrate nicely with our existing largely Cisco based networks, so when time came to replace AireOS, the Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers came out on top.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    Aruba does quite a good job with GUI configuration, especially with AOS 8 - something that Cisco struggles with (maybe they came up with something new now). Aruba can also easily scale. While not on the same level, Ubiquiti has a good GUI but is lacking a good standard controller - users have to stand their own.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Scalability
    Cisco
    There are different vesrions for different requirements, there's HA as well.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    No answers on this topic
    Return on Investment
    Cisco
    • Positive impacts, yeah, is good to have a central location to control all these profiles for different countries and locations. And the drawback, like I said to you really because of the too many integrations that have a dependency on the software version. For example, Cisco ONE for Access have certain software that can run through and then this scatter center need to make sure it's working with the others APS version that is currently working. And we also, the Cisco Catalyst Center also have some kind another version of software that you need to support this controller. So it's like two tier three tiers of the software version that we need to match. Then only it can work.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    • Good return on investment in terms of a working wireless network for thousands of users
    • However, troubleshooting and support may be difficult
    • Good integration with ClearPass
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots