Cisco vs Ruckus

[TM13]

Any response from Cisco?

[George Stefanick]

Having used and deployed both vendors they both have advantages and disadvantages for some folks. As for the attachment looks like a lot of marketing spin :) 

[TM13]

Can you name the advantages and disadvantages? as far i know ruckus having better radio performance? 

[George Stefanick]

Tell me why you think that ? 

[TM13]

i am not thinking, i've tested ... cisco 3702 having around -90dbm, but ruckus -70dbm

[George Stefanick]

 They do beam forming yes. Yes you will notice enhanced signal. That's what they are known for. My last ruckus install was in a warehouse I wanted to use external antennas to better shape the signal. Boy did I get flack from ruckus. Ruckus is a good product. 

If youre looking at signal alone than ruckus is probably your ap. 

Cisco will not be all things to everyone. Cisco by far next to Aruba has a complete ecosystem of products. 

[TM13]

Hmmmm, can you name what else than Signal alone? 

[mohanak]

Each and every company/vendor has their advantages and disadvantages :

Will 710 wave2 support DFS ?

The truth is, Ruckus is shipping with the Qualcomm 11ac Wave 2 chipset without DFS certification.

So no DFS support, what is the big deal?

Well for high density networks and those looking to leverage wider 40/80MHz channel widths – DFS is a big deal.

Without DFS, only two non-overlapping channels are supported when using 80MHz-wide channels, causing massive issues with co-channel interference and negating the benefits of using wider channels.

[TM13]

There is no advantage to beat Ruckus other than DFS?