The 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
D-Link Wireless Access Points
Score 4.7 out of 10
N/A
D-Link offers wireless access points. Designed for versatile deployment, their enterprise products supports indoor, outdoor, and wall-mounted installations to meet diverse coverage and environmental needs.
$120.99
one-time fee
Pricing
Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
D-Link Wireless Access Points
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
D-Link Wi-Fi 6 AX1800 Access Point (DAP-X2810)
$120.99
one-time fee
D-Link Wi-Fi 6 AX3000 Outdoor Access Point for Business (DAP-X3060OU)
$239.99
one-time fee
D-Link BE9500 Tri-Band Wi-Fi 7 Smart Router (R95)
$249.99
one-time fee
D-Link Nuclias Cloud-Managed AX3600 Access Point - (DBA-X2830P)
$349.99
one-time fee
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
D-Link Wireless Access Points
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
Available through D-Link's shop or through third-party resellers.
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
We are moving into a more unified and centralized design, and the benefits offered by the 9800 compared to the above listed 5520 series and 8500 series of wireless controller is much preferred. The staggered upgrade option is again another feature much improved moving to the …
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
Used all the Cisco 5504s, the 25, 06s s, all of the old legacy Cisco controllers. And on the competitor side, we did have a few sites that had Aruba and not a fan of that. Cisco is much easier to use, implement and to deploy.
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
I've used Ruckus Zone director, so another controller. It's way more robust. There's more features and there's more devices that integrates with. So overall, a more comprehensive solution, I think.
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
Honestly, I haven't used a non Cisco wireless controller since about 2004 when I used to put autonomous APs in. It's the difference between eating broken glass and having a five star meal. I mean there's no comparison.
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
From a wireless standpoint? Just any, well, we have the 9300 switches from Cisco. We also just went to the new firewalls that Cisco just came out. I forget the product name right now. So I like the wireless controller from a ease access or be able to configure better than the …
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers is more modern, looks better, supports newer access points. Using different tags - site tags, policy tags, etc. is a nice way to configure different access point groups or locations. Also Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless …
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
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, …
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers
Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers can be easily integrated with Cisco Identity Service Engine. It is easy to configure policy sets for multiple authentication methods like MAB, dot1x, Centralized web authentication. Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series Wireless Controllers …
We studied and selected D-Link due to usage in a limited area, and it is a very cost effective solution; therefore, D-Link Wireless AP and D-Link Wireless Controller [were] selected for our organization. We also [researched] Cisco, but Cisco was an expensive product and not …
I really like central switching. Central switching is converging all of the tunnels, fewer people can administer the product. It's much easier to scale, it's much easier to configure and it's much easier to get predictable results out of that. I have run FlexConnect before under AireOS. I'm proficient with it. But yeah, I think as a centralized controller it works very well. And I think as building redundancy with regard to not just HA-SSO but with an N plus one design, I think the scheme and logic and architecture of the platform is very well thought out and I don't know what use cases I would find it to be lacking. There's a few things when you drill into it, it actually is not that simple. AireOS I feel like was a lot simpler. I think the catalyst, how it breaks out the hierarchy of configuration requires each of these tags and profiles and policies and how you bring them together. Actually, even though they've decoupled a lot of these elements from how AireOS did it, I think fewer of those features, even though it was less extensible, it was not as easy or intuitive to deploy. So I think the intuition and how you actually construct a 9800, an entry engineer would struggle a lot more in a 9800. So I would not recommend the product if somebody did not already have a good foundation of network engineering.
Best in small networks & appropriate in industrial areas. AP works fine in any temperature & location (in remote locations office or remote location). Open area wireless connectivity is good with good range. Simple VLAN management and management are good. Backup and restoration is very good. Small home offices using wireless network work awesome.
It is good kind of design with the multiple flow profiles and also location base whereby the long very, I think the traditional controller doesn't have this, so we need to have that specific. Every day is getting the same profile but this have a little bit difference. It's very good with the site tagging and also designing all the location-based requirements.
Due to multiple switches in a single network environment, communication issues are common; therefore, productivity is effected. After installing D-Link Wireless, we resolved these kind of issues in our network.
One windows solution make management easy via D-Link Wireless.
Logs and troubleshooting is now easily handled. Pictorial form help in configuration and users management.
If possible, please add a column for WAP Name and WAP Model within the 2.4/5/6 GHz radio sections, as we have different models of WAPs in the fleet, and it would be easier to identify WAPs within a building.
We conduct digital exams for our students. If there is a way to identify clients and block traffic for applications like ChatGPT, it would be greatly appreciated. Currently, there is no filter for ChatGPT or generative AI.
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
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.
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.
We are moving into a more unified and centralized design, and the benefits offered by the 9800 compared to the above listed 5520 series and 8500 series of wireless controller is much preferred. The staggered upgrade option is again another feature much improved moving to the new model and management through DNAC
We studied and selected D-Link due to usage in a limited area, and it is a very cost effective solution; therefore, D-Link Wireless AP and D-Link Wireless Controller [were] selected for our organization. We also [researched] Cisco, but Cisco was an expensive product and not appropriate in our required area or task; therefore, we selected D-Link.
I mean, return on investment is really hard to quantify. Being in a healthcare scenario, it definitely has very good uptime, very good performance. It's easy to manage, fairly trouble free with a few issues not withstanding. There's really no income based off of it, but it does allow our nurses, nursing staff, our physicians to take care of patients better and more reliably and enables a lot of communication options that we wouldn't have had we not had that controller.
