Wireless standalone v managed
Currently looking to upgrade our wireless provision, we currently (due to varying budgets and changing minds) have standalone Cisco AP1142N access points. Initialy this was just ment to cover dead zones within the school but later they replaced the failed Extricom managed solution, that even Extricom couldnt find why it wasn't working. So we now have 1 AP between 2 classes plus 3 for other areas, so 8 in total.*
This provision isn't enough as I find when 30 plus laptops are out in one area the login is pretty slow, have to say it does perform pretty well once logged in. So my original plan was to add more AP so there would be 1 per class, *I know this isnt the correct way of doing things and I should have a managed solution.*
Cost to provide 6 more Cisco 1142N access points would be just under £2000 which I believe would provide the coverage I need. Looking at managed solutions would cost near £5000 *to provide similar coverage to what we already have. Do people think that the benefits of having the managed functionality outweigh standalone?
Standalone - no central point of failure like managed - am I right in assuming a solution like Ruckus if the controller goes down so does the wireless AP?
Managed - easily configure all access points but to be honest uploading a text file to a Cisco AP is hardly difficult am I missing something or is this a benefit just for networks where there is a lot more AP than myn?
Managed - I've read that systems such as Ruckus will try force clients to other APs if a lot are connected does this really work well? From the description on the website it sounds like it will try to do it but can't promise! Do systems such as the ubiquity kit also do this?*
Any other features that I am missing using standalone?*
Anyone think that adding more Cisco APs would be ok?*
Any help or thoughts would be great! Cheers in advance!