One of the major disadvantages of moving from UniFI UAP-AC-PRO to AP ONE ENT is the lack of the AP ONE ENT to operate in repeater mode as UniFi allows. This is useful in scenarios where no hard wiring is available and you need to extend WiFi coverage.
Also while we have found the MESH (Transitioning client through multiple AP with shared SSID) to be superior in AP ONE ENT, they lack the same overall coverage footprint performance that UniFi provides in relative client distance to AP. We have tried to use the “Boost On” feature in the AP ONE ENT configuration page but it does not improve the coverage distance. I haven’t compared the power output specs nor do I understand engineering antenna designs but something UniFI does gives them the edge. Hoping your engineers can figure why this is.
The AP ONE ENT retails $100 more than the UAP-AC-PRO. I would hope for the cost we were buying a superior product.
Out of interest, why are you moving from the unifi product to the AP One Ent? Whats driving that? And have you done a rip and replace for direct deployed situational comparison?
We’re consolidating solutions and have elected to go with Pepwave. While the PEP APs have inferior coverage they have Incontrol2 access so we can send any Vendor to site unseen for their installation and provision them remotely. We manage around 300 franchise locations from our central office, anything we can do to streamline deployment is important. Ubiquity equipment requires one to initially install their “UniFi Controller” software onsite prior to joining devices to their SSO cloud solution. Also the ease of use of the Balance One’s compared to the Edge Routers is night and day, Pepwave routers also have better session load balance handling.
I would like to see maybe an MK4 model with better throughput @ 300x300 would be nice. Also better internal antennas for the AP ONE ENT.