From the link above, you’ll find two videos showing an overview of the capabilities and features of Aruba’s integrated spectrum analysis. This is an important first look because it provides some insight to the spectral resolution and general functionality of Atheros’ chipset, which looks so-so. This is important even if you’re not an Aruba customer because it shows what you might expect to see within the next few years from other vendors with Atheros chipsets.
As you’ll see in the video, Aruba provides the same spectrum-level displays that we’ve become accustomed to with the other mobile spectrum analysis products. This includes charts like real-time FFT, FFT duty cycle, swept spectrogram, channel utilization, as well as several other charts showing SNR, device types, etc. Of course, it also auto-classifies RF signal sources, which will be an important for its use with ARM. I’m already eager to test its accuracy. There’s only so much to be said about these initial videos. Where the rubber meets the road is in the implementation of these features. It’s one thing to have more spectrum-level data than most vendors, but the real kicker is what Aruba—just like Cisco—does with it.
You may remember a Cisco video from a few months back comparing CleanAir to ARM. That test may go a bit differently with Aruba’s spectrum analysis functionality, but I’ll leave it to Cisco and Aruba to duke that one out. I love competition.
Hi Marcus,
Is nt the comments in the blog Cisco premium (April 2010)and this one contradicting ? So what changed ?
best Regards,
Mubeesh
I watched the Aruba videos, and wasn’t very impressed with the demos. Cisco has a clear advantage with their CleanAir technology, but it’s an advantage that certainly doesn’t come for free. It remains to be seen how many of Cisco’s customers will embrace the CleanAir APs; I predict the take-up will be slow because of the $$ premium.
Aruba’s solution should be called Dynamic ARM, because to me that’s all it appears to be. Pretty impressive that they were able to develop this technology given the limited info provided by an off-the-shelf Wifi chipset.
In the Aruba videos, it didn’t appear that they have the ability to classify an interference signal type (bluetooth, video camera, microwave oven, etc.). But they are able to alert you to it’s existence at least.
For now, there’s a much easier solution for all the problems these promise to solve: it’s called the 5GHz spectrum. Right now, if you really want to minimize the impact of Interference and co-channel problems, 5GHz is the way to go. Plus, with 802.11n support for speeds of up to 300Mbps with the current generation of products, it’s a no-brainer. Except maybe for Apple and Steve Jobs! Ho-ha!
Regards,
Steve
To Mubeesh’s comment:
I hope not.
Maybe my language was a bit ambiguous (not intentionally). You may be talking about the section where I said “Aruba is providing the same spectrum-level displays that we’ve become accustomed to with the other mobile spectrum analysis products.” When I say that, I don’t mean that the resolution or quality is as good as everything else we’re accustomed to. What I meant is that they’re breaking it down for manual analysis in all the usual ways, as with the usual charts/plots. If that’s not the section you meant, can you be more specific as to where there is a contradiction?
thanks,
Marcus
Hi Marcus,
Yes that is exactly what i was referring to. I felt the April blog was highly critical of Aruba’s choice not to go for specific hardware chipsets for doing spectrum analysis.
thanks,
Mubeesh
Mubeesh,
That’s a fair criticism. On a personal level, it was frustrating to me that Aruba took a cheap shot by announcing vaporware (at that time) before Cisco’s launch (as I said in the previous blog, everyone does it). But, not only was it vaporware, but it was also technically inferior (in my opinion) in terms of spectrum-level capabilities. However, no one could rebut Aruba’s press because there was no product to test. It was all marketing. For that reason, I felt the burden of responding to their aggressive marketing from a vendor-neutral perspective by sharing my opinion about these marketing claims that couldn’t be validated at that time. In that sense, I was a bit frustrated with Aruba at the time of writing the Cisco blog, but while I admit that, I don’t think it skewed my judgments about the products technically. I still retain that Cisco’s technical capabilities with the Cognio chip logic are superior to what Aruba provides via the Atheros chip. In fact, I think Aruba made this move primarily to keep up with Cisco on the spec sheet. “Oh Mr. Customer, you’re telling me Cisco has spectrum analysis in their AP and you want that feature…that’s a wise choice, now let me show you…”
After several discussions since the Cisco blog, I’ve come to believe that there are really two salient factors in this comparison:
1. How does this technology appeal to specific customer needs (especially business needs)? Does it make the WLAN more resilient or higher performing, is there a better ROI, easier upgrade, more future proofness, more robust troubleshooting, a longer track record, etc. Cool technology is cool, but the rubber meets the road in the customer’s need for it and their ability to use it. I can make general comments about these things, but I can’t say which product is superior from a business perspective because I’m not a customer with a list of requirements. However, give me a list of requirements and I will have an opinion.
2. How are the technical capabilities of the products actualized? It’s one thing for Cisco’s spectrum analyzer to have, for example, higher resolution or better automated device classification, but the real meat and potatoes here is how this advantage is applied. Do these capabilities allow it to positively detect harmful interferers more rapidly and accurately and then take a more ameliorative response? Is the system-wide dynamic RF and channel intelligence really capitalizing on the spectrum-level data? Is the spectrum-level data allowing administrators to gain helpful insight into the RF space that will allow them to make better choices for network configurations? What is the end application of the technology, and how is it beneficial to the administrator or the automated functions of the WLAN? I can talk all day about this topic because it is more objective and technical in nature. Hopefully, my original Cisco post stayed more in this camp.
I really think Aruba made the right choice by pursuing integrated spectrum analysis from Atheros. Also, when I share things on a “personal” level, I don’t mean to say it is bad business. I have a different business philosophy than most people, but I think if the end goal is to make money, Aruba seems to be doing all the right things…even when it comes to aggressive, spoil-the-news marketing. That’s obviously their marketing MO, and it seems to be working. Their stock has been rising, anyway.
I also want you to know that I truly appreciate this kind of feedback. By all means, if I contradict myself, kick me in the pants. I like to think that I have enough humility to admit when I’m wrong.
Boy, this response feels so soft. Sorry for that.
Responses and rebuttals invited.
Hi Marcus,
Appreciate your clarification. As always there is never one solution/vendor for all situations
.
Best Regards,
Mubeesh