Aerohive?

How can Meru get points on "virtual cell" when virtual cell isn't even supported on the 802.11n products (as you yourself reported recently)?

Another anti-cisco review

.....Meru wins, though virtual cell doesn't exist on 802.11n. Some vendors not included. Extricom has same architecture as Meru but is #10. How can we take these things seriously?

Doesn't the Meru N solution requrie either a power supply at each AP or a second CAT5 cable run to boost the power? Hardly a smooth transition to N...

You guys make me laugh,,, how is it that you didn't even review Cisco or Aerohive. I have a Meru wireless deployment that has gone south because their stupid virtual cell technology doesn't work with WIRELESS PHONES. Thanks for steering your readers astray!!!!!

Then turn off Virtual Cell dumb ass. Its not hard to configure but maybe you should go out and get some linksys or D-Link where are they in this test...

The Meru AP320 only requires a single cat 5e cable with power from a standard POE switch. You may be thinking of Xirrus

Ow and to add ("dumb ass") why don't you leave virtual cell on for data profiles or whatever else you are trying to do and create a separate ESSID ID with same channel but no virtual cell? The Meru access points still will not interfere with each other and you will have unique BSSID's for each AP which is what confuses IP phones?! I know this because I have deployed close to 10,000 Meru access points!

If you need any help putting in a light bulb just let me know.

Go to ABIresearch Cisco was included. Just because they weren't the best doesn't mean you need to be a baby. And as the last guy said try not to blame the equipment for your inability to configure your network.