8 ms·

Cloudless if and only if you run their gigantic bloated Java network management tool. I really like ubiquiti hardware but I got fed up with their software BS.

Cloudless if and only if you run their gigantic bloated Java network management tool. I really like ubiquiti hardware but I got fed up with their software BS. Now I use either Mikrotik or TP-Link’s industrial offerings. Both are way easier to work with than ubiquiti and the hardware is usually in the same tier.

exabrial 6y ago
... we run it on a raspberrypi. Not sure I'd call that gigantic or bloated.
- jandrese 6y ago
  RasPis have a fair bit more grunt than people give them credit for. The big problem with the Ubiquti thing is that it takes a long time to start, so if your usage model is to start it whenever you want to make a change it's rather piggish. If you start it once and leave it running forever on a dedicated device it's not nearly as bad.
- NikolaeVarius 6y ago
  Its not a great solution. The application logs and writes to storage alot. Also it usually works fine, but when it breaks, it breaks HARD
  - exabrial 6y ago
    Agree. Our DHCP pool is around 200, so we're not talking a huge amount of data. If I were running any bigger of a LAN I'd definitely ratchet the skookum factor up.
sjm-lbm 6y ago
They have a little device (IIRC they call it "cloud key" or something like that) that runs that interface pretty well. Much better than setting that UI up on a device yourself.
- lsllc 6y ago
  The CloudKey is actually pretty decent -- the CK2 Plus Gen2 if you're running UniFi Protect.
vetinari 6y ago
Mikrotik? Easier? Do not get me wrong, I love Mikrotik, but easier would not the word I would be using. This image (https://www.reddit.com/r/mikrotik/comments/jyjgnc/mikrotik_vs_unifi/ https://www.reddit.com/r/mikrotik/comments/jyjgnc/mikrotik_v...) sums it up neatly. Also, Mikrotik is not directly comparable, you cannot replace Unifi Controller with Capsman.
- PenguinCoder 6y ago
  MikroTik is great, but hard to configure compared to UniFi AND capsman NEVER worked reliably for me.
- chrisgacsal 6y ago
  Only thing disappoints me about Mikrotik is the wireless performance of their routers, which seems to that is more about the RouterOS then the hardware itself. You can never know if the next update will improve or worsen WiFi perf. Otherwise they have really good products.
  - vetinari 6y ago
    It is both. Hardware-wise, many Mikrotik products are shipping with just 2x2 radio. Software-wise, even where hardware supports it, RouterOS doesn't support MU-MIMO and beam-forming (there is some preliminary support in the ROS7 beta, for selected chips). There are also some weird bugs, like when you have a client with Intel WiFi and it is unable to connect to VHT80 band... but all the other clients do not have such problem. So in the end, for APs, I'm using Unifi.
alex_suzuki 6y ago
You don't need their Java client (which I agree, is BS) if you use a Cloud Key or a UDM PRO.
imposterr 6y ago
You can also just run a docker container for it [0]. This has the added benefit of separating your data from the runtime so you can move it around as if you had a physical cloud key. [0] https://hub.docker.com/r/linuxserver/unifi-controller https://hub.docker.com/r/linuxserver/unifi-controller
- centimeter 6y ago
  I shouldn't have to run a docker appliance for my network appliances to function. Are you kidding me?
  - secabeen 6y ago
    You don't. The docker appliance (or whatever platform you use to run the controller) only is needed for config changes. You can shut it down when finished making changes and everything runs fine. The install at my mom's house has the Windows controller, and I don't think it's run in 6 months.
- lsllc 6y ago
  Yeah ... I find that the containerized UniFi controller tends to crash after a few days with various Java errors. I've tried several different unifi-controller containers, although I haven't tried this particular one so I'll give it a try.
  - dawnerd 6y ago
    That particular image has been problem free for me on unraid for I dunno feels like years now. They did do some update that I missed the notes on that wiped out my database and I had to re add everything. Wasn't too happy about that.
    - lsllc 6y ago
      I have tried a couple of others before and have currently been using: https://github.com/goofball222/unifi https://github.com/goofball222/unifi But every couple of days, the logs start to fill up with random java exceptions, then it starts leaking memory and eventually brings the host to a grinding halt and crashes. I've had no troubles when using the Cloud Key Gen2 Plus, but I like the idea of the controller NOT being located on site.
jlgaddis 6y ago
I've been running the Unifi controller on a Raspberry Pi 2 for four or five years now with no problems that I can recall. After the initial installation and configuration was done, I've probably only logged into it a handful of times. (With the exception of their APs and said controller, I avoid Ubiquiti as much as possible, though.)

exabrial 6y ago

... we run it on a raspberrypi. Not sure I'd call that gigantic or bloated.

jandrese 6y ago
RasPis have a fair bit more grunt than people give them credit for. The big problem with the Ubiquti thing is that it takes a long time to start, so if your usage model is to start it whenever you want to make a change it's rather piggish. If you start it once and leave it running forever on a dedicated device it's not nearly as bad.
NikolaeVarius 6y ago
Its not a great solution. The application logs and writes to storage alot. Also it usually works fine, but when it breaks, it breaks HARD
- exabrial 6y ago
  Agree. Our DHCP pool is around 200, so we're not talking a huge amount of data. If I were running any bigger of a LAN I'd definitely ratchet the skookum factor up.

sjm-lbm 6y ago

They have a little device (IIRC they call it "cloud key" or something like that) that runs that interface pretty well. Much better than setting that UI up on a device yourself.

lsllc 6y ago
The CloudKey is actually pretty decent -- the CK2 Plus Gen2 if you're running UniFi Protect.

vetinari 6y ago

Mikrotik? Easier? Do not get me wrong, I love Mikrotik, but easier would not the word I would be using. This image (https://www.reddit.com/r/mikrotik/comments/jyjgnc/mikrotik_vs_unifi/ https://www.reddit.com/r/mikrotik/comments/jyjgnc/mikrotik_v...) sums it up neatly. Also, Mikrotik is not directly comparable, you cannot replace Unifi Controller with Capsman.

PenguinCoder 6y ago
MikroTik is great, but hard to configure compared to UniFi AND capsman NEVER worked reliably for me.
chrisgacsal 6y ago
Only thing disappoints me about Mikrotik is the wireless performance of their routers, which seems to that is more about the RouterOS then the hardware itself. You can never know if the next update will improve or worsen WiFi perf. Otherwise they have really good products.
- vetinari 6y ago
  It is both. Hardware-wise, many Mikrotik products are shipping with just 2x2 radio. Software-wise, even where hardware supports it, RouterOS doesn't support MU-MIMO and beam-forming (there is some preliminary support in the ROS7 beta, for selected chips). There are also some weird bugs, like when you have a client with Intel WiFi and it is unable to connect to VHT80 band... but all the other clients do not have such problem. So in the end, for APs, I'm using Unifi.

alex_suzuki 6y ago

You don't need their Java client (which I agree, is BS) if you use a Cloud Key or a UDM PRO.

imposterr 6y ago

You can also just run a docker container for it [0]. This has the added benefit of separating your data from the runtime so you can move it around as if you had a physical cloud key. [0] https://hub.docker.com/r/linuxserver/unifi-controller https://hub.docker.com/r/linuxserver/unifi-controller

centimeter 6y ago
I shouldn't have to run a docker appliance for my network appliances to function. Are you kidding me?
- secabeen 6y ago
  You don't. The docker appliance (or whatever platform you use to run the controller) only is needed for config changes. You can shut it down when finished making changes and everything runs fine. The install at my mom's house has the Windows controller, and I don't think it's run in 6 months.
lsllc 6y ago
Yeah ... I find that the containerized UniFi controller tends to crash after a few days with various Java errors. I've tried several different unifi-controller containers, although I haven't tried this particular one so I'll give it a try.
- dawnerd 6y ago
  That particular image has been problem free for me on unraid for I dunno feels like years now. They did do some update that I missed the notes on that wiped out my database and I had to re add everything. Wasn't too happy about that.
  - lsllc 6y ago
    I have tried a couple of others before and have currently been using: https://github.com/goofball222/unifi https://github.com/goofball222/unifi But every couple of days, the logs start to fill up with random java exceptions, then it starts leaking memory and eventually brings the host to a grinding halt and crashes. I've had no troubles when using the Cloud Key Gen2 Plus, but I like the idea of the controller NOT being located on site.

jlgaddis 6y ago

I've been running the Unifi controller on a Raspberry Pi 2 for four or five years now with no problems that I can recall. After the initial installation and configuration was done, I've probably only logged into it a handful of times. (With the exception of their APs and said controller, I avoid Ubiquiti as much as possible, though.)