Novarum (independent research group) reported 3 key differences between MERU’s 802.11N product and that of Cisco and Aruba.  The first significant difference was 40mbps more of throughput over MERU’s competitors.  Performance was usually above 170mbps beating the other guys’ by 40mbps.  The next thing they found was in the category of “Air Time Fairness” where MERU’s solution provided “fair and equitable access” to the 802.11N clients being served by the WLAN.  Airtime fairness is important because it’s how the signal is shared by different clients, both old school (b/g/a) and the new (N), and gives a sense of network stability in the eyes of the client (user).  The final standout in Novarum’s WLAN testing is in the category of “Toll Grade Voice”.  Neither Cisco or Aruba can match MERU’s performance in supporting voice applications at a toll grade voice level.  MERU’s product registers above a MOS score of 4.0 with high density, bi-directional voice and data traffic.  Interface Technologies’ AVAYA VOIP users and dual mode cell phone users require a WLAN system like MERU’s to provide toll quality voice performance. 

What is QOS?  QOS is “Quality of Service” and is a hugely important when considering the move to an all wireless VOIP solution.  Without QOS rated wireless, a company’s voice communications will be unsatisfactory.  In a nutshell, QOS is a function of your wireless LAN’s ability to “prioritize voice” transmissions on the network in order to maintain the appropriate performance levels.  These performance levels can be measured with a “MOS score” to measure “Toll Quality Voice”.  MERU’s Virtual Cell technology and Air Traffic Control show powerful results in independent testing.  In the testing procedures, the evaluation group compared MERU and two other big names in a multiple testing format of combined VOIP and laptop users with the largest single test being a combined 48 data users and 24 simultaneous VOIP users.  In this last scenario testing with 15 APs, MERU and another competitor tied for MOS scores of 4.5 while both maintaining data throughput of over 33 mbps  using 802.11g gear.  When the AP count was reduced from 15 to 10 with the same number of clients trying to connect to the network (48 laptops, 24 VOIP phones), MERU’s throughput stayed above 33mpbs and its MOS score only dropped to 4.0, the bar for “toll quality voice”.  The other guys’ both came in below 5mpbs in throughput and MOS scores of 3 and 1.4, well below the standard for toll quality voice.  This testing showed us that MERU’s WLAN is very scalable, requires less infrastructure to perform at the same or better levels to support voice and data, more easily managed without the need for costly RF planning, and outperforms its’ closest competitors in the market place at nearly every level.