OnHub • Hacker News Board

Re: OnHub

#41

Post by mtgx » Tue, Aug 18, 2015, 4:42 PM UTC

adriancooney wrote: post #3

Very interesting. From looking at the specs, it looks like they're packaging a server and marketing it as a router. The configuration app is a very nice touch, routers have always a pain to configure. I'd love to stick this in my apartment (even though I can only receive a maximum of 10mb/s). As a side note, I'm surprised this isn't marketed alongside the Nest branch. It really has the look and feel of Nest products…

To understand why certain products, which are seemingly unrelated to Google's core competency, have stayed with Google and haven't moved on to Alphabet, or why Google created a product such as OnHub and not Nest, you have to realize why all of these product are under Google - to track all the data that goes through them under the same generic/unified "privacy" policy, and then feed it into its advertising system.

That's why OnHub is a Google product.

Re: OnHub

#42

Post by rattray » Tue, Aug 18, 2015, 4:43 PM UTC

exelius wrote: post #13

Hopefully this device actually has the CPU power to run QOS at more than 50mbps... the same can't be said of any other consumer router in the $200 price range.

Can you explain that? What's QOS, how much CPU does it take to run well, and why don't other expensive routers have the power for fast internet?

Re: OnHub

#43

Post by carlosdp » Tue, Aug 18, 2015, 4:43 PM UTC

jcfrei wrote: post #31

Here in CH virtually everyone receives a modem/router combo for free from their provider (ie. they borrow it to you). They are also usually preconfigured - so you just need to plug them in. Is it the same in the US? I guess at a 199$ price point this will be a tough sell.

Yea, many of the major ISPs lease out a modem that acts as a router by default.

Re: OnHub

#44

Post by 0xdeadbeefbabe » Tue, Aug 18, 2015, 4:43 PM UTC

So how does it connect to the app? Buttons and lights are a lot better than no connection.

Re: OnHub

#45

Post by callumjones » Tue, Aug 18, 2015, 4:43 PM UTC

kevinSuttle wrote: post #30

new2 wrote: post #21

Can anyone explain why a Router needs 4GB of storage ? What do they mean by "OnHub has 4GB of storage space, so there’s plenty of room for auto-updates and the latest software features." ? Is software for a router that large ?

Let me tell you, if my Apple TV had any sort of storage, I'd be a lot happier. Getting a little old streaming everything from "the CLOUD".

The Apple TV has 8GB of storage, so when you start streaming a TV show or movie it begins downloading the whole thing so internet interruptions don't mess up your viewing.

Re: OnHub

#46

Post by smackfu » Tue, Aug 18, 2015, 4:43 PM UTC

nodesocket wrote: post #22

OnHub looks nice, but honestly the Apple AirPort Time Capsule is a great device, and also gives you Time Machine backups. The only feature I've found missing, is VPN site-to-site and VPN client connections.

It is missing SNMP or any kind of traffic monitoring. The WAN to LAN speed is also a bit lacking if you have a very fast connection.

Re: OnHub

#47

Post by astrocyte » Tue, Aug 18, 2015, 4:44 PM UTC

mtgx wrote: post #41

adriancooney wrote: post #3

Very interesting. From looking at the specs, it looks like they're packaging a server and marketing it as a router. The configuration app is a very nice touch, routers have always a pain to configure. I'd love to stick this in my apartment (even though I can only receive a maximum of 10mb/s). As a side note, I'm surprised this isn't marketed alongside the Nest branch. It really has the look and feel of Nest products…

To understand why certain products, which are seemingly unrelated to Google's core competency, have stayed with Google and haven't moved on to Alphabet, or why Google created a product such as OnHub and not Nest, you have to realize why all of these product are under Google - to track all the data that goes through them under the same generic/unified "privacy" policy, and then feed it into its advertising system. Tha…

And that's exactly why it won't be getting put in my home.

Re: OnHub

#48

Post by ocdtrekkie » Tue, Aug 18, 2015, 4:44 PM UTC

astrocyte wrote: post #24

adriancooney wrote: post #3

Very interesting. From looking at the specs, it looks like they're packaging a server and marketing it as a router. The configuration app is a very nice touch, routers have always a pain to configure. I'd love to stick this in my apartment (even though I can only receive a maximum of 10mb/s). As a side note, I'm surprised this isn't marketed alongside the Nest branch. It really has the look and feel of Nest products…

"As a side note, I'm surprised this isn't marketed alongside the Nest branch. It really has the look and feel of Nest products with the LEDs and the speaker aesthetic. Also surprised this isn't an "Alphabet" product." It pretty much is... it's their way of sneaking the 'home automation' core/aggregation box into people's homes masked as a wireless router (for now). I'm sure the capability you mention will come headin…

There are decent solutions to this already. INSTEON works great. It's got dual-band connectivity (wired and wireless) and you can either use a cloud hub if you want, or control it locally with a computer.

Re: OnHub

#49

Post by will_work4tears » Tue, Aug 18, 2015, 4:44 PM UTC

twoodfin wrote: post #10

Hard to believe there's a huge market for $199 WiFi routers, no matter how sophisticated. On the other hand, even a sprinkling of installations is probably pretty valuable if it allows Google to derive more accurate ISP performance numbers. There's got to be some benefit in having thousands of devices directly connected to the ISP's network on the consumer end 24/7.

I paid almost that for my current router[0]. I think mine has better specs, even not being an AC (few, if none, of my devices use it anyway). Google's hub has no USB ports, no guest wifi (from what I can gather). Mine, however, has those things, though to be honest, most of the time, the printer or USB storage doesn't quite work right, though that could because I use a Mac and the driver's aren't supported as well.

[0] http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005KG44V0?psc=1&redirect=t...

Re: OnHub

#50

Post by aroch » Tue, Aug 18, 2015, 4:44 PM UTC

0xdeadbeefbabe wrote: post #44

So how does it connect to the app? Buttons and lights are a lot better than no connection.

They tell you, they just tucked it away at the bottom:

  >When you set up OnHub using an Android device, it uses an audio tone to send a setup code directly to your mobile device for easy and secure setup.