Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OnHub

on.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 641 posts

Re: OnHub

#111

Post by untog »

About the only real improvement I'm seeing here is the automatic, silent updates. That could be a lifesaver if a crucial bug were ever found.

Aside from that, eh. It looks good, I don't doubt that with that number of antennas etc. it'll work well, but if anyone else is like me they've long since forgotten what their router even is - it just sits there, doing its job, and has done for years.

I find the intelligent NAS boxes far more interesting - I have a Synology box that basically provides it's own cloud storage, download manager, etc.

Re: OnHub

#112

Post by RobotCaleb »

dragonwriter wrote: post #106
chrisrhoden wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're not spending at least $100 on a wireless router, you're probably giving up significant amounts of the performance you're paying for from your ISP. Routers are computers. The $40 units just can't handle modern usage patterns (multiple phones / tablets / computers with relatively high speed caps) very well. It's my single biggest recommendation when people complain about the speed of the Internet in their hom…

> More often than not, they're underspending on their networking equipment, not their ISP package. Often, their networking equipment is part of the ISP package because the ISP wants to provide a seamless experience, and doesn't even provide easy access to the information necessary to use your own equipment.

I don't even know what this means. Are you saying that your ISP doesn't allow you to plug standard ethernet devices into their lines? I own my own modem and router and do what I want with them. I don't follow you.

Re: OnHub

#113

Post by kllrnohj »

legacy2013 wrote: post #109
mihok wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What specs are you talking about specifically? It doesn't look like a server at all.

https://on.google.com/hub/#specs The detailed specs page shows a 1.4 GHz Dual Core processor and a 1GB of DDR3 RAM. Thats a little ridiculous for a router

Not really. The Linksys WRT1900AC has a 1.2ghz dual core CPU as well.

At some point you need a general purpose CPU to run everything and it's not hard to just throw an ARM SoC at it which is going to be in the 1-1.5ghz range and dual core because that's just what low-end is now.

Re: OnHub

#114

Post by Hello71 »

jlgaddis wrote: post #91
blakeyrat wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only way I can interpret that quote is, "it can automatically switch wifi radio channels when the one its using gets congested". I don't know, maybe there's more to it than that. Because $40 routers can do that.

With six 2.4 and 5 GHz antennas each, that's two antennas times three (non-overlapping) channels simultaneously in each band. Assuming it can somehow get device A to communicate on channel A and device B to communicate on channel C, etc., you could avoid some congestion while still allowing all those devices to maximize the available bandwidth. No $40 routers that I know of do anything like that.

meaning that if everyone in the neighborhood owns one, there will be six times as much congestion and everyone's internet access will be even slower than before!

Re: OnHub

#115

Post by blister »

legacy2013 wrote: post #109
mihok wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What specs are you talking about specifically? It doesn't look like a server at all.

https://on.google.com/hub/#specs The detailed specs page shows a 1.4 GHz Dual Core processor and a 1GB of DDR3 RAM. Thats a little ridiculous for a router

Plus at least 4GB of storage.

Re: OnHub

#116

Post by jonlucc »

driverdan wrote: post #87

Why would anyone want this over the latest Asus AC1900 router? Asus' web interface is easy to use and their QoS is surprisingly good out of the box. Also, Asus isn't going to spy on everything you do.

I think OnHub has ZigBee and Bluetooth, which might be very interesting to the maker community and in a couple years to the internet of things.

Re: OnHub

#117

Post by Artemis2 »

jcastro wrote: post #20
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.

It seems that with AC being more mainstream that prices north of $250 are becoming a thing. I was surprised it was only $199.

Apple's Airport Extreme sells for the same price and supports AC. I wouldn't expect Google to try to sell something more expensive without Apple's care for details.

Re: OnHub

#118

Post by ropiku »

legacy2013 wrote: post #109
mihok wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What specs are you talking about specifically? It doesn't look like a server at all.

https://on.google.com/hub/#specs The detailed specs page shows a 1.4 GHz Dual Core processor and a 1GB of DDR3 RAM. Thats a little ridiculous for a router

It's a Dual Core ARM, it's expected for a good gigabit router.

Re: OnHub

#119

Post by rm445 »

mihok wrote: post #99
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…

What specs are you talking about specifically? It doesn't look like a server at all.

There's a specs link at the top of the page, but I'm also not sure what parent poster means. Just confused, I think.

The specifications are on a par with low-end consumer-grade NAS products, and it has a USB 3 port, but nothing on the site says anything about providing storage or other services, except for router-type and supporting configuration services (I suppose "keep an eye on your network" is a bit of an extra).

"Plenty of room, OnHub has 4GB of storage space, so there’s plenty of room for auto-updates and the latest software features" is hardly selling a server. All it claims to be is a fancy router.

Re: OnHub

#120

Post by wvenable »

chrisrhoden wrote: post #58
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.

If you're not spending at least $100 on a wireless router, you're probably giving up significant amounts of the performance you're paying for from your ISP. Routers are computers. The $40 units just can't handle modern usage patterns (multiple phones / tablets / computers with relatively high speed caps) very well. It's my single biggest recommendation when people complain about the speed of the Internet in their hom…

My ISP provides an integrated modem/wifi router and they don't provide a bridge mode. I've long given up trying to fight against that with my own equipment.
Post reply on HN