Live data from Hacker News

OnHub

on.google.com

371–380 of 641 posts

Re: OnHub

#371
post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The router is cloud configured from your mobile device, that is how it works. Some cloud services for the device are actually optional. But AFAIK you still need a Google Account. Here is the help page on the topic of data collection and privacy: https://support.google.com/onhub/answer/6246642?hl=en&ref_to... And see also, how to set a whole bunch of privacy settings: https://support.google.com/onhub/answer/6279845?vi…

IPv6 support?

yes

Re: OnHub

#372

I've been dogfooding the device for about 4 months now. Before, I was using the previous generation Airport Extreme. It is far better - the app makes it super simple to set up, the signal seems to be stronger throughout my apartment, and I love having a convenient way to monitor / admin it remotely (via the app). Well worth the price imo. >inb4 shill :)

Hi, Could you elaborate on what you believe to be far better than the extreme. AExtreme was super simple to set up and has an app too. Did you position your OnHub differently than your extreme? I have had an Extreme for years but recently moved and found some issues with connectivity in the new location so I've been weighing options.

Just as simple to set up as the Extreme if you're on iOS, and even simpler on Android.

I placed it in the same spot where the Extreme was formerly located; my signal strength at the other end of the apartment and outside is noticeably stronger, perhaps due to the multi-directional antenna.

Re: OnHub

#373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Disclaimer: I work for the same former-division-of-Google-and-now-Alphabet-subsidiary that built this, though I don't work on OnHub.) I think you need an account for cloud-based configuration, credential sharing, etc. Maybe it's not for everyone, but I think it makes sense as a product. I highly doubt they added a Google account requirement to improve ad targeting.

> I highly doubt they added a Google account requirement to improve ad targeting. Ad delivery networks, and google is one of the biggest, have one core business: delivering ads. Everything is setup to make that as big and as solid as possible. Whatever it takes (and we all know how far ad delivery networks will go: almost infinitely far). Now they ship a piece of hardware, require signing up with an account, and it's…

> Ad delivery networks, and google is one of the biggest, have one core business: delivering ads

It's made by an alphabet subsidiary, not google. Google are the bad ad-selling guys, they're the good guys. 100% true!

Re: OnHub

#374

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…

> routers have always a pain to configure Eh? You must buy some shitty routers, no offense. Compared to the rest of the market, paying $200 for a router isn't competitive. It just is not worth it given Google's "eh-we-will-do-it-and-stop-if-people-complain/sue" mindset. ---- To Melvin, since I'm submitting to fast: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B013ALA9LA?ref=spks_0_0_2170510902&... > OnHub Wireless Router from Google and…

How do DrayTek products rank these days? When I was on ADSL they were excellent, and their UK-tuned firmware outperformed Linksys & Netgear.

Now I'm on fibre I'm using the Draytek purely as an access point, and BT's modem to connect. The Draytek'll need replacing soon.

Re: OnHub

#375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adding support for Linux/OSX/Windows is probably not a priority for them to get this thing off the ground.

How about, eh, you know... Web based? No need for this platform-specific bullshit. Last I heard Google was pretty good at creating good web applications.

Is that what you really want? A wifi AP that can be configured from the web? Because THAT's how you get hacked.

Re: OnHub

#376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about, eh, you know... Web based? No need for this platform-specific bullshit. Last I heard Google was pretty good at creating good web applications.

Perhaps it uses some local comms to bootstrap it. Like Bluetooth or sound waves.

Yes, it says somewhere on the site that it uses soundwaves to share the initial key with your device.

But that's NOT an excuse to make the device depend on the Mobile ecosystem.

If it can play a code on the speaker, it can just talk. In English. Via thirty-six audio files: a.wav, b.wav, ... 9.wav. Ok, thirty-seven recordings--can't forget welcome_to_your_new_router_your_key_is.wav. :)

Re: OnHub

#377
post #249

Seems a little pricey. My TP-Link router was $45 and is amazing. I'm probably missing something but $200 doesn't seem "worth it" at first glance when set up really only consists of looking at the bottom of the router to find the WPA Key.

OnHub is made by TP-Link, it seems. I have a TP-Link and it has worked flawlessly too.

Re: OnHub

#378
post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A Google Wave account.

Do you mean because they aren't available, or because of something about wave? When I tried it after hearing it would shut down soon, it seemed neat.

Yeah, Wave was a great tool for remote collaboration/project management. There's the Apache Wave bundle you can self-host, but it's not as simple as just linking someone to wave.google.com.

Re: OnHub

#379
post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's bullshit. It should use something like Thread or Bluetooth 4.0 to let you configure it from your mobile device , which already assumes you'll be in the same room with the router in 99% percent of the cases. There's no reason for this to be sent over the Internet, when you're both in the same room.

I wouldn't phrase it so negatively but I do share the same sentiment. I think this is the craziness that seems to be so widespread that people don't notice how crazy it is - the primary way for two devices sitting few meters from each other to communicate should not be routing packets around half of the planet. I get it's easier, but it's bad engineering, unnecessarily wasteful energy-wise and I bet the only reason t…

Totally agree.

Re: OnHub

#380

My biggest issue with this is that Google wants to inject a piece of hardware into my home that acts as the gateway to my data. A device through which all : > Incoming data runs through > Internal data runs through > Outgoing data runs through And then wants to be vague about what data they will be pumping to their back-end for analytics/data mining. I have had a long standing proposal for home automation and I'm cur…

I personally think the real answer is not to have a central device, but to spread it out into a peer2peer 'fog'. There's been some movement in industrial applications via stuff like https://twitter.com/FilamentHQ which leverages hardware accelerated ECC and telehash, using blockchain based DNS systems and other decentralized methods of command and control. I think a similar direction needs to be taken for consumer ha…

I very much like the term "fog computing" for P2P anti-cloud software. Hope it catches on.
Post reply on HN