Google rolls out “If This Then That” support for its $200 OnHub router • Hacker News Board

Re: Google rolls out “If This Then That” support for its $200 OnHub router

#101

Post by some-guy » Fri, Apr 29, 2016, 10:02 PM UTC

stsp wrote: post #63

some-guy wrote: post #36

I tried OnHub, but unfortunately it didn't have the option to force 5Ghz over 2.4Ghz for devices without going through some hacks. Where I live, 2.4Ghz wireless has 10% packet loss on average, no matter which router I use. I'm happy that routers are finally getting the UX treatment they deserve, and their target market isn't for people who know the difference between the two, but OnHub should keep the nitty-gritty de…

An AP cannot prioritize 5 GHz over 2 GHz. It's up to the client to decide what to connect to.

True, in my case I just wanted to turn off 2.4Ghz entirely but the software wouldn't let me.

My iPhone can't prioritize 5Ghz unfortunately. There was some BSSID trickery I could do, but having guests over was a pain since the broadcasted SSID would always result in a horrible connection. By turning off 2.4Ghz entirely on my old router there's no such problem (though the range is reduced quite a bit).

Re: Google rolls out “If This Then That” support for its $200 OnHub router

#102

Post by TheSpiceIsLife » Fri, Apr 29, 2016, 10:03 PM UTC

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #85

thrownaway2424 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your N300 is not getting security updates, but my OnHub is.

Pray tell, security updates for what? My router has all WAN-side management features etc. turned off, WPS is turned off and it has a long random WPA passphrase. Unless someone breaks into my apartment, there just isn't a significant potential for security risks that I'm aware of.

Agreed. I'm way more concerned about my computers and phones being compromised than I am my router. In comparison to the other devices I use the router has a tiny attack surface.

Re: Google rolls out “If This Then That” support for its $200 OnHub router

#103

Post by simoncion » Fri, Apr 29, 2016, 10:07 PM UTC

stsp wrote: post #63

some-guy wrote: post #36

I tried OnHub, but unfortunately it didn't have the option to force 5Ghz over 2.4Ghz for devices without going through some hacks. Where I live, 2.4Ghz wireless has 10% packet loss on average, no matter which router I use. I'm happy that routers are finally getting the UX treatment they deserve, and their target market isn't for people who know the difference between the two, but OnHub should keep the nitty-gritty de…

An AP cannot prioritize 5 GHz over 2 GHz. It's up to the client to decide what to connect to.

> An AP cannot prioritize 5 GHz over 2 GHz. It's up to the client to decide what to connect to.

While this is strictly true, an AP can encourage clients to prefer 5Ghz over 2.4Ghz. How do I know? The enterprise APs from the big players do this and do it well. Recent versions of the software that drives UBNT's UniFi APs also do a good job of this. (Every client I've connected to my UniFi APs at home has always been steered to the 5Ghz band. [0])

Like IPv6 support (which the OnHub reportedly still lacks!), sometimes it's best to try and accept the occasional suboptimal result. :)

[0] And yes, without band steering these clients would always connect at 2.4Ghz because of its stronger signal. So, I know that band steering is working. :)

Re: Google rolls out “If This Then That” support for its $200 OnHub router

#104

Post by NegativeLatency » Fri, Apr 29, 2016, 10:21 PM UTC

mrbill wrote: post #42

rdegges wrote: post #3

OnHub is one of the best routers I've ever owned. I've been buying custom router hardware for years -- I even went as far as building my own OpenBSD / PFsense router way back when, but nothing I've ever built (or bought!) has given me the same reliability / stability / speed as the OnHub. I'm seriously impressed with it. Also: the OnHub management app for mobile is AMAZING. It is so cool. Awesome product. Really grea…

Same here.. Long string of custom built routers, pfsense with wifi, OpenWRT, etc... even at one point a very expensive Cisco industrial-class 2.4/5 AP. Now I have an Ubiquiti Edgerouter Lite as my "core" router, and the OnHub acting as just-an-AP in bridge mode. It Just Works, and works better than any piece of wireless gear I've had before. My only "complaint" would be that I'm forced to use a mobile app for configu…

Why not get a ubiquity AP?

Re: Google rolls out “If This Then That” support for its $200 OnHub router

#105

Post by ProAm » Fri, Apr 29, 2016, 10:22 PM UTC

kyrra wrote: post #29

ProAm wrote: post #4

Until they discontinue support and turn the service off in a 18 months. It's hard to put any faith in google products anymore, especially with the new alphabet revenue strategy put into place.

The opinions stated here are my own, not necessarily those of Google. If you are referring to Revolv, Nest/Revolv stopped selling the device the day Nest acquired them (Oct 2014), and they are also issuing refunds to anyone that contacts them[0]. The other major hardware cancel I know about was the Nexus Q which Google also provided a full refund for anyone that contacts them. Sure, Google could cancel it, but they s…

Who are you quoting there? I didn't say that.

Re: Google rolls out “If This Then That” support for its $200 OnHub router

#106

Post by morgante » Fri, Apr 29, 2016, 10:25 PM UTC

The gratuitous negativity of this article is entirely uncalled for.

I would much rather that a device integrate with IFTTT and thus gain connectivity with the hundreds of services which IFTTT supports than for it to attempt to hand-roll integrations with a much smaller subset of services.

In case anyone disputes my claim of gratuitous negativity:

> Some smart home features finally come to OnHub, but using a non-Google ecosystem.

> Its only real differentiators were the funky design, easy setup, and the promise of future updates.

> Now with the IFTTT update, the OnHub finally supports some smart home features—but it's using someone else's ecosystem.

> IFTTT is now the gateway for controlling other things in your house via the OnHub rather than using some kind of Google communication standard like we expected.

> This is all still happening over Wi-Fi, too, so the OnHub is still not using any of the smart-home antennas it shipped with.

Re: Google rolls out “If This Then That” support for its $200 OnHub router

#107

Post by madeofpalk » Fri, Apr 29, 2016, 10:27 PM UTC

x1798DE wrote: post #76

kyrra wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The opinions stated here are my own, not necessarily those of Google. If you are referring to Revolv, Nest/Revolv stopped selling the device the day Nest acquired them (Oct 2014), and they are also issuing refunds to anyone that contacts them[0]. The other major hardware cancel I know about was the Nexus Q which Google also provided a full refund for anyone that contacts them. Sure, Google could cancel it, but they s…

I feel like being forced to sell Google back my device lest they remotely brick it is not exactly a happy ending.

To be fair, getting a refund from Google like that seems like the best possible outcome (assuming the service will be shut down regardlesS).

Re: Google rolls out “If This Then That” support for its $200 OnHub router

#108

Post by detaro » Fri, Apr 29, 2016, 10:31 PM UTC

morgante wrote: post #106

The gratuitous negativity of this article is entirely uncalled for. I would much rather that a device integrate with IFTTT and thus gain connectivity with the hundreds of services which IFTTT supports than for it to attempt to hand-roll integrations with a much smaller subset of services. In case anyone disputes my claim of gratuitous negativity: > Some smart home features finally come to OnHub, but using a non-Googl…

It's negativity, but I'm not convinced on the "gratuitous". They clearly mention the (IMHO reasonable) expectations compared to which this is negative.

Re: Google rolls out “If This Then That” support for its $200 OnHub router

#109

Post by randyrand » Fri, Apr 29, 2016, 10:31 PM UTC

jethro_tell wrote: post #68

Animats wrote: post #53

The remote update "feature" means this has a built-in backdoor into your local network. So you don't want to install this in a law office, anywhere that has to be HIPAA compliant, or any environment requiring security.

Why would you put this in a business? I suppose the same argument holds for space stations prisons but we haven't brought that up. The lack of remote updates for any router probably also means that it has a back door. There's a pretty extensive list of home router vulns out there already. Being HIPAA compliant is not generally an indication of a well secured network.

You might run a home business

Re: Google rolls out “If This Then That” support for its $200 OnHub router

#110

Post by ericclemmons » Fri, Apr 29, 2016, 10:51 PM UTC

Shucks. I just bought eero over OnHub because the former seems to answer the multi- floor wireless solution than OnHub.

I'm in a 4-story town home with PoE between floors, which works great, but Apple's AirPort Extreme + Express CONSISTENTLY stops resolving DNS while the wired connections are fine.

Looks like I have another alternative if eero doesn't work...