Live data from Hacker News

Google to end support for OnHub routers in 2022

support.google.com

221–230 of 230 posts

Re: Google to end support for OnHub routers in 2022

#221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have ~7 year old bog standard wifi router that has more than enough speed to saturate my 200Mbs downlink. Up to 7 or 8 devices online at a time when all family members are home, and there's never a contention issue. I can hog the connection w/ a huge Steam download, and then when they kids start streaming netflix to the TV it's still all shared nicely with me getting a reduced speed as the stream kicks in, everythi…

You live in a house. In an apartment there are 50 other networks within a 100 feet of you.

You actually don't know my residential environment. I don't live in an apartment with 50 networks, but I can see ~30 SSID's right now. On a semi-regular basis I benefit from going into my router config to choose the channel with the least congestion. For me, that's not worth spending $$ to upgrade when speed & latency are not otherwise an issue. I don't begrudge people who decide to upgrade to get that incremental boost, but I don't think it should be forced on them. Because I'm not claiming there are no benefits to upgrading. I'm saying that people who have lived with their current WiFi setup-- hiccups & all-- for years shouldn't be required to pay more if they're satisfied with their own status quo.

Re: Google to end support for OnHub routers in 2022

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That atrocious. Either this is vandalism, or we have no rights to private property any more

Or, just don’t buy “smart” devices whose software isn’t FOSS? Otherwise, you really never can be sure that you own a smart device.

[deleted]

Re: Google to end support for OnHub routers in 2022

#223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That atrocious. Either this is vandalism, or we have no rights to private property any more

Or, just don’t buy “smart” devices whose software isn’t FOSS? Otherwise, you really never can be sure that you own a smart device.

'should we do something about criminals shooting random people in the street?'

'Just don't leave hone without a bulletproof vest'

There are no 'dumb' tvs left any more. Soon the same fate will befall all other devices.

Re: Google to end support for OnHub routers in 2022

#224
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>and then you upgrade to a faster unit with next-gen wifi or whatever Do people actually need next-gen wifi? My impression is that 99.9+% of people would be well served by a mid-range 802.11ac router (eg. AC1750[1]) from years ago, because the most bandwidth intensive thing they do is watch 4k netflix (~25 Mb/s). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11ac-2013

I'm sure people said the same thing about 802.11ac when everyone was on n, or n when everyone was on g. Faster is always better. New 802.11ax also improves contention between devices.

> I'm sure people said the same thing about 802.11ac when everyone was on n, or n when everyone was on g.

Certainly not - 802.11ac felt like the biggest leap, 802.11n was decent for browsing, but when starting a download I would try to switch to Ethernet for it not take too long. With 802.11ac I didn't have to bother anymore as usually the difference was negligible.

Re: Google to end support for OnHub routers in 2022

#225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, just don’t buy “smart” devices whose software isn’t FOSS? Otherwise, you really never can be sure that you own a smart device.

'should we do something about criminals shooting random people in the street?' 'Just don't leave hone without a bulletproof vest' There are no 'dumb' tvs left any more. Soon the same fate will befall all other devices.

I don't disagree with you. But all the same, I don't buy smart anything, if there's any viable alternative. My light switches, blinds, bed, clothing, shoes, light bulbs, toaster, etc are all dumb.

If I did buy a "smart" thing, it would have to be rootable and hackable and OSS-friendly (e.g. I need to be able to control it if the company goes belly up) or I won't buy it.

Re: Google to end support for OnHub routers in 2022

#227
post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not defending Google but almost everyone I know who replaced a 6+ year old router then spends a month saying they should have done that sooner because the differences were noticeable. Given how heavily most people use WiFi now, spending something like $0.50 per day for your entire family seems like far from the most pressing area to economize. The other thing to consider is how the rest of the market compares: a…

far from the most pressing area to economize $0.50/day seems like a small thing until you're strapped for cash but all of a sudden have to pay $500 all at once to replace your Google mesh network hardware. That aside, as much as this particular example frustrates me, it's not my primary concern: It's the overall trend of forced obsolescence taking yet another step forward and increasing issue of e-waste. Mandatory re…

> $0.50/day seems like a small thing until you're strapped for cash but all of a sudden have to pay $500 all at once to replace your Google mesh network hardware.

You're using a definition of “all of a sudden” meaning “at some point within the next year or so”? Think about how much the average person will spend on their ISP bill in that same timeframe — again, I don't think this is great but it doesn't seem that dramatically different from, say, what happens when you have to replace your router in a hurry because Linksys orphaned it and your ISP is going to yank access due to an unpatched vulnerability.

> Mandatory recycling is also problematic. It could mean that products that might have ample community support (e.g., via OpenWRT) would still be illegal, and in general would take away a user's right to support & maintain their purchases.

I think you misunderstood the concept: requiring the manufacturer or reseller to recycle products which would otherwise end up in a landfill when people don't want them any more wouldn't in any way force the owner to turn over a device they want to keep. More importantly, building incentive structures around this would do something about the 99.995% of devices which were never going to get community firmware support.

Similarly, I doubt simply advertising expiration dates would have changed this: Google never said they were offering lifetime support for OnHub and very few people would expect them to offer support massively longer than the rest of the field when things like the WiFi standards improve more frequently than that. If they'd said “7 years of support”, I doubt it would have changed many decisions.

Re: Google to end support for OnHub routers in 2022

#228
post #120
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ditto; I only buy wireless hardware that can run openwrt on the day that I buy it. I may not flash it on that day, but I like to know that I can. My router is an x86 machine running opnsense.

What machine do you recommend? I've thought about having a custom router but I have wondered both if it is worth it and what machine I should use.

I typically use whatever I have laying around. Right now I've gone atypical since I currently have a 10 gbps symmetric connection and my leftover hardware isn't quite fast enough to route it.

Re: Google to end support for OnHub routers in 2022

#229
post #101
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is Bandwidth the only factor? What about 30-50 smart home devices? Every bulb or switch, water sensors, etc. Some of modern equipment is load balancing old legacy stuff better, no?

I don't have an IOT house, so I don't know how well they'll cope. That said, most IOT chips (eg. the famed ESP8266 and most variants of its successor, ESP32) seem to only support 802.11n, a standard from 2009. Therefore any benefits are probably not going to be gained by upgrading to an 802.11ac router. Newer routers might have beefier cpu/ram, but IOT devices are pretty low bandwidth, so I doubt they'll be taking up…

[deleted]

Re: Google to end support for OnHub routers in 2022

#230
post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

far from the most pressing area to economize $0.50/day seems like a small thing until you're strapped for cash but all of a sudden have to pay $500 all at once to replace your Google mesh network hardware. That aside, as much as this particular example frustrates me, it's not my primary concern: It's the overall trend of forced obsolescence taking yet another step forward and increasing issue of e-waste. Mandatory re…

> $0.50/day seems like a small thing until you're strapped for cash but all of a sudden have to pay $500 all at once to replace your Google mesh network hardware. You're using a definition of “all of a sudden” meaning “at some point within the next year or so”? Think about how much the average person will spend on their ISP bill in that same timeframe — again, I don't think this is great but it doesn't seem that dram…

>You're using a definition of “all of a sudden”

That is a fair point, assuming a person knows about the EOL. The article for this is "Support for OnHub routers ending in 2022". If that is the same email subject Google uses for email outreach (assuming they go that far) then it's something that many users would simply ignore, especially since the majority are nowhere near as security conscious as people here in the HN community. So I think there is potential for a sizeable % of owner to have "sudden" expenses.

your ISP is going to yank access due to an unpatched vulnerability.

If it's hardware I get through my ISP then they replace it. If it's not hardware from my ISP, how would they even know? I'm not sure that an uplink from the cable model to WiFi router will give them that info. And even if it did, they'd have no idea if I had simply slapped OpenWRT on the router negating the EOL issues.

I think you misunderstood the concept:

I'm talking about the people who would still want the device. Maybe a small portion, admittedly. My bigger concert is the moral hazard presented by giving OEM's an incentive to have ever shorter & shorter support windows. Just look at the CPU req's for Windows 11: Many millions of pre-8th gen Intel chips have the horsepower to run Windows 11. Just imagine how awful it would be if every system with an older chip had to be tossed in the trash.

Google never said they were offering lifetime support for OnHub and very few people would expect them to offer

That's a reasonable point. But in the vast majority of cases "support has ended" does not mean "your device is now (nearly) useless.".

For things like ongoing patches & similar maintenance, I understand that it can't reasonably go on forever. I do believe that vendors should have to publish their support horizons though. I'm not sure why you don't think this would help: It would tell users upfront, given that more & more of Google's products rely on their cloud support, when it will become a brick. I'm sure that folks who bought an OnHub 3 months ago would have appreciated knowing it would barely last a year.

With the Pixel this provides customers with a very useful piece of information when making a purchase decision. I know I take it into consideration: I just had to upgrade (dropped my phone-- no more crappy minimal cases for me now) and their support horizon was a factor in determining whether I went for a 5a or paid a little extra for a 6. (I chose the 6... better spec's, but I liked the style more too. :) )

So, I think expiration dates-- especially if more prominently displayed than with Pixel phones: think big bold Letters on initial config & an email where the use has to actively confirm receipt... some people will ignore and just click through, but they had their chance so long as Google doesn't bury it in a wall of text.

Still, your point about security vulnerabilities is well-taken. If there was to be any mandatory recycling, it would need be a very generous timeframe. It would be somewhat unique for consumer products, but safety limits on usable lifetime for equipment exist in various industries. I would want regulations to approach the topic with extreme caution though to at least minimize vendor influence.

Post reply on HN