81–90 of 200 posts
Serious question: whose WiFi is not working, to the degree that they think, "I really need to get a modern router to make this Internet thing actually work." I'm seeing about a dozen fancy modern wifi routers all trying to solve a problem I'm not sure exists.
It's about slowly caching the top 100 YouTube videos and then moving them quickly to whatever device you want to watch them on.
On a different note, is there any reason why someone should prefer this to Ubiquiti's AmpliFi? Unlike Google, Ubiquiti has a long history of making networking gear. The only obvious benefit I see right now is Google Wifi starts at $129 for one unit whereas AmpliFi starts at $199, but that $199 includes 2 "mesh points" and presumably to get the same effect with Google Wifi you'd have to shell out $299 for the 3-pack.
I'm a little concerned that an android device is listed as _required_... i would hope all functions of the wifi devices can be configured/administrated from the web or just an internal browser pointed to the device(s).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apartments can have this issue - where I live there are 50+ access points visible and even with the router directly next to our streaming device I cannot stream Netflix HD (75 mbps plan with Comcast). edit Not saying that Google's system fixes this but some users require nicer routers for that connection. I should note my actual computer gets an ethernet because I can never achieve on wireless what I can on wired!
This wouldn't solve that problem. Switching to Ethernet or finding a free channel (good luck) is the only solution.
https://www.google.com/search?q=metal+wall+panels&source=lnm...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my NYC apartment, the physical WAN connection is in a rather unfortunate location. There's no good spot to place a router in the center of the apartment, and no unobtrusive way to run cable there if there was such a spot. As a result I have to choose between a wifi dead zone in my bedroom, or a strategically located repeater. I've chosen the latter. If I lived in a less dense area, in a wood-framed house of the sa…
Unless you have lead walls, a ~1000 sq ft apartment should be fully covered by a single access point. The problem in NYC is that there's just too much band crowding; adding more access points is only going to provide an improvement (if any at all) until everyone else does it, too, and then it's going to be worse for everyone. We really need better solutions for extremely high-density deployment of competing WiFi netw…
But to your point, I'm sure it's all interrelated and if I had concrete walls with no neighbors it would be significantly better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my NYC apartment, the physical WAN connection is in a rather unfortunate location. There's no good spot to place a router in the center of the apartment, and no unobtrusive way to run cable there if there was such a spot. As a result I have to choose between a wifi dead zone in my bedroom, or a strategically located repeater. I've chosen the latter. If I lived in a less dense area, in a wood-framed house of the sa…
Unless you have lead walls, a ~1000 sq ft apartment should be fully covered by a single access point. The problem in NYC is that there's just too much band crowding; adding more access points is only going to provide an improvement (if any at all) until everyone else does it, too, and then it's going to be worse for everyone. We really need better solutions for extremely high-density deployment of competing WiFi netw…
The downside is that you might need more access points to achieve equivalent coverage. Forming a mesh, like these Google APs do, is useful for avoiding additional wiring.
The beam-forming features present in 802.11n and 802.11ac also help reduce interference.
Lots of vendors already offer this. It's pretty standard for commercial WiFi units. It's just slightly more expensive than dumb routers. * Eero: https://eero.com/ * Ubuquiti: https://www.ubnt.com * Cisco: http://www.cisco.com (sized for larger buildings) Does this new Google device come with the Google Fi feature which backhauls all your traffic to Google via a VPN?
This was started as a kickstarter campaign and they have just begun shipping out the first units.
Like the Google APs, Portal can form a mesh and automatically figure out which channels have the least interference.
Despite their claims of being designed for user privacy, I'm wary of anything Google puts out. What information does it report back to the mothership?
I just bought an OnHub last year. WTF Google?!
> I just bought an OnHub last year. WTF Google?! Do you get upset when a new phone is introduced a year after you bought your last one? A new car?
Of course, those of us seasoned with the experience of buying Google products before should know better, but it really doesn't change the fact that people who bought it are absolutely right to feel upset.
I'm a little concerned that an android device is listed as _required_... i would hope all functions of the wifi devices can be configured/administrated from the web or just an internal browser pointed to the device(s).
There is no Web interface; you really do have to use the app.