7 ms·

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,

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 with the LEDs and the speaker aesthetic. Also surprised this isn't an "Alphabet" product.

astrocyte 11y ago
"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 with the LEDs and the speaker aesthetic. Also surprised this isn't an "Alphabet" product." It pretty much is... it's their way of sneaking the 'home automation' core/aggregation box into people's homes masked as a wireless router (for now). I'm sure the capability you mention will come heading into the future. The only question will be : execution/security and will a competitor come up w/ a more secure/well executed product which won't serve as a data vacuum hose to google. This kind of product launch on the heels of their massive alphabet re-org with no understanding where it came from (division wise) or what its goal is leads me to question whether the re-org is really going to move google beyond its former execution flaws ...
- ocdtrekkie 11y ago
  There are decent solutions to this already. INSTEON works great. It's got dual-band connectivity (wired and wireless) and you can either use a cloud hub if you want, or control it locally with a computer.
  - spdustin 11y ago
    I can't tell you how many Insteon switches I've replaced in anger because they start flashing, stop responding to button presses, start beeping - one didn't even stop when I pulled the air gap switch. I'm well versed in their tech and in electrical systems, and everything was installed correctly, in some cases with fresh neutral wires pulled through direct from the neutral buss bar in the service panel, just to avoid potential crosstalk/current leakage, since they communicate over wires as well as via two way radio (newer spec switches). I know it's anecdotal, but the Insteon forums are filled with similar stories. I was a very early adopter and have been through several generations of devices, and I'm committed to using another platform when I start replacing the remaining Insteon switches that will inevitably die. I wouldn't recommend Insteon to anyone. X-10 was more reliable in my house. I'm evaluating Zigbee options now.
    - ocdtrekkie 11y ago
      I have heard these stories (and am wary), but I have yet to have a single INSTEON device fail on me so far. X-10 was completely unusable for me.
    - icecreammatt 11y ago
      I just bought a Zigbee Winkhub because I was looking into something to play around with to remotely control lights. I also wanted something that I could hack and run my own code on. The Winkhub is relatively easy to hack. I've only been using mine for about a week now but am very happy with it. I've only tested mine with lights so far.
- rch 11y ago
  Well they bought Revolv a while back (via Nest), mostly for the team. Come to think of it, I think they were working with Go too. Revolv Hub supported devices: http://support.revolv.com/knowledgebase/articles/329116 http://support.revolv.com/knowledgebase/articles/329116
- derefr 11y ago
  > home automation' core/aggregation box Deeper than that, even. It seems like this is intended as a local-network cloudlet[1] substrate. Launch an app on your phone that needs a companion frontend server instance to talk to? One gets launched "in the cloud"—specifically, in a virtual cloud owned by the app author. But where is that instance, physically? Usually a provider like AWS... but with a cloudlet peering arrangement, that instance could instead end up running on your router. (Not as crazy as it sounds if your app has an N:M frontend-backend server topology.) [1] https://github.com/cmusatyalab/elijah-cloudlet https://github.com/cmusatyalab/elijah-cloudlet
  - ultimape 11y ago
    I've been toying with terminology to deal with the idea of a decentralized p2p cloud. Calling it a 'virtual cloud' seems off, and 'fog' has been co-opted by other kinds of tech. Any thoughts on what would be a good terminology for this?
    - jcrcj 11y ago
      Mist
    - noblethrasher 11y ago
      “The Shade” * It’s a play on the word “shard”. * It suggests privacy and protection. * It suggests something that is nearby, as opposed to “the cloud” that is far away. … Unfortunately, the word is probably too susceptible to negative connotation.
    - martinflack 11y ago
      I thought fog was being used to describe this kind of thing. Where else is fog computing used, differently?
- ropiku 11y ago
  Given that it has ZigBee, Bluetooth 4.0 I think it's meant to be a hub. It also mentions Weave which would work well together with Nest: https://nest.com/support/article/How-does-Nest-Protect-connect-wirelessly https://nest.com/support/article/How-does-Nest-Protect-conne...
  - mtgx 11y ago
    What about Thread?
    - knightofmars 11y ago
      Thread uses the same hardware and radio protocols as Zigbee but a different software layer on the top.
      - mynameisvlad 11y ago
        Which means this could easily get Thread support as one of the "software updates" to come out.
        magicalist 11y ago
        The FAQ on the specs page mentions Thread support.
    - erbdex 11y ago
      Thread and Zigbee both work on 802.15.4, which it supports.
      - mtgx 11y ago
        Come to think of it, that's why Google is so behind Thread - they want a mesh networking protocol that's not exclusively local, but can connect each one of the embedded systems directly to the Internet with their own IPv6 address. Although, the protocol does support using a "gateway", too, but I have a feeling that won't be made the priority for most Thread-enabled devices.
mtgx 11y ago
To understand why certain products, which are seemingly unrelated to Google's core competency, have stayed with Google and haven't moved on to Alphabet, or why Google created a product such as OnHub and not Nest, you have to realize why all of these product are under Google - to track all the data that goes through them under the same generic/unified "privacy" policy, and then feed it into its advertising system. That's why OnHub is a Google product.
- astrocyte 11y ago
  And that's exactly why it won't be getting put in my home.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- fraserharris 11y ago
  This was a primary motivation for Google+ as well - a single unified login under one unified privacy policy.
- endtime 11y ago
  I hate to burst your bubble, but it's actually just a branding thing, and has been in the works for much longer than anyone involved knew that Alphabet was going to happen. The team that built this is part of the same company as Google Fiber (disclaimer: for which I work), which is in fact no longer part of Google Inc.
  - kuschku 11y ago
    Well, if they wanted to track data through this, though, they either have to make it under the Google brand, or can’t sell it in Europe.
  - curun1r 11y ago
    > but it's actually just a branding thing I've heard it's mostly a liability thing. When projects like the self-driving car were directly under Google, Google's assets were fair game in any lawsuit over that technology. With the current setup, liability is siloed in each legal entity which gives the cash cow, Google, more protection. More here: http://www.theverge.com/2015/8/13/9149431/alphabet-google-corporate-tax-restructuring-liability-google-x http://www.theverge.com/2015/8/13/9149431/alphabet-google-co...
fweespeech 11y ago
> 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&qid=1439920378&pf_rd_p=2170510902&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_t=301&pf_rd_s=desktop-auto-sparkle&pf_rd_r=1GZB2QQ2TEH9Y8J6SS1B&pf_rd_i=TP-LINK http://www.amazon.com/dp/B013ALA9LA?ref=spks_0_0_2170510902&... > OnHub Wireless Router from Google and TP-LINK > by TP-LINK 1) You complain about the quality of TP-LINK products and think the solution is....another TP-LINK product, likely measured in the same way. 2) Honestly, I cannot think of a consumer AP that would actually perform to your expectations [apartment complex with 30+ competitors, saturating all the channels] that would be priced at $300, let alone $200. I can tell you right now, this Google AP won't do it either. Its "up to 1900mbps" for a reason. Trust me. Buying this won't be a magical solution to your problems if you real world gigabit speeds. ---- To the folks complaining about "magical routers": A) Buy something from Ubiquiti Networks. B) Buy something you can flash with WRT firmware. In both cases, as long as you understand the hardware specs, you'll get something better than the norm. In Ubiquiti's case, I'm 99% sure it will outperform a Google branded TP-Link AP unless Google is heavily subsidizing and QAing everything.
- lallysingh 11y ago
  Really? I paid more for that for my last one. ASUS RT-AC68U when it just came out...
- melvinram 11y ago
  I have a 1 Gbps fiber connection at my apartment. I spent a good hour doing research and finally bought this http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00BUSDVBQ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00BUSDVBQ. It had 4.5 stars at the time and was the highest rated router that Amazon carried. I bought it, plugged it in and ran speedtest on it. Max speed I could get was 250mb/s. Not bad but not the gb/s that was getting advertised. Additional, over time, it would always slow down to 10-50mb/s. I called TP-Link and they said this was likely the best it'll do and the advertised speeds are in an interference free lab environment. If OnHub fixes that second problem as they claim to, that would be more than enough reason for me to spend the $200. If they can get higher than 250mb/s speed by optimizing around the congestion, $200 will be well worth the spend.
mihok 11y ago
What specs are you talking about specifically? It doesn't look like a server at all.
- legacy2013 11y ago
  https://on.google.com/hub/#specs 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
  - kllrnohj 11y ago
    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.
    - fimoreth 11y ago
      The Linksys: http://www.linksys.com/us/p/P-WRT1900AC/ http://www.linksys.com/us/p/P-WRT1900AC/ Agreed, the specs between the WRT1900AC and the OnHub are strikingly similar. Even the advertised smart features.
  - blister 11y ago
    Plus at least 4GB of storage.
  - ropiku 11y ago
    It's a Dual Core ARM, it's expected for a good gigabit router.
  - ceejayoz 11y ago
    I'd imagine it's basically off-the-shelf mobile hardware.
  - cptskippy 11y ago
    The CPU is inline with top of the line routers these days (e.g. Asus RT-AC87U is a 1Ghz dual core). 1+Ghz dual core CPUs are really cheap these days. The RAM is about 4x what other routers are packing but the cost difference between a 1Gbit chip and 4Gbit chip is a few dollars. Prices have been plummeting this year and 8Gbit chips replaced 4Gbit as the new hotness. Not to mention DDR4 rolling out so there might just be dumping going on that makes adding 1GB of RAM a non issue.
dragonwriter 11y ago
> Also surprised this isn't an "Alphabet" product. Alphabet has been announced, but AFAIK the actual corporate transition hasn't yet occurred.
- mbreese 11y ago
  Not to mention Alphabet is a holding company and won't have any products. It will all be done through the subsidiary companies (e.g. the new Google).
Cacti 11y ago
It's comparable to the other top home commercial routers out there, like the Airport Extreme or Linksys 1900AC.
nadams 11y ago
> The configuration app is a very nice touch, routers have always a pain to configure. Basically this boils down to: The average home router which has basic to no settings (many even lack channel selection) but usage is poor to suboptimal. I had a Netgear router which had broken internal static routing - and netgear's response was to buy a different router (even though you could set it inside the router...). vs Buying a higher power router or installing DD-WRT, Tomato or any of the other firmwares - now you have 1000 configuration items but you don't know which ones to tweak to give you good performance. I believe most people fall into the middle - they want something that's easy to use with good performance but with the ability to adjust the 1000 configuration items if they wanted to.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > I believe most people fall into the middle - they want something that's easy to use with good performance but with the ability to adjust the 1000 configuration items if they wanted to. I think most people want something that just works. (Most HN readers might want something where they can adjust 1000 configuration settings, but most people I think would never want to.)
chaostheory 11y ago
> I'm surprised this isn't marketed alongside the Nest branch. I'm surprised that it isn't a Nest branded product that the Nest division ultimately controls. Looking at Google's history, I wouldn't be surprised if the Nest division came out with their own wifi router as well. I'm hoping that this doesn't turn into another Google TV release where the product is barely beta.
mrwilliamchang 11y ago
I think the best way to judge this product is as a hub for a smart home. The fact that it is an easy to wifi router is incidental (in spite of the fact that is all the marketing is talking about). It seems pretty clear, "onHub" is suppose to be a hub for a bunch of "on" branded smart home devices.
- mrwilliamchang 11y ago
  I've written some more fleshed out thoughts here: https://medium.com/@mrwilliamchang/onhub-is-not-a-router-focused-on-simplicity-9e623103d00d https://medium.com/@mrwilliamchang/onhub-is-not-a-router-foc...

astrocyte 11y ago

"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 with the LEDs and the speaker aesthetic. Also surprised this isn't an "Alphabet" product." It pretty much is... it's their way of sneaking the 'home automation' core/aggregation box into people's homes masked as a wireless router (for now). I'm sure the capability you mention will come heading into the future. The only question will be : execution/security and will a competitor come up w/ a more secure/well executed product which won't serve as a data vacuum hose to google. This kind of product launch on the heels of their massive alphabet re-org with no understanding where it came from (division wise) or what its goal is leads me to question whether the re-org is really going to move google beyond its former execution flaws ...

ocdtrekkie 11y ago
There are decent solutions to this already. INSTEON works great. It's got dual-band connectivity (wired and wireless) and you can either use a cloud hub if you want, or control it locally with a computer.
- spdustin 11y ago
  I can't tell you how many Insteon switches I've replaced in anger because they start flashing, stop responding to button presses, start beeping - one didn't even stop when I pulled the air gap switch. I'm well versed in their tech and in electrical systems, and everything was installed correctly, in some cases with fresh neutral wires pulled through direct from the neutral buss bar in the service panel, just to avoid potential crosstalk/current leakage, since they communicate over wires as well as via two way radio (newer spec switches). I know it's anecdotal, but the Insteon forums are filled with similar stories. I was a very early adopter and have been through several generations of devices, and I'm committed to using another platform when I start replacing the remaining Insteon switches that will inevitably die. I wouldn't recommend Insteon to anyone. X-10 was more reliable in my house. I'm evaluating Zigbee options now.
  - ocdtrekkie 11y ago
    I have heard these stories (and am wary), but I have yet to have a single INSTEON device fail on me so far. X-10 was completely unusable for me.
  - icecreammatt 11y ago
    I just bought a Zigbee Winkhub because I was looking into something to play around with to remotely control lights. I also wanted something that I could hack and run my own code on. The Winkhub is relatively easy to hack. I've only been using mine for about a week now but am very happy with it. I've only tested mine with lights so far.
rch 11y ago
Well they bought Revolv a while back (via Nest), mostly for the team. Come to think of it, I think they were working with Go too. Revolv Hub supported devices: http://support.revolv.com/knowledgebase/articles/329116 http://support.revolv.com/knowledgebase/articles/329116
derefr 11y ago
> home automation' core/aggregation box Deeper than that, even. It seems like this is intended as a local-network cloudlet[1] substrate. Launch an app on your phone that needs a companion frontend server instance to talk to? One gets launched "in the cloud"—specifically, in a virtual cloud owned by the app author. But where is that instance, physically? Usually a provider like AWS... but with a cloudlet peering arrangement, that instance could instead end up running on your router. (Not as crazy as it sounds if your app has an N:M frontend-backend server topology.) [1] https://github.com/cmusatyalab/elijah-cloudlet https://github.com/cmusatyalab/elijah-cloudlet
- ultimape 11y ago
  I've been toying with terminology to deal with the idea of a decentralized p2p cloud. Calling it a 'virtual cloud' seems off, and 'fog' has been co-opted by other kinds of tech. Any thoughts on what would be a good terminology for this?
  - jcrcj 11y ago
    Mist
  - noblethrasher 11y ago
    “The Shade” * It’s a play on the word “shard”. * It suggests privacy and protection. * It suggests something that is nearby, as opposed to “the cloud” that is far away. … Unfortunately, the word is probably too susceptible to negative connotation.
  - martinflack 11y ago
    I thought fog was being used to describe this kind of thing. Where else is fog computing used, differently?
ropiku 11y ago
Given that it has ZigBee, Bluetooth 4.0 I think it's meant to be a hub. It also mentions Weave which would work well together with Nest: https://nest.com/support/article/How-does-Nest-Protect-connect-wirelessly https://nest.com/support/article/How-does-Nest-Protect-conne...
- mtgx 11y ago
  What about Thread?
  - knightofmars 11y ago
    Thread uses the same hardware and radio protocols as Zigbee but a different software layer on the top.
    - mynameisvlad 11y ago
      Which means this could easily get Thread support as one of the "software updates" to come out.
      - magicalist 11y ago
        The FAQ on the specs page mentions Thread support.
  - erbdex 11y ago
    Thread and Zigbee both work on 802.15.4, which it supports.
    - mtgx 11y ago
      Come to think of it, that's why Google is so behind Thread - they want a mesh networking protocol that's not exclusively local, but can connect each one of the embedded systems directly to the Internet with their own IPv6 address. Although, the protocol does support using a "gateway", too, but I have a feeling that won't be made the priority for most Thread-enabled devices.

mtgx 11y ago

To understand why certain products, which are seemingly unrelated to Google's core competency, have stayed with Google and haven't moved on to Alphabet, or why Google created a product such as OnHub and not Nest, you have to realize why all of these product are under Google - to track all the data that goes through them under the same generic/unified "privacy" policy, and then feed it into its advertising system. That's why OnHub is a Google product.

astrocyte 11y ago
And that's exactly why it won't be getting put in my home.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
fraserharris 11y ago
This was a primary motivation for Google+ as well - a single unified login under one unified privacy policy.
endtime 11y ago
I hate to burst your bubble, but it's actually just a branding thing, and has been in the works for much longer than anyone involved knew that Alphabet was going to happen. The team that built this is part of the same company as Google Fiber (disclaimer: for which I work), which is in fact no longer part of Google Inc.
- kuschku 11y ago
  Well, if they wanted to track data through this, though, they either have to make it under the Google brand, or can’t sell it in Europe.
- curun1r 11y ago
  > but it's actually just a branding thing I've heard it's mostly a liability thing. When projects like the self-driving car were directly under Google, Google's assets were fair game in any lawsuit over that technology. With the current setup, liability is siloed in each legal entity which gives the cash cow, Google, more protection. More here: http://www.theverge.com/2015/8/13/9149431/alphabet-google-corporate-tax-restructuring-liability-google-x http://www.theverge.com/2015/8/13/9149431/alphabet-google-co...

fweespeech 11y ago

> 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&qid=1439920378&pf_rd_p=2170510902&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_t=301&pf_rd_s=desktop-auto-sparkle&pf_rd_r=1GZB2QQ2TEH9Y8J6SS1B&pf_rd_i=TP-LINK http://www.amazon.com/dp/B013ALA9LA?ref=spks_0_0_2170510902&... > OnHub Wireless Router from Google and TP-LINK > by TP-LINK 1) You complain about the quality of TP-LINK products and think the solution is....another TP-LINK product, likely measured in the same way. 2) Honestly, I cannot think of a consumer AP that would actually perform to your expectations [apartment complex with 30+ competitors, saturating all the channels] that would be priced at $300, let alone $200. I can tell you right now, this Google AP won't do it either. Its "up to 1900mbps" for a reason. Trust me. Buying this won't be a magical solution to your problems if you real world gigabit speeds. ---- To the folks complaining about "magical routers": A) Buy something from Ubiquiti Networks. B) Buy something you can flash with WRT firmware. In both cases, as long as you understand the hardware specs, you'll get something better than the norm. In Ubiquiti's case, I'm 99% sure it will outperform a Google branded TP-Link AP unless Google is heavily subsidizing and QAing everything.

lallysingh 11y ago
Really? I paid more for that for my last one. ASUS RT-AC68U when it just came out...
melvinram 11y ago
I have a 1 Gbps fiber connection at my apartment. I spent a good hour doing research and finally bought this http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00BUSDVBQ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00BUSDVBQ. It had 4.5 stars at the time and was the highest rated router that Amazon carried. I bought it, plugged it in and ran speedtest on it. Max speed I could get was 250mb/s. Not bad but not the gb/s that was getting advertised. Additional, over time, it would always slow down to 10-50mb/s. I called TP-Link and they said this was likely the best it'll do and the advertised speeds are in an interference free lab environment. If OnHub fixes that second problem as they claim to, that would be more than enough reason for me to spend the $200. If they can get higher than 250mb/s speed by optimizing around the congestion, $200 will be well worth the spend.

mihok 11y ago

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

legacy2013 11y ago
https://on.google.com/hub/#specs 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
- kllrnohj 11y ago
  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.
  - fimoreth 11y ago
    The Linksys: http://www.linksys.com/us/p/P-WRT1900AC/ http://www.linksys.com/us/p/P-WRT1900AC/ Agreed, the specs between the WRT1900AC and the OnHub are strikingly similar. Even the advertised smart features.
- blister 11y ago
  Plus at least 4GB of storage.
- ropiku 11y ago
  It's a Dual Core ARM, it's expected for a good gigabit router.
- ceejayoz 11y ago
  I'd imagine it's basically off-the-shelf mobile hardware.
- cptskippy 11y ago
  The CPU is inline with top of the line routers these days (e.g. Asus RT-AC87U is a 1Ghz dual core). 1+Ghz dual core CPUs are really cheap these days. The RAM is about 4x what other routers are packing but the cost difference between a 1Gbit chip and 4Gbit chip is a few dollars. Prices have been plummeting this year and 8Gbit chips replaced 4Gbit as the new hotness. Not to mention DDR4 rolling out so there might just be dumping going on that makes adding 1GB of RAM a non issue.

dragonwriter 11y ago

> Also surprised this isn't an "Alphabet" product. Alphabet has been announced, but AFAIK the actual corporate transition hasn't yet occurred.

mbreese 11y ago
Not to mention Alphabet is a holding company and won't have any products. It will all be done through the subsidiary companies (e.g. the new Google).

Cacti 11y ago

It's comparable to the other top home commercial routers out there, like the Airport Extreme or Linksys 1900AC.

nadams 11y ago

> The configuration app is a very nice touch, routers have always a pain to configure. Basically this boils down to: The average home router which has basic to no settings (many even lack channel selection) but usage is poor to suboptimal. I had a Netgear router which had broken internal static routing - and netgear's response was to buy a different router (even though you could set it inside the router...). vs Buying a higher power router or installing DD-WRT, Tomato or any of the other firmwares - now you have 1000 configuration items but you don't know which ones to tweak to give you good performance. I believe most people fall into the middle - they want something that's easy to use with good performance but with the ability to adjust the 1000 configuration items if they wanted to.

dragonwriter 11y ago
> I believe most people fall into the middle - they want something that's easy to use with good performance but with the ability to adjust the 1000 configuration items if they wanted to. I think most people want something that just works. (Most HN readers might want something where they can adjust 1000 configuration settings, but most people I think would never want to.)

chaostheory 11y ago

> I'm surprised this isn't marketed alongside the Nest branch. I'm surprised that it isn't a Nest branded product that the Nest division ultimately controls. Looking at Google's history, I wouldn't be surprised if the Nest division came out with their own wifi router as well. I'm hoping that this doesn't turn into another Google TV release where the product is barely beta.

mrwilliamchang 11y ago

I think the best way to judge this product is as a hub for a smart home. The fact that it is an easy to wifi router is incidental (in spite of the fact that is all the marketing is talking about). It seems pretty clear, "onHub" is suppose to be a hub for a bunch of "on" branded smart home devices.

mrwilliamchang 11y ago
I've written some more fleshed out thoughts here: https://medium.com/@mrwilliamchang/onhub-is-not-a-router-focused-on-simplicity-9e623103d00d https://medium.com/@mrwilliamchang/onhub-is-not-a-router-foc...