3 ms·

Thanks for your suggestion! What filters would you like to see there? I have had some comments also along the lines of it being not obvious enough what the "sor

by proctor 10y ago

Thanks for your suggestion! What filters would you like to see there? I have had some comments also along the lines of it being not obvious enough what the "sort" buttons do; Do you think the page is to "bare bones?" As for the C2600, I do not believe it is stable yet, and still being worked on. I deliberately don't put "trunk" only builds on the page because not everyone is sufficiently technical to deal with them. It should show up soon though by the looks of things (will be stable soon-ish).

wtallis 10y ago
Definitely include a more detailed explanation of the criteria for inclusion and rankings, and if possible a breakdown of the sub-scores that went in to the final score (this can be a separate page per device, since it would clutter the main chart). It sounds like some of this (the weights, at least) is subjective, so transparency is important. If this is really aimed at the less technical/experienced crowd that can't cope with the command line, then you need a lot more background information explained: the hardware revision bait and switch business model, what the benefits actually are of open-source router firmware, the major differences between DD-WRT and OpenWRT (and LEDE). Explain that Broadcom WiFi is about as open-source friendly as NVidia graphics, and that DD-WRT can do very little to help with WiFi issues on those hardware platforms. It would be great if you could offer guidance for what constitutes fast enough, ie. that "tri-band" routers won't help anything, client WiFi devices don't support more than 3 streams, and an ARM processor isn't necessary if your WAN is only 100Mbps. Also add warnings for devices that only support 100Mb Ethernet on the WAN port or all ports, and make sure to cap the amount that their WiFi speeds can contribute to the performance score. Alternatively, if your target audience is people who know generally what kind of hardware they need and just need to know which product currently delivers that at the best price and with third-party OS support, then add filters on major categories like NIC vendor (BRCM/QCA/MTK), built-in flash quantity (because 8MB isn't always enough), and radio MIMO class. More generally, it doesn't serve the public good if your chart is just abstract bragging rights that can be gamed by things like including more RAM than necessary or a useless extra radio for a 150% price increase. The market should be discouraged from producing overpriced overpowered devices that have no real-world use, even if they are to some extent hackable.

by proctor 10y ago

wtallis 10y ago

Definitely include a more detailed explanation of the criteria for inclusion and rankings, and if possible a breakdown of the sub-scores that went in to the final score (this can be a separate page per device, since it would clutter the main chart). It sounds like some of this (the weights, at least) is subjective, so transparency is important. If this is really aimed at the less technical/experienced crowd that can't cope with the command line, then you need a lot more background information explained: the hardware revision bait and switch business model, what the benefits actually are of open-source router firmware, the major differences between DD-WRT and OpenWRT (and LEDE). Explain that Broadcom WiFi is about as open-source friendly as NVidia graphics, and that DD-WRT can do very little to help with WiFi issues on those hardware platforms. It would be great if you could offer guidance for what constitutes fast enough, ie. that "tri-band" routers won't help anything, client WiFi devices don't support more than 3 streams, and an ARM processor isn't necessary if your WAN is only 100Mbps. Also add warnings for devices that only support 100Mb Ethernet on the WAN port or all ports, and make sure to cap the amount that their WiFi speeds can contribute to the performance score. Alternatively, if your target audience is people who know generally what kind of hardware they need and just need to know which product currently delivers that at the best price and with third-party OS support, then add filters on major categories like NIC vendor (BRCM/QCA/MTK), built-in flash quantity (because 8MB isn't always enough), and radio MIMO class. More generally, it doesn't serve the public good if your chart is just abstract bragging rights that can be gamed by things like including more RAM than necessary or a useless extra radio for a 150% price increase. The market should be discouraged from producing overpriced overpowered devices that have no real-world use, even if they are to some extent hackable.