24 ms·
Introducing a new kind of Wi-Fi system
- rmanalan 10y agoI just bought an OnHub last year. WTF Google?!
- kyriakos 10y agodoesn't make me feel good buying this one knowing that next year they might abandon it....
- mmanfrin 10y agoThey released an 'updated' OnHub 3 months later; they really don't care about early adopters.
- mikecb 10y agoIt was the same hardware, with a different headline feature. This _is_ part of the onhub ecosystem, and onhubs will be able to be a part of this mesh.
- wmf 10y agoAnd you just got an email saying that OnHub and the new Wifi router use the same OnHub firmware, which presumably will be maintained at least until the Google This-Time-We're-Serious router comes out.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> 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?
- agentdrtran 10y agoThe OnHub still has a disabled USB port and is missing other features - it's been abandoned.
- ocdtrekkie 10y agoThe problem is Google sells products like the OnHub with indications that more is coming. It was strongly hinted that the OnHub was going to be the center of Google's soon to come Google Home solution. 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.
- mikecb 10y agoThis is part of Onhub, which can be a part of the mesh, and they both use the same app.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- Nmatares 10y agoOnHub works with Google Wifi and will receive all of the updates announced today. https://support.google.com/onhub/answer/7168220 https://support.google.com/onhub/answer/7168220
- calinet6 10y agoSerious 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.
- kyriakos 10y agodepends how large your house is, the material of the walls etc. I personally do need multiple routers to get wifi throughout the house.
- xahrepap 10y agoI had nothing but problems with typical consumer hardware. Having to restart routers all the time. Dead spots. When family would visit (both my wife and I have large families) they would connect at least 2 devices each to my wifi (tablet, phone, laptop, etc). My wireless would just tank. They would always ask me why my internet was so terrible. Last year I bought an Edge router and a higher end Netgear hotspot. Works wonders separating things out and letting me easily add separate "Guest" wireless networks on different channels or whatever using my older devices. If I were to have done that change now I would've definitely used a device like Google's. But to do something like that would've been outside my budget. I wish I could easily add new hotspots that just seamlessly worked so that I could eliminate the dead spots on the edges of my house and in my yard over time. Maybe there's something I don't know already and I don't need Google's new Wifi System. But it definitely seems to fix my usecase.
- unprepare 10y ago> I wish I could easily add new hotspots that just seamlessly worked so that I could eliminate the dead spots on the edges of my house and in my yard over time. Ubiquiti has wifi APs and you can add them whenever youd like. They automatically detect the existing APs and download their config.
- calinet6 10y agoI could be lighting a fire by saying this, but I've been using AirPorts for 5 years and haven't had a single issue. Is the issue just that the non-Apple-customer market didn't have a good analogue?
- Apreche 10y agoYou can tell this product is made by people who live in suburban McMansions. In a 1 BR NYC apartment, you have no problems with wifi coverage.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> You can tell this product is made by people who live in suburban McMansions. In a 1 BR NYC apartment, you have no problems with wifi coverage. More relevantly, for instead of by (though its quite possible both are true), but, sure, in a small urban apartment, coverage isn't going to be your big issue, and you aren't going to need a set of routers forming a mesh network. OTOH, lots of people don't live in small urban apartments and use the internet.
- rch 10y agoSo split it with a couple of neighbors...
- wmf 10y agoThey do sell a 1-pack, although in that configuration really the only benefit is automatic security updates.
- the_watcher 10y agoOr, just not 1BR NYC apartments. So, the majority of Americans.
- the_watcher 10y agoSo they didn't build this product for your use case. Is that supposed to mean that they can't try to solve the problems that others have?
- thescriptkiddie 10y agoTo be fair, if you live in a masonry building or even a particularly thick-walled reinforced concrete building, you might have trouble covering all of the rooms of a 2-3 bedroom apartment with a single AP.
- ryanobjc 10y ago
- biot 10y agoDespite 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?
- ocdtrekkie 10y agoI'd suggest unless Google's providing a fully open source solution, you should never trust them enough to purchase a networking device from them.
- api 10y agoI'd guess everything that can conceivably be reported.
- jaytaylor 10y agoI feel the same way. Was also disappointed with my Chromecast after it just stopped being able to connect to wifi and eventually wouldn't even boot at all. What kind of warranty and privacy disclosures does this solution come with?
- mariusz79 10y agoThe list of features is missing one important item - Using these we will be better able to monitor your indoor whereabouts.
- SEJeff 10y agoAnd in specific, lookup Tomographic Motion Detection ala: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8updJWoSxE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8updJWoSxE http://www.securityelectronicsandnetworks.com/articles/2014/06/24/xandem-tmd-tomographic-motion-detection-review http://www.securityelectronicsandnetworks.com/articles/2014/...
- captn3m0 10y agoThis is a nice piece of recent research: Keystroke Recognition Using WiFi Signals [0]: https://www.sigmobile.org/mobicom/2015/papers/p90-aliA.pdf https://www.sigmobile.org/mobicom/2015/papers/p90-aliA.pdf
- raldi 10y agoAnd then what? What's the hypothetical secret evil plan?
- dorianm 10y agoI actually just got a "Wi-Fi booster"[1] for my place to have good Wi-Fi upstairs and it's amazing (it even has an ethernet port) [1]: https://www.amazon.fr/Netgear-WN3000RP-200FRS-R%C3%A9p%C3%A9teur-Wifi-N300/dp/B00MWNWEIE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1475607805&sr=8-1&keywords=wifi+booster https://www.amazon.fr/Netgear-WN3000RP-200FRS-R%C3%A9p%C3%A9...
- ebf6 10y ago> The system uses a technology called mesh Wi-Fi (something usually only seen in expensive commercial installations). This is misleading. You can create your own mesh networks with several off-the-shelf routers / access points using open source software like batman-advanced [0]. [0] https://www.open-mesh.org/projects/batman-adv/wiki https://www.open-mesh.org/projects/batman-adv/wiki
- dragonwriter 10y agoI don't think its misleading to anyone -- the kind of people to whom aftermarket open source software for routers is a reasonable solution won't be misled, and its completely accurate for the people for whom what comes built in with the router is the only thing of interest.
- ebf6 10y agoBut that's different from saying "something usually only seen in expensive commercial installations". And it is still misleading, accuracy of some information has nothing to do with what someone is looking for (a self-contained, plug-and-play mesh network).
- dragonwriter 10y ago> But that's different from saying "something usually only seen in expensive commercial installations". No, its not. The fact that there are inexpensive alternative means by which it can be deployed, and by which certain segments of the population can and do deploy it, doesn't make it any less true that it is usually only seen in expensive commercial installations. > And it is still misleading if it tends to mislead one group of people more than another group. I don't think it tends to mislead any group at all. I think that the group to whom the exceptions to the "usual" case accurately described here is relevant will be well aware of it and so not misled, and the group who is not interested will also not be misled by the accurate statement, even though they are likely to be less aware of the nature of the alternative.
- 10y ago
- andrewpe 10y agoAnyone notice they are using their new TLD?
- sp332 10y agoYeah, I thought they were only using that internally. Well, there used to be an April Fool's page at elgoog.google which was just a mirror-image of the homepage, but that's gone now.
- striking 10y agoI think you mean http://com.google http://com.google, which is indeed now just a redirect. I think someone discovered a vulnerability in it.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- Animats 10y agoLots 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/ https://eero.com/ * Ubuquiti: https://www.ubnt.com https://www.ubnt.com * Cisco: http://www.cisco.com 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?
- drzaiusapelord 10y agoNo. It comes with pretty much nothing but a nice little price break. You get a 3-pack for $299. The Eero 3-pack is $499.00. This is a serious price break in this market, which is currently over-priced. You can get 3 Ubiquities for almost $300. A lot less user friendly, but $500 for 3 units is holding back mass adoption. Personally, for my home I need just two units. Shame there's no $199 2-pack yet. It would be an instant buy for me.
- fps 10y agoUbiquiti's Amplifi is $199 for 3 units.
- hossbeast 10y agoAmplifi has 3 models. The high end, the amplifi HD is $350 for a 3 pack
- uptown 10y agoBuy the three pack and sell one?
- resonantjacket5 10y agoIf they made a 2 pack it would probably be around $230 with my guesstimate. 3-pack $300 or $100/item 2-pack $230 or $115/item 1-pack $130 or $130/item
- eridius 10y agoFor Ubiquiti I'd suggest linking to https://www.amplifi.com https://www.amplifi.com instead of ubnt.com. AmpliFi is their mesh networking product aimed at consumers, whereas almost everything on ubnt.com is aimed at enterprise use.
- SamuelAdams 10y agoHow is Mesh networking different from a wireless repeater? Yes, there's a nicer UI for this, but are there any technical advantages?
- ebf6 10y agoThe difference between the two isn't in the UI. Wireless repeaters traditionally have a set receiving and transmission point. Let's assume that signal interference / reflection / amplification does no matter, for the sake of simplicity in this example. So if you have a chain of three repeaters A <--> B <--> C, and then you move access point C closer to A (closer than B is to A), then the topology does not change (do you see the issue here?). Worse, if you have a longer chain with a few alternatives, then a single point going down (call it X) would require nodes previously connected to X to be reconfigured. Mesh networks automatically judge the path of least resistance to a destination, and distribute the state of all the access points on a network. If one access point goes down, all the access points previously connected to the faulty access point will find alternatives if there's anything else within signal range. In this case, if those are meant to be portable access points, you can move them between different rooms without worrying about nodes choosing a suboptimal path.
- obrienmd 10y agoAnyone know if this is going to make use of modern AQM (fq_codel or cake) like OnHub did? OnHub used the Qualcomm brand name for it: "Streamboost".
- throw7 10y agoI'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).
- wmf 10y agoThere is no Web interface; you really do have to use the app.
- rootbear 10y agoWell, that's a deal breaker. I don't own an Android device. There's no excuse for not providing a web interface.
- mikecb 10y agoiPhone or Android.
- rootbear 10y agoOkay, that's a bit better, but it should still have a web interface.
- mikecb 10y agoThere are security implications: How do you provision a cert for it? Do you really want it running a full web server? The native application is pretty great, because I can manage it from anywhere. (Which includes managing my parents one from anywhere.) I've honestly not needed a web interface, after getting used to it. A web interface is reportedly on the roadmap, but not a high priority. The last time it came up on reddit, the question asked by the PM was "how would you use it differently than the native app?" And the nice thing is, he takes those suggestions and feedback seriously.
- deleted 10y ago
- eridius 10y agoI'm surprised nobody here has yet questioned the wisdom of allowing Google access to literally all of your internet traffic. This is actually a commercial product that you pay money for, so maybe they're all aboveboard here, but with Google's history of trying to get as much personal data as possible about everybody makes me unwilling to trust them with something like this. 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.
- acdha 10y agoI realize it's popular to peddle conspiracy theories about Google in some circles but think about just how many people use Google search, Gmail, Chrome, Android, etc. – do you really think their choice of routers matters more? There's also an inconvenient truth that such problems are greatly hindered by … Google in their prominent role improving security for average users. If their goal was to spy on people, they'd be the last to push HTTPS, HSTS, HKP, various TLS hardening, etc. rather than one of the first.
- IMcD23 10y agoNone of those technologies you listed make it harder for Google to collect information from you, but instead make it harder for 3rd parties to intercept that data in transit.
- linsomniac 10y agoYou mean in transit like through one of their wireless APs? :-D
- notatoad 10y agoIf they were attempting to collect information via your router, those technologies would absolutely hamper them.
- spynxic 10y agoMesh-based Device Triangulation
- mikecb 10y agoJust for everyone focusing on gimmicky features, this is an OnHub, which are intended to just work. Under the hood, they run ChromiumOS, including things like trusted boot (yes, this home router has a tpm), and the A/B partitions so when you get an automatic update, (which happens during a time of low bandwidth usage), it reboots into the new version in about 6 seconds. The security team is awesome: they pushed an update to all onhubs within 48 hours of public disclosure of a critical RCE earlier this year. There has been some slowness to expected features, like ipv6, but the PMs have been clear about their goal: they won't include a feature that's buggy. It's exactly what you want in a piece of infrastructure.
- modeless 10y agoWait, OnHub doesn't support IPv6?! That's inexcusable. There's no reason IPv6 couldn't "just work" too. Google Wifi had better support IPv6 at launch.
- ryanlol 10y ago>That's inexcusable Except it's not, we live in an IPv4 world. Edit: How are you guys downvoting me on your v6 connections? HN only supports v4.
- modeless 10y agoMaybe you haven't checked lately but we live in a world where IPv6 adoption is over 10% (over 25% in the US) after doubling each year for the past 6 years. https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html
- jrockway 10y agoIPv6 is important, but it's not like your ISP will lower your bill if you forego IPv4, and it's not like there are IPv6-only sites. If I recall correctly, I have to pay _extra_ for an IPv6 address.
- cynix 10y agoWhy are all these mesh Wi-Fi products (Google Wifi, Eero, UBNT AmpliFi, ...) only available in the US?
- lobster_johnson 10y agoUbiquity products are available in Europe.
- cynix 10y ago"The AmpliFi online store is currently available only for US-based customers."
- lobster_johnson 10y agoYou have to buy from a European reseller.
- cynix 10y agoSince the power plug is built into the repeaters, I assume I won't be able to plug it directly into my Australian wall socket.
- TheSpiceIsLife 10y agoMaybe. I've modded more than one device from the US for AU power by changing 1 capacitor for a higher voltage unit. I believe European mains is 220 volts and our Australian mains is 230 volts, so it should be fine. I think. Might need an adapter or change the plug.
- bikamonki 10y agoIntroducing a new way to spy on you? A WiFi repeater will do the trick...
- vikiomega9 10y agoI guess the lay persons question at this point is why not just publish the software and dispel any notion of privacy infringement?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- spullara 10y agoMy Airports work just fine and have worked for years. I think that the WiFi issues are mostly that people are only willing to pay like $50 for their WiFi router. At this price point I'm not sure it changes anything.
- pat2man 10y agoIf you try to use multiple Airport routers together without Ethernet you get severely reduced bandwidth. These routers (and other similar products) have multiple radios which allow mesh networking without reducing bandwidth as much. In a large house where running cable isn't an option having a mesh network can solve a lot of issues. In a small apartment a single access point is probably sufficient.
- spullara 10y agoThey have multiple radios and my bandwidth is basically capped by my comcast internet at around 180 Mbps which I get everywhere in the house with 2 airports, one extending the other.
- bakman329 10y agoThe problems with this are the same as the rest of the things announced today(except the pixel, in my opinion): Too expensive, and not much to set it apart.
- anderber 10y agoI believe Google Home is cheaper than Amazon's Echo too. But in general I agree with you.
- millstone 10y agoI've used my Airport Express to extend my Airport Base Station for years. Is this "mesh networking?" How is Google WiFi different?
- pat2man 10y agoIf you ran an Ethernet cable you probably get a similar experience. Otherwise Airport routers use a single radio for communicating with the other access point and clients. This greatly reduces bandwidth.