5 ms·

Why is it due to be replaced? Has your bandwidth speed substantially improved to the point that OnHub can no longer keep up? Because otherwise it sounds like yo

Why is it due to be replaced? Has your bandwidth speed substantially improved to the point that OnHub can no longer keep up? Because otherwise it sounds like you're happy with where you're at. There's no reason to replace a well-functioning device that does everything you need just because it's reached the end of the ever-shortening consumer electronics lifecycle. My own router is about ~7 years old, I have twice the devices connected as I did when I purchased it, and it still handle my 200Mbs broadband just fine among all devices in use.

acdha 5y ago
WiFi isn’t that simple: every generation makes substantial improvements in things like how they handle contention with multiple clients or interference. Since most of us have more than one device active these days, that is noticeable — especially if you have devices which also talk to each other rather than exclusively over the internet. When I replaced my 2016 OnHub + Google WiFi mesh with an Eero WiFi 6 system, I saw across the board improvements in latency and bandwidth from almost every client (faster ones more than doubled). We also lost the sporadic hangs for iOS devices which Google never fixed for totally innocent reasons.
- causi 5y ago
  Did you notice those improvements or did you just do benchmarks to see if they improved? Not everyone's needs are the same of course, but I have no complaints about my seven year old Nighthawk R7000. Latency-sensitive devices like game consoles are ethernet, phones and laptops are 5GHz, and everything else is 2.4GHz.
  - prmoustache 5y ago
    I think this is a case of first world country arrogance of putting perfectly working things in the landfill just for the heck of it.
  - acdha 5y ago
    I found it noticeable for anything latency sensitive - conferencing, Terraform/SSH, etc. (losing Google’s iOS hangs was extremely noticeable, of course, but that’s for a different reason) The key thing to remember is that there’s considerable variability across different peoples’ experience. If you live in a widely spaced suburban house, you probably don’t need to worry about interference the way an apartment dweller does or even someone in a city where the neighbor’s property starts a lot closer. The layout and materials used in your house similarly have a big impact on whether your devices are operating on 5GHz close to a base station or 2.4GHz further away. Since you have your latency sensitive devices on Ethernet, you probably are fine with an old AP. Cables are definitely better but not everyone has permission or a suitable way to run them (my house built in the 1930s did not include spare conduit).
- ineedasername 5y ago
  I think that what is simple for me is that I don't make those judgements based purely on age. If I'm not having noticeable problems with a 6-7 year old router then I'm not going to write off forced obsolescence as "well it was time to upgrade anyway". I already get the full 200Mbs speed that I pay for and 15-20ms ping & low jitter. Upgrading isn't going to do a lot for me. Everyone is able to make their own determination on that sort of thing, when they should upgrade. Or at least they used to be able to do that for this product class. Google is now baking in expiration dates that aren't even published at the time of purchase.
  - acdha 5y ago
    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 lot of people have routers which still work but are no longer secure, so this entire field seems right for a legal requirement of, say, a decade support period and/or mandatory recycling.
    - ineedasername 5y ago
      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 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. It is also something that would be ripe for regulatory capture. Separate from those issues is the consumer's ability to make an informed choice: A product with a potential expiration date should be required to market it as such. Google does this with Pixel phones; hopefully after this they will begin doing it with their other products as well, and I think that in general it should be required: MS does this with Windows, plenty of other vendors do it, there's no reason it can't be a universal requirement as part of consumer protection laws.
ajdude 5y ago
I’m guessing that Google has datamined everything that it could from all of the users who would get something like this, so there is no point financially in supporting it.

acdha 5y ago

WiFi isn’t that simple: every generation makes substantial improvements in things like how they handle contention with multiple clients or interference. Since most of us have more than one device active these days, that is noticeable — especially if you have devices which also talk to each other rather than exclusively over the internet. When I replaced my 2016 OnHub + Google WiFi mesh with an Eero WiFi 6 system, I saw across the board improvements in latency and bandwidth from almost every client (faster ones more than doubled). We also lost the sporadic hangs for iOS devices which Google never fixed for totally innocent reasons.

causi 5y ago
Did you notice those improvements or did you just do benchmarks to see if they improved? Not everyone's needs are the same of course, but I have no complaints about my seven year old Nighthawk R7000. Latency-sensitive devices like game consoles are ethernet, phones and laptops are 5GHz, and everything else is 2.4GHz.
- prmoustache 5y ago
  I think this is a case of first world country arrogance of putting perfectly working things in the landfill just for the heck of it.
- acdha 5y ago
  I found it noticeable for anything latency sensitive - conferencing, Terraform/SSH, etc. (losing Google’s iOS hangs was extremely noticeable, of course, but that’s for a different reason) The key thing to remember is that there’s considerable variability across different peoples’ experience. If you live in a widely spaced suburban house, you probably don’t need to worry about interference the way an apartment dweller does or even someone in a city where the neighbor’s property starts a lot closer. The layout and materials used in your house similarly have a big impact on whether your devices are operating on 5GHz close to a base station or 2.4GHz further away. Since you have your latency sensitive devices on Ethernet, you probably are fine with an old AP. Cables are definitely better but not everyone has permission or a suitable way to run them (my house built in the 1930s did not include spare conduit).
ineedasername 5y ago
I think that what is simple for me is that I don't make those judgements based purely on age. If I'm not having noticeable problems with a 6-7 year old router then I'm not going to write off forced obsolescence as "well it was time to upgrade anyway". I already get the full 200Mbs speed that I pay for and 15-20ms ping & low jitter. Upgrading isn't going to do a lot for me. Everyone is able to make their own determination on that sort of thing, when they should upgrade. Or at least they used to be able to do that for this product class. Google is now baking in expiration dates that aren't even published at the time of purchase.
- acdha 5y ago
  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 lot of people have routers which still work but are no longer secure, so this entire field seems right for a legal requirement of, say, a decade support period and/or mandatory recycling.
  - ineedasername 5y ago
    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 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. It is also something that would be ripe for regulatory capture. Separate from those issues is the consumer's ability to make an informed choice: A product with a potential expiration date should be required to market it as such. Google does this with Pixel phones; hopefully after this they will begin doing it with their other products as well, and I think that in general it should be required: MS does this with Windows, plenty of other vendors do it, there's no reason it can't be a universal requirement as part of consumer protection laws.

ajdude 5y ago

I’m guessing that Google has datamined everything that it could from all of the users who would get something like this, so there is no point financially in supporting it.