2 ms·
> Nobody competes with them as 'Apple for networking' Apple used to ;_; I was still using my Airport Expresses until they gave out. Didn't care if they didn't
by hot_gril 4y ago
> Nobody competes with them as 'Apple for networking'
Apple used to ;_;
I was still using my Airport Expresses until they gave out. Didn't care if they didn't have the latest wifi standards, they were way easier to manage than Ubiquiti or anything else.
- mikestew 4y agoAs a hard-core Apple Airport user for a long time, the Apple stuff was great until it wasn't. For example, wanting to put the Xbox in the DMZ. You can do that on the Airports, but it's not called "DMZ" (IIRC) and it's not at all obvious. Whereas Ubiquiti is like the industrial version of an Airport or something, because if you do want to put devices in a DMZ or on a VLAN, you can do it and without a lot of effort. Of course, Ubiquiti's stuff has limitations, so the next stop is...MicroTik? Cisco? But, yeah, if Apple had kept the Airports going, I'd have had little reason to look elsewhere, and would probably still use them.
- hot_gril 4y agoI've seen the term "default host" on other routers too, so it's fair enough. AirPort settings were pretty full-featured for a consumer device, just lacked advanced routing stuff that I'd not use in a home anyway. It started falling apart when they made the new AirPort Utility, which hid some settings. I had to go install the old version.
- dotBen 4y agoThe founder of Ubiquiti used to be a radio engineer on the AirPort product at Apple. Part of the reason he left was because the line became devalued in Apple's product lineup and would ultimately be shelved.
- hot_gril 4y agoInteresting, I didn't know that. Apple lost a great engineer!