Agreed.. Hopefully this new stuff will be better.  Maybe not.

> On Oct 7, 2015, at 3:42 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> camium isn't known for their centralized management of anything being a good 
> investment
> 
>> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Josh Baird <[email protected]> wrote:
>> .. again, no comments about the Cambium cnPilot stuff?  Even from WISPs that 
>> primarily use Cambium gear?
>> 
>> Sounds like a decent feature set; PoE, ATA, centralized management, dual 
>> band, etc.  Haven't seen any in action, but at least it sounds promising.
>> 
>> On Oct 7, 2015, at 3:36 PM, Glen Waldrop <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> I've had the Netgear 3700 series completely blow out the 2.4GHz band for 60 
>>> seconds every 5 minutes, two different ones. Not sure of the exact model, 
>>> been a little while since I fooled with one.
>>> 
>>> MT assured us on the forum that they are seeking UNII certifications. I'm 
>>> not banking on it and buying a ton of their hardware based on a promise, 
>>> but I'm keeping a few on hand for specific shots.
>>>  
>>>  
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Ken Hohhof
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 12:49 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Consumer routers?
>>> 
>>> If a customer insists on a recommendation, I say every router you can buy 
>>> in the store has problems, but the least problematic seems to be Netgear as 
>>> long as you get at least a 3000 series.  I have seen a high field failure 
>>> rate on the WNR2000, and they can die a slow lingering flakey death rather 
>>> than just falling over dead.  Probably a WNDR3700 if you want gigabit and 
>>> 3400 if you don’t.  Some customers get to the store and get a 4500 because 
>>> it’s on sale or $10 more.  I like having gigabit ports but many customers 
>>> these days don’t have a single wired device.  The Netgear routers come with 
>>> the WiFi already secured, they can be set to wireless access point mode, 
>>> and they have a lifetime warranty (but who is going to go through the 
>>> trouble).  On the downside some laptops with Intel 802.11ac WiFi refuse to 
>>> play nice with the Netgears, and the PPPoE default has to be changed from 
>>> dial on demand.
>>>  
>>> I will no longer sell routers to customers, many years of bad experiences.  
>>> But I will lease a managed Mikrotik (a nice one – typically a RB951G-2HnD 
>>> or RB2011) for $5/month including free replacement.  I won’t sell a 
>>> Mikrotik to a customer for them to manage unless the customer is an IT 
>>> professional.
>>>  
>>> This does mean I don’t have a dual band (much less 802.11ac) managed router 
>>> solution.  Given our rural customer base, the 2.4 only WiFi usually works 
>>> out better than dual band.  Occasionally I wish for dual band so we could 
>>> segregate some weak WiFi clients (like Dropcams) onto their own band.  
>>> Mikrotik doesn’t seem to want to deal with getting equipment FCC approved 
>>> in 5 GHz.
>>>  
>>> Some of the routers customers have bought that have been problematic:  
>>> Cradlepoint, Securifi, Amped Wireless (at least the range extenders).
>>>  
>>>  
>>> From: Brett A Mansfield
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 11:30 AM
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Consumer routers?
>>>  
>>> I've had very bad luck with Belkin, D-Link, Asus (the worst), linksys, and 
>>> low end netgear. I've had great success with the higher end netgear and the 
>>> 3rd through 5th gen Apple AirPort Extreme. Prior to the 3rd gen and the 6th 
>>> gen (latest) airports are junk. So I'm with you, pretty much every consumer 
>>> grade router is trash now.
>>> 
>>> Thank you,
>>> Brett A Mansfield
>>> 
>>>> On Oct 7, 2015, at 9:58 AM, Glen Waldrop <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Are there any consumer routers that don't suck      these days?
>>>> 
>>>> I used to recommend Linksys/Cisco, but since the Belkin buyout quality 
>>>> seems to be going down. They jink with teh firewall and I can't block 
>>>> specific outgoing traffic, can't remote admin anymore, etc...
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as 
> part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.

Reply via email to