Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

juusan · Oct 29, 2003, 04:28 PM

I just bought a new ibook (shipping monday!) and with it I ordered an airport extreme card, mostly for use around town and on campus. I'm now thinking of getting wifi for the house, and I'm wondering if it's worth it to spend the $200 on apple's base station or if I should go get a netgear or linksys for $100-150.

is there any real difference? shouldn't any 802.11g router work?

also, can someone clue me in on what exactly the difference is between a wifi router and a wifi access point? I can't seem to get a straight answer from the manufacturer websites.

maxintosh · Oct 29, 2003, 04:39 PM

Apple's is WAYYYYY overpriced. It's only advantage is being able to use Mac OS X's built-in Airport admin utilities. Other base stations are configured via any web browser. I don't think it's worth the price difference at all. My Airport base station fried itself, and I replaced it with a Netgear router... no regrets.

Access point vs. router... nothing. It's just stupid consumer-trapping jargon. An Access Point is simply the internet connection the Wireless Router gives you.

aaanorton · Oct 29, 2003, 05:20 PM

Originally posted by maxintosh:
Apple's is WAYYYYY overpriced. It's only advantage is being able to use Mac OS X's built-in Airport admin utilities.

I wouldn't get an AEBS either, but I do think they offer certain features that others do not. The most important (in my opinion) is wireless bridging, followed by USB printer sharing. But if you're not going to use these, get something else.

Access point vs. router... nothing. It's just stupid consumer-trapping jargon. An Access Point is simply the internet connection the Wireless Router gives you.

Actually, there is a difference. A router routes and an access point simply replaces an ethernet cable. The confusion comes from the fact that most products now have both functions included, so it seems like they are the same. A router is able to take one IP address from, say, your cable ISP and share that IP with other clients by assigning them internal IPs, usually via DHCP. An access point is just a device that connects after the router to allow wireless clients to connect to/through the router.

juusan,
The first thing you want to do is decide if you REALLY need Extreme or not. If you simply want to surf the net and stuff, 802.11b is plenty fast (much faster than your internet connection) and considerably cheaper and more reliable. I really like the Netgear MR814. It's .11b and you can pick one up for 30 (!) bucks.

juusan · Oct 29, 2003, 05:39 PM

Originally posted by aaanorton:

Actually, there is a difference. A router routes and an access point simply replaces an ethernet cable. The confusion comes from the fact that most products now have both functions included, so it seems like they are the same. A router is able to take one IP address from, say, your cable ISP and share that IP with other clients by assigning them internal IPs, usually via DHCP. An access point is just a device that connects after the router to allow wireless clients to connect to/through the router.

ok, so I would have to buy a router that was an access point also? I've seen a few that are both, but many just say 'router'. I'm assuming that if I get _only_ this 'router' I would still need an access point. am I getting this right?

juusan,
The first thing you want to do is decide if you REALLY need Extreme or not. If you simply want to surf the net and stuff, 802.11b is plenty fast (much faster than your internet connection) and considerably cheaper and more reliable. I really like the Netgear MR814. It's .11b and you can pick one up for 30 (!) bucks.

I have fairly quick DSL... would 802.11b still be a better choice? can windows machines print from the print sharing capabilities of an AEBS?

thanks for your help

aaanorton · Oct 29, 2003, 06:09 PM

Originally posted by juusan:
ok, so I would have to buy a router that was an access point also? I've seen a few that are both, but many just say 'router'. I'm assuming that if I get _only_ this 'router' I would still need an access point. am I getting this right?

A wireless router, by definition, includes an access point. This is what makes it "wireless". Generally, these will also include multiple wired ports as well, which allow you to connect more wired clients and other devices.

An access point is just that. It has no routing capabilities.

To me, it doesn't make sense to get a router AND an access point, cuz the prices for the combined units are so cheap. Plus I like one box to do both those functions: less clutter.

I have fairly quick DSL...

Doesn't matter. 802.11b is still several times faster than the fastest consumer broadband available today. My cable service regularly gives me 3 mbps, which is probably 2x your DSL speed. I never notice slowdowns due to my MR814.

would 802.11b still be a better choice? can windows machines print from the print sharing capabilities of an AEBS?

The big advantage of .11g is when you need to regularly transfer LARGE files between computers on your LAN, say from a PB to a G4. But if you don't plan on doing a lot of this (with large files), then save your money and get .11b. For 30 bucks, you could just use this til .11g gets more reliable and/or you develop a need for a speed increase. It's 30 bucks!!! I easily spend that for dinner at some places. That's like going to a movie with someone... I can't see how you can go wrong at that price.
I've read mixed reviews on windows printing through an AEBS. Try searching the Networking forum for more info on that.

juusan · Oct 29, 2003, 06:57 PM

Originally posted by aaanorton:

It's 30 bucks!!! I easily spend that for dinner at some places. That's like going to a movie with someone... I can't see how you can go wrong at that price.
I've read mixed reviews on windows printing through an AEBS. Try searching the Networking forum for more info on that.

point taken. since I'm a student, $30 is more within my range!

thanks again!

Cadaver · Oct 30, 2003, 12:40 AM

While I will abstain from voting for or against any particular wireless base station, the one thing my AirPort Extreme base has that I really, really like is the USB printer port on it. Makes wireless print serving a no-brainer. I've even got a Windows XP PC configured to print though it; no Mac is required to be even powered on.

My wife has the PC, I use a dual G5, my oldest child plays on an iBook and my youngest two share an old iMac. One printer, no hassles (and no need to configure one of the computers to act as the print server).

**The one caveat is that you must have a supported printer (listed on Apple's website).

Cadaver · Oct 30, 2003, 12:43 AM

Originally posted by juusan:
can windows machines print from the print sharing capabilities of an AEBS?

See my post above. Very easy to configure XP to print through the AEBS. Probably the same procedure for Win2K. Not sure about Win9x, but who cares

garetjax · Oct 30, 2003, 09:19 PM

Yeah, aaanorton tipped me on the netgear MR814 a few months ago, which I bought for $50, instead of Apple's. It works great! I think it even has a better range than the ABS. I thought I was going to have trouble configuring it with my ibook but ended up having no glitches at all. They're even cheaper now. Unless you're swapping video or very large files within your home network, G and superG will be overkill.

Hey, I just ordered an iMac with an extreme card. I know they're backward compatible with 802.11b, but for those of you who are using Apple's AE cards with netgear MR814 routers, is the range pretty good or not as good as the regular airport cards?

GJ

CIA · Oct 30, 2003, 10:14 PM

I'm using a MR814 and the range is super good inside.
On a side-note, I unless you are doing large file transfers, I would stick with 802.11b. 802.11g is OK, but with 802.11n just around the corner, 802.11g may be dead soon. 802.11Super-G (Netgear is shipping a version of this) is a VERY early version of 802.11n, 802.11n promises 100BT speeds over wireless, but could go as high as 320! The standard (802.11n) should be finalized next year. So I would say stick with 802.11b untill 802.11n comes out.

CIA · Oct 30, 2003, 10:17 PM

I forgot, I posted a thread here around a month ago about this....

ph0ust · Oct 31, 2003, 02:11 PM

Originally posted by CIA:
I'm using a MR814 and the range is super good inside.
On a side-note, I unless you are doing large file transfers, I would stick with 802.11b. 802.11g is OK, but with 802.11n just around the corner, 802.11g may be dead soon. 802.11Super-G (Netgear is shipping a version of this) is a VERY early version of 802.11n, 802.11n promises 100BT speeds over wireless, but could go as high as 320! The standard (802.11n) should be finalized next year. So I would say stick with 802.11b untill 802.11n comes out.

i would recommend the opposite actually. .11b is dead and already antiquated, while .11g is able to be firmware upgraded to .11i which will include massive security upgrades. many of these are already available.

.11n is mostly directed towards corporate wlans and will cost waaaay more. i also doubt we will see anything with it for well over a year. regardless, there will always be a next generation sitting somewhere in the future. .11g is fast and the protocol can actually be upgraded!

as a side note, there is never a reason to get networking gear just from apple, as all networking gear is *protocol* based. since they all use the same protocols your selection on gear s hould be based on price, performance and any value-ads they include (cool mgt features, etc.) just my opinion though

Kenneth · Oct 31, 2003, 03:13 PM

Grab the AirPort Extreme Technical Overview and scroll down to page 26.

aaanorton · Oct 31, 2003, 03:36 PM

Originally posted by ph0ust:
i would recommend the opposite actually. .11b is dead and already antiquated,...

Funny, hadn't noticed. It's hard to tell it's dead when it keeps my LAN up for so long, so reliably...
There is ABSOLUTELY no reason to spend more money on g, n or i etc. etc., if all you want to do is surf the net wirelessly. In addition, if you spend a very small amount of money on b eqpt now, it will last you til the faster stuff:
� comes down in price
� gets more stable (search the Networking forum for AE threads)
� is more necessary (when faster broadband becomes available)

CIA · Nov 1, 2003, 12:42 AM

The problem is, 802.11b has critical mass, whereas 802.11g does not. In mixed networks, like offices, people are going with B because of price. I'm all for speed, but like FW800, few people need the boost.