AirPort Base Stations: Will Apple Ever Return to Wi-Fi Router Market?

[JPS127]

Probably not, and it bums me out.

There's something to be said for the simplicity and control via software (Apple App) they offered.

It was a very polished offering that I really enjoyed.
I only stopped using my Airport Extreme about 2 years ago.

It's still sitting over to my right as I type this.

As I live in an 1815 house with horsehair walls that resist WiFi signals, I've relied on the Extreme and two Airport Expresses for years. So far they're working well, though lately there's sometimes a lag between the Xfinity modem and the Extreme. So I'm hoping for an upgraded system.

 

[kagharaht]

My Extreme AC and all previous ones never failed. I just upgraded to faster speeds and only reason I don't use the AC Tower anymore is because of Capacity limits and no mesh capability. Otherwise I would still be using them. My Velop AX 4200 bought in 2022 are very reliable for me since the last Firmware update. HK firmware update screwed them up and was not compatible. Thankfully I don't use HK, turned that off and it's been great ever since.

 

[ThomasJL]

Tim Cook is such a cheapskate that, despite Apple being one of the very richest companies in the world and thus having far more than enough money to hire new employees, he killed off the AirPort line to move those employees working on it to other projects.

Cook is a bean counter who only cares about maximizing profits. Unlike Steve Jobs, Cook doesn’t do what is best for customers. Cook does what is best for shareholders.

 

[norbinhouston]

If they do, they have their own wifi chips and they can put an older A/processor in it. It could be quite capable. Probably pricy but like the studio display, people will still buy them. And they have the software expertise. So why not.

 

[CapitalIdea]

Obviously the answer is no. These are now mostly commoditized, with the majority of broadband users perfectly happy with the one they get from their provider, and the devices last forever, so there’s no real reason to pursue a market where someone MAY buy something once a decade or even less.

 

[cateye]

Literally the only justification to buy an Apple router was, and remains, that you absolutely must have one with an Apple logo on it. The Time Capsules in particular dissipated heat extremely poorly, their performance overall was middling at best, the management interface was pretty but terrible, and at a time that the industry was rapidly churning technology, Apple (just as rapidly) fell behind with a slow update schedule and no communication about or timeline for supporting newer standards or urgency about security updates.

Apple has made a lot of decent peripherals that justified their higher price (various Apple monitors are a good example—Apple's early embrace of LCD was a boon. Even the Studio Display remains a decent option) Airports, other than perhaps the very earliest UFO-shaped ones that provided decent, accessible performance at a time when wifi hardware was still complex and expensive, were poorly designed and a poor value.

 

[Apple MessagePad]

I don't think they will and hope they don't. They were always a generation or two behind. They were significantly overpriced for the market. So they were selling more expensive offerings that weren't nearly as fast as products costing half as much.

 

[EugW]

I'm honestly really surprised they've stayed away from this given the pricing I've seen on some mesh systems.

Some of these systems are nearly $2k ... at that price, surely Apple could figure out how to make it something worth their time?


View attachment 2528449

This is one reason why I slowly collected more and more AirPorts instead of buying a system from another brand. The AirPorts function well in a mesh-like fashion when used with Apple devices, including recent ones just released in the past year. It works perfectly with my M4 Mac mini, M4 iPad Pro, and iPhone 16e.

The main drawback is that it does NOT function like a true mesh with Windows / Android / Chrome / Linux devices, and I can understand Apple not wanting to bother to support those. Fortunately, in my setup, all my non-Apple devices are stationary (TVs, smart thermostat, doorbell, etc.) so it's not an issue in my house. So, I've continued to use them as WiFi access points, although they are all on a wired Ethernet backbone, and I am now using my ISP's gateway to do the actual routing. This is my setup, as posted in the other thread:

I only bought one of these new, and for the last few AirPort Extremes I paid like US$30 each or something. I only need 3 or 4 in this house but I have six 802.11ac models in key positions in the house to maximize speed. I also have a 802.11ac and a 802.11n model outside (which stay there even through the winter here in Toronto, at -20C temps) to give strong signal in the backyard.

I only use the AirPort Express units for audio distribution though. I've turned off the WiFi on those.

Literally the only justification to buy an Apple router was, and remains, that you absolutely must have one with an Apple logo on it. The Time Capsules in particular dissipated heat extremely poorly, their performance overall was middling at best, the management interface was pretty but terrible, and at a time that the industry was rapidly churning technology, Apple rapidly fell behind.

Apple has made a lot of decent peripherals that justified their higher price (various Apple monitors are a good example—Apple's early embrace of LCD was a boon. Even the Studio Display remains a decent option) over, at times, more capable alternatives. Their wifi routers were not among them.

I have never owned a Time Capsule, but I disagree about the AirPort Extremes. I have bought numerous access points from various brands over the years, but the Apple ones were always the most stable. In fact, that's the main reason I've stuck with them despite the more limited feature set. The other reason is I didn't want to spend $1000 to buy 3 mediocre access points, or even worse, CA$3000 for a Netgear Orbi 970 set.

I agree the range of the AirPort Extremes are at best just OK, but as mentioned my solution was just to buy more of them, at $30 apiece on the used market.

 

[webbuzz]

They should've bought Ubiquity and really up their game for enterprise networking and compute offering but not VR is more important.

Hard pass. I like Ubiquiti the way they are.

 

[cateye]

but the Apple ones were always the most stable.

Largely due to using old chipsets and supporting only the most basic standards profile.

If they work for you, great. Not for me to tell you otherwise. But they were designed for sub-200Mbps internet connections. Configuring them in a "mesh like" setup like you've done literally halves their already meager performance. They have zero support for channels wider than 80MHz, no support for the 6GHz band, and receive no regular security updates. Again, if those realities don't concern you, that's fine. I pay for a gigabit connection and expect my networking gear to deliver 100% of that speed at every point on my property.

 

[Circa1984]

People buy routers seldomly
It’s a competitive space
Product support effort is high
There is no recurring revenue - it’s a one and done sale
Margins are slim
… so likely not

 

[NightFox]

Who would invest in something they will abbandono as soon as they see fit.

You could say the same for any company, but Apple doesn't have a track record of doing this, unlike Google for example. Apple produced and supported their previous networking devices for a very long time, so I'm not sure what's driving your comment as off the top of my head I can't think of any Apple abandonware products that they've brought to market.

 

[Westside guy]

I'm honestly really surprised they've stayed away from this given the pricing I've seen on some mesh systems.

Some of these systems are nearly $2k ... at that price, surely Apple could figure out how to make it something worth their time?

Yeah, remember how people used to rag on endlessly about how expensive Apple wi-fi hardware was?

 

[darngooddesign]

One more huge reason they should bring back WiFi routers — there is not enough hardware out there that can run Homekit Hubs.

Used to be iPads, HomePods, and Apple TVs. They've more or less discontinued iPads, and a lot of people have no use for HomePods or Apple TVs.

Should add it to iMacs, Mac Minis & Studios, and even Studio Displays (A16 chip!!) as far as I'm concerned, anything that stays plugged in. But a WiFi router should be a no-brainer.

It looks like one reason the iPads cant be hubs is that they need to be always on devices and Apple cant guarantee everyone using an iPad will leave it always on and connected. I think you can still use an iPad to control everything, it just cant be a hub.

 

[NightFox]

Cook is a bean counter who only cares about maximizing profits. Unlike Steve Jobs, Cook doesn’t do what is best for customers. Cook does what is best for shareholders.

I won't disagree with you, but as a CEO of a traded company that's quite literally his job.

 

[jlc1978]

Could they? Sure
Will they? Who knows, that market is saturated with good options today, not sure there is a profitable segment for Apple.

That's the key. If the do, it's likely to be an afterthought on a device they can sell at a premium, not one tfor what is basically a commodity market where many devices probably come with someone's internet service.

 

[ppenn]

I still use an airport and airport extreme. They aren't my main wifi connection but both are important pieces in my home network. I was still using the extreme as my main router until a year ago. Works fine, I just have a new need for it. It was really ahead of its time when it came out.

 

[Westside guy]

Apple doesn't have a track record of doing this, unlike Google for example.

Aperture, iWeb, and Front Row say "hello".

 

[ppenn]

I won't disagree with you, but as a CEO of a traded company that's quite literally his job.

It's also the entire reason Job appointed him CEO..he knew the company would be better off financially with Cook

 

[EugW]

Largely due to using old chipsets and supporting only the most basic standards profile.

If they work for you, great. Not for me to tell you otherwise. But they were designed for sub-200Mbps internet connections. Configuring them in a "mesh like" setup like you've done literally halves their already meager performance. They have zero support for channels wider than 80MHz, no support for the 6GHz band, and receive no regular security updates. Again, if those realities don't concern you, that's fine. I pay for a gigabit connection and expect my networking gear to deliver 100% of that speed at every point on my property.

No, as mentioned they are all on an Ethernet backbone, so they all run at full speed. My description of "mesh-like" was that there is seamless roaming from room to room in this setup with Apple devices. However, this doesn't work with Windows / Android / Linux / Chrome devices. Once they connect, they stay with the same AirPort Extreme until the signal is so weak that it disconnects, and then it reconnects with the closest AirPort Extreme with strong signal again. (This is a non-issue for us, since all non-Apple devices in this house are stationary.) It's clear Apple has built-in a quasi-seamless handoff into their WiFi devices, even though they never advertised this feature.

At moderate distances I get lower 3-digit Mbps speeds, and at closer distances I get over 400 Mbps, sometimes well over 500 Mbps, literally 3X that "sub-200 Mbps" speed you stated. This is my iPhone 12 Pro Max at my desk in my home office:



And this is my M4 iPad Pro in the kitchen, about 10 feet away from the AirPort Extreme (which is inside a cabinet):



Also as mentioned, they aren't doing any of the routing. The Extremes are just working as WiFi access points. Anyhow, since my work desktop is hardwired (and I get 1.8 Gbps there), WiFi speed is no longer an issue for us once it's well into 3-digit Mbps. IOW, ever since WiFi 5 / 802.11ac came out, I haven't really cared about getting higher WiFi speeds. That may change in the future, but I don't think I'll care for the next several years.

 

[svish]

Would like Apple to do that but I think it is highly improbable. But anything can happen and Apple can surprise us.

 

[klasma]

They could do it by requiring an Apple device to manage the network,

Yeah, but to compensate for that drawback they’d have to offer some compelling upside as well, nowadays.

but why should a wifi network require lock-in? Apple knows selling to everyone is better which is why there used to be a Windows app to manage the network.

I guess that’s why they offer iMessage clients on Android and Windows, and made FaceTime an open protocol.

 

[arc of the universe]

the way i see apple doing it is
turning the HomePod into the new Airport Extreme / Time Capsule.
and it being controlled by a new Home app that will run on the new HomeHub device.
or, at least integrate it all so that the possibility of doing all the above creates a several 100M$ market for 3rd parties to build out.

 

[fmillion]

1. Build in an SSD and resurrect the Time Machine.

2. Let us localised wireless backups and take ownership of our data from cloud services.

3. Let it act as a home NAS as well, caching your music library for local lossless or preloading movies for streaming when the network is busy.

4. Sell multiple of them to customers to RAID the storage so if one gets hacked the rest cut it off preventing data access.

Now that's an interesting idea, RAID across multiple separate networked devices. That'd be an interesting protocol to build! (I know you could do it with iSCSI across multiple devices, but I'm imagining a more native protocol that handles autodiscovery of the volumes across the network... you mount your "Resilient Storage" volume and all the RAID is handled for you.

I still have two Time Machines with working drives, honestly it's too bad there isn't a Linux firmware for these things because they're actually decent little machines, if I could flash one with Linux I'd probably drop in an SSD and carry it around as a travel router. Yes, I know there's lots of other options for Linux based portable routers, but we can't argue with the design...

 

[cateye]

No, as mentioned they are all on an Ethernet backbone

Also as mentioned, they aren't doing any of the routing.

Fair! And shame on me for skimming and missing those important details. Then yes, that's probably the smartest way to keep using that hardware, and should fully account for their shortcomings. Most people aren't going to design their network as intelligently as you, however.