Apple Announces New Airport Base Station and Time Capsule with Faster 802.11ac Wi-Fi

[DisplacedMic]

Another device, another piece of clutter, more space used on my shelf, another wall-wart to squeeze into the surge strip...that's why. It may as well be all in one device. It's not just a router, it's a switch as well. When Wi-Fi works as well as a wired connection, then maybe I won't care anymore.

For me, wi-fi does work as well as a wired connection for all intents and purposes. I agree with oneMadRssn on this issue - it's a wireless router.

Sure, the industry standard for a router is 4+ ports, but i haven't used more than 1 or 2 of those ports in years. My computing is all wifi, my printer is wifi. I plug in my desktop simply because it's there - so there you have it. 2 ports, one for the modem, one for the tower... i do have a hardwire running under my house to my media server - but even that works fine over wifi

I don't see how 1 less port increases clutter by 25%. at least not for my purposes. there are a million and one ways to manage wires, switches and general clutter.

i don't think this device or its design are "endgame" but i certainly don't think either are deal breakers either.

 

[John Kotches]

You realize that Real-world GigE speed tops out around 70 MB/s, right?

I guess I don't live in the real world. I see transfers exceeding 90MB/s from my Mac mini to my Synology NAS. Jumbo frames made a significant bump in throughput.

And that there's gotta be a pretty fast drive (drives, if we're honest) reading AND writing over this network?

SSD to NAS with jumbo frames.

And that Real-world USB3 speeds can get up to 400 MB/s?

SSD is really fast

If people are whining about wanting USB3 so they can read/write at about 20% of the protocol's real-world capability, then I'd have to back out of this debate.

20% of USB 3 is faster than 100% of USB 2.

 

[AppleMacFinder]

1. AirPort Extreme is based on an IEEE 802.11ac draft specification Performance based on comparison with Apple’s 802.11n products. Comparison assumes AirPort Extreme network with 802.11ac-enabled computer. Speed and range will be less if an 802.11a/b/g product joins the network. Accessing the wireless network requires a Wi-Fi-enabled device. Actual speed will vary based on range, connection rate, site conditions, size of network, and other factors. Range will vary with site conditions.
2. Weight varies by configuration and manufacturing process.

It is better to not to buy and wait for 802.11ac final Airports;
otherwise there could be problems with other 802.11ac devices!
I remember a lot of trouble with 802.11n draft. Draft always suck

 

[itickings]

It is better to not to buy and wait for 802.11ac final Airports;
otherwise there could be problems with other 802.11ac devices!
I remember a lot of trouble with 802.11n draft. Draft always suck

In general, yeah, it is safer to wait. Lots of problems with 11n draft in general, interoperability problem between devices from different manufacturers, and not all devices were even possible to upgrade to final n. But Apple's devices did fine.

...of course, draft-n working out for Apple last time is in no way any guarantee for ac not being a disaster this time.

The final 802.11ac is most likely a long time away, so plenty of time to enjoy draft-ac in the meantime (sticking to compatible devices) for anyone willing to gamble. There is always something better coming out later...

 

[AppleMark]

I had hoped for an aluminum design, with some allowance for non-metallic strips at the back, or all around, near the antennas, similar to 3G/4G iOS devices.

Aluminium blocks WIFI. So even with "non-metallic strips" this would defeat the object of creating a maximum range device. Which is what they were aiming to do.

Also, you cannot compare the practical range and output of an iOS device verses a purpose designed WIFI transmitter.

 

[MattG]

For me, wi-fi does work as well as a wired connection for all intents and purposes. I agree with oneMadRssn on this issue - it's a wireless router.

I have two Apple TVs, one of which is wired and the other of which is wireless due to reasons beyond my control. Sorry, but I'm going to have to disagree. The wired one is solid, the wireless one simply is not, and it's not a distance issue.

 

[silvetti]

Gosh we never thought of that

So why were you arguing which one was at fault: Apple or Comcast ?

Your post makes no sense then...

 

[oneMadRssn]

Another device, another piece of clutter, more space used on my shelf, another wall-wart to squeeze into the surge strip...that's why. It may as well be all in one device. It's not just a router, it's a switch as well. When Wi-Fi works as well as a wired connection, then maybe I won't care anymore.

So you want more wires but less clutter. Make up your mind!

 

[downpour]

Sorry if this has been asked before but isn't USB 2.0 going to mean 802.11ac is totally useless in the AirPort Extreme when used as a NAS.

The top speed of 802.11ac is 1300Mbps, but the top speed of USB2.0 is just 480Mbps (even lower in reality).

That's a major bottleneck. If Apple had included USB 3.0 (4800Mbps) the 802.11ac would have been worth it. As it stands, it's just a waste of money.

Other manufactures seem to be able to do it, like this netgear...
http://www.netgear.com/home/products/wirelessrouters/ultimate-performance/R6250.aspx#two

...so why can't Apple?

 

[macs4nw]

Aluminium blocks WIFI. So even with "non-metallic strips" this would defeat the object of creating a maximum range device. Which is what they were aiming to do. Also, you cannot compare the practical range and output of an iOS device verses a purpose designed WIFI transmitter.

That's precisely why I suggested non-metallic strips, or even a non-metallic band all around the part where the antennas are. I'm convinced Jony could come up with some gorgeous design incorporating these requirements, without hampering all those signals (beams). It's a trade-off for the unit's longevity; as it stands now, the average lifespan of the current TCs is approx. 18 mos. That's not good enough.

 

[MattG]

So you want more wires but less clutter. Make up your mind!

<sigh> Is this really that difficult to understand? There are already wires going to the back of the Airport regardless. One or two more wires is a lot less clutter than the addition an entire, secondary switch.

 

[ix.heart]

For those of you who care

Bought one yesterday and set it up at my brother's house. He had a previous extreme and all i can say is it's faster, runs cooler and has much better range than even the previous generation and that's on 802.11n. Looking forward to getting my Air and seeing increased productivity. Who cares what it looks like, the design obviously facilitates the performance. Love it.

 

[sick z33]

Ordered mine for store pickup. Can't wait!

 

[AppleMark]

That's precisely why I suggested non-metallic strips, or even a non-metallic band all around the part where the antennas are. I'm convinced Jony could come up with some gorgeous design incorporating these requirements, without hampering all those signals (beams). It's a trade-off for the unit's longevity; as it stands now, the average lifespan of the current TCs is approx. 18 mos. That's not good enough.

Maybe he was too busy on the MacPro

 

[VenusianSky]

Maybe time to upgrade my 1st gen 500GB TC. It has been solid for all these years, but I would like more space and updated Wifi features.

 

[GSPice]

20% of the protocol's real-world capability is still faster than what we have with USB2.

Just because it can't use the full capability of USB3 in every task doesn't mean that it isn't worth having or that it isn't a disappointment that it doesn't have that feature.

Like I said, if this level of moaning for 20% of USB capability is warranted, then I concede the debate.

----------

I guess I don't live in the real world. I see transfers exceeding 90MB/s from my Mac mini to my Synology NAS. Jumbo frames made a significant bump in throughput.

SSD to NAS with jumbo frames.

SSD is really fast

20% of USB 3 is faster than 100% of USB 2.

Sacrebleu! An expert! That's cheating! I'd say that anyone with your (our? ) level of knowledge and requirements has much more of a right to complain about Apple products than most. I'm serious!

And of course 20% of USB3 is faster than 100% of USB2. I just chuckle at some folks vigor in whining to achieve that 20% capability. Personally I'd be looking down more optimal avenues.

 

[GSPice]

It's a trade-off for the unit's longevity; as it stands now, the average lifespan of the current TCs is approx. 18 mos. That's not good enough.

Whoa turbo! Where'd you get that stat? Does it include total units sold, or just those sold to users who ended up with some response bias? I'd check that article a little closer..

If I'm not mistaken, the power supply in the unit is the part that has been specifically noted for failure. That's another reason why all my expensive stuff is connected to magic power filtering boxes.

TC's actual MTBF is pretty interesting though.. I'll probably be getting one soon and I'd hope it would last at least as long as my individual hard drives have.

 

[John Kotches]

And of course 20% of USB3 is faster than 100% of USB2. I just chuckle at some folks vigor in whining to achieve that 20% capability. Personally I'd be looking down more optimal avenues.

There is nothing wrong with registering disappointment with a product vs. expectations. We don't know the details into the decisions that were made with the new AE, but the gang here know what the current technology is and they expect the latest product to have the latest technology. It's not IMO a ridiculous ask. I'm guessing there were practical implications, ie more CPU horsepower required for the USB3 port vs a USB2 that could have changed the economics of the delivered product. This is Apple and they need to maintain their margins after all

I'm more of a *nix expert (Solaris, RHEL and to a lesser extent HP-UX and AIX) than an Apple expert. Thankfully OS X has *nix roots so a lot of existing knowledge translates over directly.

 

[Tomacorno]

Buy as many current model (5th generation) airport extreme base stations as you can get your hands on right now! Do it quick before they are all gone and hard to find! this new model looks to be a tank for $20 more. What is Apple thinking? $20 for more plastic. Unbelievable. I say fire those involved in designing the new look of the Mac Pro and Airport Base stations. UGLY!

Thank goodness for user names!

----------

In general, yeah, it is safer to wait. Lots of problems with 11n draft in general, interoperability problem between devices from different manufacturers, and not all devices were even possible to upgrade to final n. But Apple's devices did fine.

...of course, draft-n working out for Apple last time is in no way any guarantee for ac not being a disaster this time.

The final 802.11ac is most likely a long time away, so plenty of time to enjoy draft-ac in the meantime (sticking to compatible devices) for anyone willing to gamble. There is always something better coming out later...

IIRC the n draft was operating for several years You could wait but you would have missed the better speeds for quite a while and it seemed to work for me and my apple devices.

 

[ProMod]

As soon as someone can confirm that this thing doesn't buzz under heavy load like the previous gen AEBS, I'm buying one.

 

[GSPice]

There is nothing wrong with registering disappointment with a product vs. expectations. We don't know the details into the decisions that were made with the new AE, but the gang here know what the current technology is and they expect the latest product to have the latest technology. It's not IMO a ridiculous ask. I'm guessing there were practical implications, ie more CPU horsepower required for the USB3 port vs a USB2 that could have changed the economics of the delivered product. This is Apple and they need to maintain their margins after all

I'm more of a *nix expert (Solaris, RHEL and to a lesser extent HP-UX and AIX) than an Apple expert. Thankfully OS X has *nix roots so a lot of existing knowledge translates over directly.

+1

I hear that.

 

[AppleMacFinder]

In general, yeah, it is safer to wait. Lots of problems with 11n draft in general, interoperability problem between devices from different manufacturers, and not all devices were even possible to upgrade to final n. But Apple's devices did fine.

...of course, draft-n working out for Apple last time is in no way any guarantee for ac not being a disaster this time.

It was still impossible to upgrade from draft-n to n without buying new Apple hardware.
Perhaps, you remember about Apple Extreme 802.11n Enabler, which allowed to enable draft n
on some computers, which were just a/b/g initially: http://support.apple.com/kb/ht2447

The final 802.11ac is most likely a long time away, so plenty of time to enjoy draft-ac in the meantime (sticking to compatible devices) for anyone willing to gamble. There is always something better coming out later...

I see your point: it could take 2-3 years for ac final. Draft 802.11ac would be
a wiser choice than previous 802.11n: at least, could just disable ac if dont like.
Would be like previous generation, and even better if more powerful antennas.

 

[haravikk]

I don't really like this tall design; I think they would have been better going for a cylinder more like the new Mac Pro, or maybe something convex with a wider base that gets shorter. I dunno, it's just not really all that stylish, but for a device that works best when centrally located you really want it to look a bit better.

Not that there are that many good-looking wireless routers, but I think Apple could have surely come up with something a bit better.


Functionally it sounds good, it's just a bit ugly when you extrude the design so far like that.

 

[locoboi187]

I just bought one. If anyone wants to know anything about it let me know and I'll try to answer what I can.

 

[Ramiro210]

?

Loco,

If you have a sec...

1) What router are you upgrading from?
2) What spec(s) are you using? (a,g,n, etc)?
3) If you have devices using the n spec, what band 2.4ghz or 5ghz?
4) What's the performance delta from old router to the new one?

I'm really on the fence about buying this, currently using a 5th gen AP Extreme and I'm finding that the range isn't really cutting it, especially on the 5ghz band. Any feeback would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Ram