Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

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

DaveGee said:
Do you have any devices that support 102.11ac ??If so then yes, without a doubt!
Click to expand...
I disagree. Your wireless network is typically most limited by its connection to the outside world (the WAN connection to the Internet). If, for example, your home Internet connection supports a maximum 5 Mbps, you buy a new MacBook Air that supports 802.11ac, and you want to surf the Internet from your MacBook Air within a couple meters of your wireless base station -- in other words, if you're like most people with wifi -- then there is probably zero benefit to upgrading your base station to 802.11ac from 802.11g or 802.11n. Your wireless network will simply wait faster for the same Web pages retrieved from the Internet at the same speed. Increasing the capacity of a network element that isn't the rating limiting factor yields nothing, and it's not common that your wireless network is the rate limiting factor.

"Not common" is not the same as "never." However, I'm sure Apple is counting on many ignorant people to buy new base stations...to attach to their much slower Internet connections. Unless they're pushing lots of data through on the wireless side (Mac to PC, for example), or unless they can benefit from improvements (if any) in 802.11ac range, a base station upgrade is a waste of money.
 
Mike MA said:
You got me wrong on that one - if you're looking for a backup tool with integrated WiFi base station, you got your deal. It ADDITIONALLY supports the latest WiFi standard and comes completely redesigned. What more do you need?
Click to expand...

802.11ac, while a standard, it isn't final yet. So in essence we are back in the "Draft N" days where the standard could (unlikely) change still. Additionally, 802.11ac isn't the latest standard, 802.11ad is.
 
OK, where is the teardown? I wonder if the new Base Station = the new Time Capsule without the internal HDD. This would allow some cool hacking.
 
Too much.....

people waiting new Apple network hardware. Hope that this hardware means the ac standard is coming to desktop Macs. Like the new design too.....:D

:):apple:
 
I wonder if the 802.11n performance is any better with this. The range of the previous version is terrible. I'm ready to get rid of it for a different brand.
 
BBCWatcher said:
I disagree. Your wireless network is typically most limited by its connection to the outside world (the WAN connection to the Internet). If, for example, your home Internet connection supports a maximum 5 Mbps, you buy a new MacBook Air that supports 802.11ac, and you want to surf the Internet from your MacBook Air within a couple meters of your wireless base station -- in other words, if you're like most people with wifi -- then there is probably zero benefit to upgrading your base station to 802.11ac from 802.11g or 802.11n. Your wireless network will simply wait faster for the same Web pages retrieved from the Internet at the same speed. Increasing the capacity of a network element that isn't the rating limiting factor yields nothing, and it's not common that your wireless network is the rate limiting factor.

"Not common" is not the same as "never." However, I'm sure Apple is counting on many ignorant people to buy new base stations...to attach to their much slower Internet connections. Unless they're pushing lots of data through on the wireless side (Mac to PC, for example), or unless they can benefit from improvements (if any) in 802.11ac range, a base station upgrade is a waste of money.
Click to expand...

When you have no clue what you are talking about, you should not talk about it.

Who says you buy a router with even 802.11n for internet access ? You buy it to access things THAT ARE IN your network. Maybe you have a too simple setup as WAN - ROUTER - Laptop and you just browse the Macrumors forum every day, but some of us have other devices connected to our network and having an (even if theoretical) almost gigabit wireless connection makes a big difference if I let's say want to transfer a 4GB file from a NAS (or another mac, or whatever other device) to my Mac.

I'm sorry if I sound offensive but sometimes there are posts here that seem to be only with the reason to get a new title under their macrumors id name...
 
Nice to see integrated Power adapter

parapup said:
ME177_AV2


All that wasted space, but still only 3 GigE ports, only one USB port that too USB2! What's with the odd trash can type design?
Click to expand...

3 Ethernet ports is not enough for what I need, but probably about right for today's wireless world.

I like it that it looks like there's a direct connection for AC power rather than a 'soap on a rope' power adapter.
 
radgar said:
3 Ethernet ports is not enough for what I need, but probably about right for today's wireless world.

I like it that it looks like there's a direct connection for AC power rather than a 'soap on a rope' power adapter.
Click to expand...

I do like the fact that the wan port turns into lan port if you don't need it as a wan port though.
 
DJTaurus said:
Why not add them full capabilities of modem/router?
Click to expand...

Cable, DSL, or FTTH? On top of that you'll need to factor in the different variations (ADSL, vDSL, sDSL, etc.) and provider firmwares. Also some providers lock access to certain brands of "certified" modems... Too much trouble.

----------
leman said:
No USB3? What the ***? :mad:
Click to expand...

The processor inside is not powerful enough to saturate USB 2.0 (~35MB/s) let alone USB 3.0!

----------
Cali Fornia said:
Apple doesn't want you to go for the Express version and hook a fast hard drive to it, u shall spend some more and get the dedicated time capsule. :rolleyes:;)
Click to expand...

I rather buy a Synology NAS. More reliable, more powerful. :D
 
Any ideas as to why they didn't add ac into the express? Was really hoping to pick up a new time capsule and an ac express to extend the network.
 
extradryny said:
I'd have said the same thing until my wifi stopped working and I got stuck between Apple (it's your modem!) and Comcast (it's your time capsule!).. for 4 days.
Click to expand...

That should be pretty easy to figure out by eliminating one of the devices (e.g., connecting your computer directly to the cable modem).

As for the original request: Apple hasn't included a modem in the AEBS the original AirPort Base Station and, if I recall, the first model of the Extreme--and by "modem," I mean "dial-up modem." I'm not sure they'd want to make several different DSL and cable modem models when most people are going to buy or rent one from their ISP anyway. (Of note, you can generally configure DSL modems to bridge [and I think most cable modems do by default] so that the AEBS is doing all of the networking tasks.)
 
silvetti said:
When you have no clue what you are talking about, you should not talk about it.
Click to expand...

Straight back at you Mr I know it all!

The fastest and most reliable form of connection, regardless of what is on the network is and always will be wired. If your serious about networking your house/devices forget wireless in any flavour......
 
silvetti said:
When you have no clue what you are talking about, you should not talk about it.

Who says you buy a router with even 802.11n for internet access ? You buy it to access things THAT ARE IN your network. Maybe you have a too simple setup as WAN - ROUTER - Laptop and you just browse the Macrumors forum every day, but some of us have other devices connected to our network and having an (even if theoretical) almost gigabit wireless connection makes a big difference if I let's say want to transfer a 4GB file from a NAS (or another mac, or whatever other device) to my Mac.

I'm sorry if I sound offensive but sometimes there are posts here that seem to be only with the reason to get a new title under their macrumors id name...
Click to expand...

I think his last paragraph says what you said. He points out that higher wifi speeds do benefit the end user on the wifi side, meaning locally, with improved LAN transfer rates and possibly range. So, it kinda does look like he has a clue.

People do all the time think that they have to get the latest wifi N version to speed up their internet over their 3mbps DSL lines. I get questions all the time when I recommend WRT54G wifi routers. Why not N?? But the N is faster. I want a wifi N! :rolleyes: When they tell me they are moving files locally or streaming from a PC locally, then I say bump up the WiFi speed.
 
It's a shame the AirPort Express didn't get 802.11 AC as well :(.. But I guess that since it isn't really marketed as a primary router, there's no need :L
 
And it also comes with a "chin strap" that attaches to the bottom so you can wear it on your head. Takes "personal hotspot" to a whole new level.
 
silvetti said:
When you have no clue what you are talking about, you should not talk about it.
Click to expand...
And you should improve your reading comprehension skills. A good start would be acquiring some.

...but some of us have other devices connected to our network and having an (even if theoretical) almost gigabit wireless connection makes a big difference if I let's say want to transfer a 4GB file from a NAS (or another mac, or whatever other device) to my Mac.
Click to expand...

Why, yes. What a brilliant insight. It's also what I cited when I wrote:

BBCWatcher said:
"Not common" is not the same as "never...." Unless they're pushing lots of data through on the wireless side (Mac to PC, for example), or... (Emphasis mine.)
Click to expand...

Most people don't have NAS boxes at home! (What planet do you live on?) Most people don't routinely push multi-gigabyte files between devices on their home wi-fi networks, and most people aren't doing that between two 802.11ac devices (or between an 802.11ac device and a fast wired device on the same local network). Among those very exceptional people there are many who won't particularly care if it takes a bit longer. Most people don't have many network connected devices, for that matter. Most is not all.

The poster I quoted recommended upgrading the base station to 802.11ac simply if you get an 802.11ac-capable MacBook Air. That's bad general advice. The correct advice is to upgrade if and only if there would be some actual benefit. You and I agree on that better advice, but you failed to read what I wrote correctly.

Apple introduced its new 802.11ac-capable base stations by saying (paraphrasing), "And, of course since we've added 802.11ac to the MacBook Air, we are introducing new base stations to support them." Apple knew exactly what it was doing when it didn't explain that most people buying new MBAs cannot benefit at all from an 802.11ac (specifically) base station. If Apple wasn't just trying to make money, Apple should have said something like, "The new MBA works great with the wi-fi networks you already use every day. However, some of you may want to get faster network speeds between your new MBA and fast wired devices in your home. Or perhaps you don't have a wireless network yet, or you want to add a wi-fi network to another location. If so, we have new base stations to offer which support 802.11ac...." That'd be more honest with customers. Apple didn't do that, unfortunately.
 
MattG said:
That big stupid box, and they can still only give us 3 Ethernet ports. I'd love to buy this AND get rid of the additional switch I have linked up to my additional Airport.
Click to expand...

parapup said:
ME177_AV2


All that wasted space, but still only 3 GigE ports, only one USB port that too USB2! What's with the odd trash can type design?
Click to expand...

Let n = number of ports on the AEBS
Let x = number of additional ports you wanted on the AEBS
Let s = number of additional ports someone else wants after Apple releases an AEBS with n+x ports.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

:rolleyes:
 
For those of you wishing for a USB 3 port


Why in the WORLD would there be a USB 3 port when the "Over the Air" AC data transfer speed is not even at USB 2 speeds???????????

Yikes!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back