Connectivity-wise, the AC-Pro and AC-LITE units are fine as long as the throughput is not a consideration. For example, if you need to blanket a large warehouse with Wi-Fi coverage for wireless scanners, buying 50 UAP-AC-HDs would be crazy expensive and unnecessary. However, a lot of home customers are interested in delivering maximum bandwidth to their Wi-Fi devices. With Internet bandwidth available to home users quite often exceeding 500 Mbps and 1Gbps download bandwidth becoming increasingly common, home owners want to get a Wi-Fi system that can blanket their homes with as much throughput as possible. So, it’s not just Wi-Fi connectivity that’s wanted in home environments but Wi-Fi connectivity with maximum throughput.You can use UniFi and EdgeOS items together, they just aren't controlled with the same controller software. All your UniFi devices are controlled with either your cloud key device or with the controller software installed on a PC/server somewhere on your network (or even cloud hosted). You could also SSH into any of those devices and control them directly if you prefer. EdgeOS (EdgeRouter and EdgeSwitch) all have typical web front ends for common management functions. That web front end also has a command line interface gateway so you can issue commands to it like you would from a CLI shell; of course you could just SSH into them too. There's also UNMS as a centralized method to connect to all your EdgeOS devices, it's not an aggregated controller like the UniFi controller, more of an easy way to interact with each device.
In any case, it's not like the devices aren't compatible with each other, having a network with a mixture of EdgeOS and UniFi devices is just fine, you just can't take advantage of the centralized UniFi controller to manage your EdgeOS items. I wouldn't let that stop me from choosing EdgeOS items though, if you feel EdgeRouter or EdgeSwitch better meet your needs but want to run UniFi APs and a USG I'd say go for it.
As to POE, there are UniFi switches with it. There are a couple 8 port switches with POE (either 60w or 150w I believe). You could get the little USG and a 8 port POE. They have bigger options too but they would likely start getting expensive for the average home user or small business (sorry you may have said what your use case was but I either missed it or forgot). I don't view Ubiquiti as offering a single box that does everything like picking up a typical NetGear WiFi router, I view them as modular and I pick up the combination of devices that do exactly what I'm trying to accomplish. That results in a multiple devices in my homes but I'm happier with the results.
I don't know anything about the Dream Machine the other poster referenced, I've never used one (or even seen it for that matter). I disagree about their assessment of the APs though. I've worked with nanoHDs and had nothing but good experiences. I also disagree with their recommendation to jump right to the UAP-AC-HD, that would be overkill for most home (and even small business) networks. Unless you're running a hotel/convention center (something with pretty high user density where you can make good use of MU-MIMO) you'll be more than good with the UAP-AC-PRO or even the UAP-AC-LITE. Depending on the size of your home or business you'd be ahead to pick up 2/3/4/more UAP-AC-LITEs and distribute them well to provide good signal coverage rather than wasting money on a single (or multiple) UAP-AC-HD. That said, if this is a home deployment and you have an average size house a single centrally located LITE is usually enough all on its own. Larger homes and offices can benefit from multiple drops positioned to avoid dead zones.
I've also never worked with the In Wall units that the other poster said were buggy so I don't have any opinion on that.
Hope that helps.
In my tests, only UAP-AC-HD can deliver on the maximum throughput. This has nothing to do with the fact that this model is a high-density unit that allows up to 500 clients to be associated with one AP. Obviously, no home will have that many clients. It’s the power of the UAP-AC-HD chipset and better antennas that provide much superior throughput and wider coverage via the UAP-AC-HD than via the UAP-nanoHD. Now, if the home owner doesn’t care about pushing the throughput and is satisfied with the throughput in the 400 Mbps range, going with the UAP-nanoHD is fine. Additionally, one UAP-AC-HD may be able to cover a 3,000 sq ft house (if placed centrally), whereas two UAP-nanoHDs placed at opposite ends of such a house may be required to reach into the outer corners of the 3,000 sq ft house.
The home owner should also be aware that the system he/she would install will become the bottleneck to the Internet within just a couple years if the UAP-nanoHD is used even if today the Internet speed to the house is well below 400 Mbps. For example, my home Internet download bandwidth was recently upgrade by Comcast Xfinity from 150 Mbps to 300 Mbps for no extra charge. I’m sure that in a year or two, it will be doubled again for no additional price. Even then, my Wi-Fi will not become the bottleneck.
On the other hand, Ubiquiti doesn’t yet have Wi-Fi 6 based APs, so none of their APs are capable of 1Gbps real-world throughput. The most they could get with the UAP-AC-HD is in the 700 Mbps real-world throughput, so if they plan to get 1 Gbps Internet, the Wi-Fi system will be the bottleneck until they get both clients and APs capable of Wi-Fi6.
In my opinion, if one invests in a prosumer-level networking equipment in the house, it’s better to spend a little more and get a system that doesn’t need to be forklifted for at least 5 years. I think that the UAP-AC-HD would be a solid investment for the next 5 years as long as you are not chasing gigabit throughput, especially because existing older clients will not be able to take advantage of Wi-Fi 6 AP system. The UAP-nanoHD is too much of a compromise to keep for the next 5 years, as most homes in the US will definitely have internet bandwidth exceeding 400 Mbps in the next few years, and the UAP-nanoHD would become the bottleneck to such download bandwidths.
In no way would I recommend the UAP-AC-Pro or UAP-AC-LITE for a home. One would be much better off with the a couple 2013 AirPort Extremes or Time Capsules for a house. It doesn’t mean that these two AP models have no business use case anymore. A large warehouse where wireless scanners are used is one such example. A hotel is another example. But, these models are too weak to provide modern Internet bandwidth in a house unless your Internet bandwidth doesn’t exceed 100 Mbps. But even in that case, these models are so old and their chipsets are so weak and outdated that investing in these units (unless you have to buy dozens or hundreds of them) makes no sense, as you are not saving a lot of money but are setting yourself up for another upgrade in the near future.
I vacation in an amazing area of Quebec, where the maximum Internet bandwidth available to home owners is 30 Mbps. In such areas, I would not hesitate recommending the UAP-nanoHD. There would be absolutely no reason to deploy the UAP-AC-HD there.
Last edited: