Google To Introduce Google Wifi, Google Home and 4K Chromecast Ultra Devices On October 4th (androidpolice.com) 51
Android Police has learned of a new Google device that will launch alongside the Google Pixel smartphones, Google Home, and 4K 'Chromecast Ultra' dongle on October 4th. Called Google Wifi, the Wi-Fi router will cost $129 and contain several "smart" features. Android Police reports: [The] source additionally claims that Google will advertise the router as having "smart" features -- probably similar to OnHub in some respects -- and that Google will claim it provides enhanced range over typical Wi-Fi routers (a claim we see basically every router make, to be fair). But the one thing that will make it an insta-buy for many over OnHub? Our source claims multiple Google Wifi access points (two or more) can be linked together to create one large wireless network. We don't have any details on how this works, unfortunately. But one source claims that Google Wifi device will essentially be like a little white Amazon Echo Dot. So, relatively small and inconspicuous. In a separate report, Android Police details Google's upcoming smart speaker called Google Home, along with their upcoming 4K 'Chromecast Ultra' devices. Specifically, they will be priced at $129 and $69 respectively: Google Home was announced at Google I/O in May. Our sources also confirmed that the personalized base covers Google showed at I/O will be a feature of the final device. $129 also undercuts Amazon's Echo by a full $40, and though matches the price of the portable Amazon Tap, it's clear Google has Amazon's flagship smart home product in its sights with Home. Chromecast Ultra, which we are now all but certain is the name of Google's upcoming 4K version of Chromecast, will come in at $69 retail. As for what it brings beyond 4K, one of our sources claims that HDR is indeed on the list of bullet points.
That's all fine (Score:2)
But why is Slashdot getting articles about rumors? There's nothing yet officially disclosed...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
WOW that's a LOT of FUD you are SPOUTING there! Do YOU have any EVIDENCE that GOOGLE would be CREATING a CONTROLLED and WALLED garden for the INTERNET, other than the DERANGED SIGNALS bouncing INSIDE your TIN FOIL HAT?
Re: Google: The new AOL (Score:1)
Is IRC still around?
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, YES, surprisingly. It is still the quickest and easiest way to report and get fixed bugs for countless open-source projects. Said projects have GitHub, JIRA, and other systems in place, but it is usually still significantly faster to just hop onto the dev channel for the project, ping a key developer directly, and get things resolved right on the spot.
The price is wrong... (Score:4, Informative)
... since they'll use it to spy on me, they should pay me instead.
Re: (Score:2)
... since they'll use it to spy on me, they should pay me instead.
All that effort to create the Alphabet name with the publicly stated purpose of being able to sell hardware while disassociating it from the Panopticon and every single upcoming product has Google in the name.
Is the Google brand really that strong, despite the Panopticon? Or is calling a company Alphabet really that dumb? Or has Google's attention span gotten so incredibly poor they can't remember why they created Alphabet? Or all of the above? Or should they have called it Cowboy Neal's Chips and Bits
then can create a single wifi network? (Score:2)
you mean like every wifi ap ever?
Re: (Score:2)
But this one is on the internet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple routers have been able to do that for years.
Re: (Score:1)
I believe apple airports do this.
I assume all mid range consumer Wi-Fi will within the next year.
I purchased a ubiquity access point to do this, it's actually pretty cheap of you already have a router, and the long range was enough that I don't need a second one anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
I believe apple airports do this.
Apple's Airport routers have done this for a decade or more. It works pretty well and is darn handy. I've got one Extreme and a couple Expresses set up this way.
Re: (Score:1)
He never said they invented it, just that they "have done this for a decade or more". And they have. One example which did this is the AirPort Express, released in 2004: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
No, this doesn't prove that Apple invented it (and I'm not claiming they did). But it does prove that it is not really newsworthy for someone to be doing this at least 12 years later than its original release.
Re: (Score:1)
Good to know.
I was pretty sure they did, but wasn't certain.
I ended up only needing one access point once I got my ubuquiti anyway (I get excellent coverage in my small house now, and the front and back yards).
Re: (Score:2)
Theoretically, I can create a single network for home WiFi with more than one AP by giving all of them the same SSID but using different channels for the ones nearest each other (to prevent interference). Clients should then automatically connect to whichever AP signal is strongest and then, as the client roams the network area, re-connect to stronger APs. In practice, clients do not do that. They stay associated with whichever AP it connected to first until it loses the signal altogether. Only then will it
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, this is exactly how WiFi was designed to work. In big cities, the noise floor is so high that frequently, you need one access point per room or two. So, the ability for a client to roam seamlessly is pretty important.
And generally things worked fine that way, back in the day when you could buy WiFi "access points" instead of WiFi "routers". These days, the router function usually gets into the way, though. For many consumer models, you are supposed to be able to selectively disable routing; but in my e
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, this is right.
One reason for people buying Unifi APs rather than router/wifi combo boxes from any other vendor is that there don't seem to be many other vendors who sell straight up APs other that overpriced vendors like Cisco.
It was not like this in the past. The first APs were all APs.
>The downside is that you'll need a router to plug all these devices into.
Well a PoE ethernet switch. The router can be elsewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
Buy Wifi "router" - disable WAN interface. disable DHCP. assign static LAN IP. *BAM*, instant extra Wifi access point for a house.
Re: (Score:2)
I have tried that many times. And it even almost works. But in the long run, there always are problems. Connections stop letting data go through. Clients fail to roam when they should. Bandwidth drops inexplicably.
It's just not a mode that is well supported by most consumer-level hardware. You are much better off buying hardware that was designed as an access point rather than a router.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't "WDS" (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_distribution_system) quite common in most routers today?
I've used it with a bunch of old tp-link adsl-modems/Wi-Fi routers to extend a Wi-Fi network. It worked fine.
WDS and ESSID are two different things.
ESSID is multiple APs on the same LAN allowing STAs to roam freely between them.
WDS is 4-address frames (normal frames have 3) to allow AP-AP communication.
Re: (Score:2)
with two or more wifi AP? I haven't seen consumer level do that. Enterprise does this but not a router that you picked up at your local Best Buy.
Yes, Every AP does that. It's integral to the protocol. Two APs with the same SSID on the same ethernet form an ESSID.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm struggling to understand what "one large wifi network" actually is.
In enterprise gear this roughly translates into broadcasting the same SSID and some back channel communication of interference, channel selection, etc, to avoid stepping on each AP too much in addition to some of the newer "roaming" extensions that speed up the process of moving between radios.
You usually can fake this by just using the same SSID on multiple standalone APs and if their channel selection process is any good you generally
Re: (Score:2)
you mean like every wifi ap ever?
WDS doesn't work at all with a lot of APs, and doesn't work properly with even more (e.g. won't interoperate with other AP software than itself.) Tomato and OpenWRT are both good platforms for actually making WDS work, though.
Re: (Score:2)
you mean like every wifi ap ever?
WDS doesn't work at all with a lot of APs, and doesn't work properly with even more (e.g. won't interoperate with other AP software than itself.) Tomato and OpenWRT are both good platforms for actually making WDS work, though.
Same comment as the one I made above. WDS and ESSID are different things.
ESSID is the one that's worked from day one. WDS (4 address frames) took a bit longer to be properly comprehended by P802.11 and it is not something you want to use unless you need it. I remember an 802.1/11 summit in a plenary meeting where competing views of how to comprehend WDS in the 802.1 architecture were put forth.
Re: (Score:3)
Most likely pre-configured for 8.8.8.8 / 8.8.4.4, so most likely at a bare minimum, yes for DNS.
Loud and clear (Score:2)
So will it... (Score:3)
run OpenWRT?
What could possibly go wr (Score:2)