- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Thoughts on Eero WiFi system?
Posted on 6/5/16 at 10:19 am
Posted on 6/5/16 at 10:19 am
This is, quite simply, the best WiFi router you can buy
Eero has been in the press a lot lately and is mostly getting rave reviews. But $499 for 3 routers seems steep. Are most people with large homes and dead spots better off with range extenders than something like Eero?
quote:
If you are unfamiliar with Eero, it's a WiFi router that's best used with other Eero routers to cover an entire home with solid, speedy WiFi.
It's similar to a WiFi extender setup where the extender boosts the signal from your main router. The difference with the Eero is that it works extremely well.
How so? Regular extenders often cut your internet speeds in half, and some need you to manually switch to the extender's own network, which isn't as seamless or convenient.
The Eero, on the other hand, extends your WiFi signal at full speeds, and it lets your devices seamlessly connect to different Eero devices around your home as you get closer to them. That means you have your full internet speeds wherever you are in your home, even if you're far away from your primary Eero, and you never have to think about switching the connection, like you do on a regular extender.
Eero has been in the press a lot lately and is mostly getting rave reviews. But $499 for 3 routers seems steep. Are most people with large homes and dead spots better off with range extenders than something like Eero?
This post was edited on 6/5/16 at 10:24 am
2
Posted on 6/5/16 at 10:29 am to Street Hawk
Granted people are spending over 200 dollars for more router than they will ever need all the time.
That being said the two radio claim seems like a marketing gimmick. The spectrum and standard determine your available "speed". There are only so many lanes on the highway so adding another radio is not going to help, actually seems like it would complicate things. Current radios on high end routers are already pushing to the limits of what is available.
I would need to see proof of its advantages over standard access point setups.
Plus unless you have fiber to the home, most people's internet connection is significantly lower than even what you can get over N
That being said the two radio claim seems like a marketing gimmick. The spectrum and standard determine your available "speed". There are only so many lanes on the highway so adding another radio is not going to help, actually seems like it would complicate things. Current radios on high end routers are already pushing to the limits of what is available.
I would need to see proof of its advantages over standard access point setups.
Plus unless you have fiber to the home, most people's internet connection is significantly lower than even what you can get over N
This post was edited on 6/5/16 at 10:32 am
Posted on 6/5/16 at 11:28 am to Street Hawk
I like the idea of the mesh network and ease of use, but 400 was a bit steep for me as well.
Luma seems to be the same and is available for pre-order (3 units for 299.00)
LINK
Luma seems to be the same and is available for pre-order (3 units for 299.00)
LINK
Posted on 6/5/16 at 12:28 pm to UltimaParadox
quote:
That being said the two radio claim seems like a marketing gimmick. The spectrum and standard determine your available "speed". There are only so many lanes on the highway so adding another radio is not going to help, actually seems like it would complicate things. Current radios on high end routers are already pushing to the limits of what is available.
Haven't seen the performance numbers, but the idea itself isn't a marketing claim. Wireless is, by nature, a half-duplex technology, and why it tends to be inferior to wired. Long of the short, half-duplex means information cannot be sent and received at the same time. So, if your connection between the internet and your host (phone, computer) looks like this: Modem/Router>Range Extender> Host, then the following will happen. The Host will send a request to the Range extender. The range extender will listen to the request, and then when no other radios are talking, forward that request to the router/modem which then sends it out to the internet. The return is the same, the webpage comes to the router which then forwards it to the range extender when the range extender isn't broadcasting, which then sends it to the host.
So, in a single channel, each hop effectively cuts bandwidth in half. What having simultaneous channels and radios like this can do is allow the range extender to listen and speak at the same time.
That said, I always run Cat6 to Access points when possible.
This post was edited on 6/5/16 at 12:37 pm
Posted on 6/5/16 at 1:17 pm to WavinWilly
quote:
Wireless is, by nature, a half-duplex technology, and why it tends to be inferior to wired.
Thanks for the explanation, but reading more about it seems like there is no definition for full duplex in the 802.11 standards. So obviously they are doing something custom.
I am still not convinced it is true full duplex system since we are still talking about taking over the same wireless spectrum. So collisions are still going to be an issue. Unless of course they are using the 2.4ghz spectrum for transmit and 5ghz for receive.
Posted on 6/5/16 at 1:22 pm to UltimaParadox
quote:
I am still not convinced it is true full duplex system since we are still talking about taking over the same wireless spectrum. So collisions are still going to be an issue. Unless of course they are using the 2.4ghz spectrum for transmit and 5ghz for receive.
I suspect they are using non-overlapping channels, so co-channel interference should not occur. That's how I would do it anyway. (Think channels 1,6,11 on 2.4) Both radios are apparently AC radios, so I'd anticipate they tend to run on 5GHz. Each radio individually will still be half-duplex, but in one direction essentially. This is all just educated guesswork on the inner workings of their product, on my part though.
Quite frankly, I'm surprised it took somebody this long to do something like this.
This post was edited on 6/5/16 at 1:23 pm
Posted on 6/6/16 at 2:01 am to xgd
quote:
I like the idea of the mesh network and ease of use, but 400 was a bit steep for me as well.
Luma seems to be the same and is available for pre-order (3 units for 299.00)
LINK
Thanks. I just pre-ordered the Luma 3-pack. They just closed a $12.5M round of funding lead by a leading VC firm along with a major investment by Amazon. Looks like Luma will have some Amazon Echo/Alexa features baked-in. I am liking the potential of this company.
Posted on 6/25/16 at 2:00 pm to Street Hawk
Got tired of waiting on the Luma which I pre-ordered for $299 for a 3-pack. I DMed eero on Twitter and told them I will switch to eero if they can match the Luma pre-order price (regular eero 3-pack price is $499). They replied back with a promo code that took $200 off and I immediately ordered it. It should be here early next week. Very impressed with their customer servoce. I'm looking forward to setting it up and see how it improves the wifi signal in our 3 floor condo.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 8:39 am to Street Hawk
I did the same.
Emailed Eero support and received a $200 discount on the 3 pack. It will be here tomorrow.
Emailed Eero support and received a $200 discount on the 3 pack. It will be here tomorrow.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News