or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › High-quality AirPort Extreme 802.11n unboxing photos
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

High-quality AirPort Extreme 802.11n unboxing photos - Page 3

post #81 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

Here's a review of the Airport Extreme....
http://reviews.digitaltrends.com/review4331.html

Is it just me, or are those numbers rather disappointing?

C.

Hard to say. It would be easier to tell if tested in the same environment as other draft-n routers.

But yes, seemed a tad slower than the majority of numbers posted. Now that its out I'm sure it'll get reviewed in more places.

Vinea
post #82 of 106
Good stuff. Is Apple the first one to release an 802.11n wireless router?

--------------------
Wanna get the most out of your mac,
Visit www.mostofmymac.com
post #83 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by themacthinker View Post

Good stuff. Is Apple the first one to release an 802.11n wireless router?

--------------------
Wanna get the most out of your mac,
Visit www.mostofmymac.com


No there have been other brands out for over a year now.
post #84 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunilraman View Post

Bonjour and FTP transfer of 50MB file:
1. 2.4GHz unencrypted 802.11g/n Avg. 1.7MB/s
2. 2.4GHz encrypted 802.11g/n Avg. 3.4MB/s
3. 2.4GHz unencrypted 802.11n Avg. 2.3MB/s
4. 2.4GHz encrypted 802.11n Avg. 20KB/s (yes, 20KB/s)
5. 5GHz unencrypted 802.11n Avg. 6.2MB/s
6. 5GHz encrypted 802.11n Avg. 6.1MB/s
7. Wired-only via AirPort Extreme Avg. 11MB/s
8. Wired-only with Gigabit LAN Avg. 20MB/s

Let's break it down. Convert to Megabit/sec (x8)
1. 13.6 Mbit/sec
2. 27.2 Mbit/sec
3. 18.4 Mbit/sec
4. 0.16 Mbit/sec
5. 49.6 Mbit/sec
6. 48.8 Mbit/sec
7. 88.0 Mbit/sec
8. 160 Mbit/sec

.......Um, gotta run, so... Thanks for the numbers and the review link.

Told y'all so about the 100mbit/sec ethernet outs on the AirportExtreme.
Told ya so... muah haah aah h ha

Great to hear the range is fantastic but the no. 5 and 6 above should be closer to 100Mbit/sec.

These number suck. Result #2 is the transfer speed I normally get on my current Airport Extreme. The best result the 802.11n came up with is only double that not the 5x that it's suppose to be. The extra range is nice but not necessary in my environment.
post #85 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerMacBandit View Post

These number suck. Result #2 is the transfer speed I normally get on my current Airport Extreme. The best result the 802.11n came up with is only double that not the 5x that it's suppose to be. The extra range is nice but not necessary in my environment.

If you look at reviews of the Linksys WRT300N
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1952662,00.asp

They seem to have measured throughput of more than 100Mbps! Which is quite a bit faster.
The Airport Extreme review seems to be measuring throughput from Macbook to Macbook via wireless.

Macbook1 <-> Airport Extreme <-> Macbook 2 . Which I guess might explain the slowness.

You know, it would be good to have this sort of real-world test standardised.
Perhaps there's a version of this iPerf for Mac?

C.
post #86 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunilraman View Post

Here's a good site about why AC is used widely [Because easy to transform via electromagnetic coils], and why AC is transmitted at high Voltages [Because more efficient overall]....

Hey, thanks for the homework!
I guess I asked for it...
I will consider your work a success if I understand Carniphage's response when I am done...
Quote:
You can't convert one DC voltage into another.
But you *can* convert AC voltages. (using inductance)
And then you can turn AC into DC (using a rectifier)
It's all very clever.
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #87 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

If you look at reviews of the Linksys WRT300N
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1952662,00.asp

They seem to have measured throughput of more than 100Mbps! Which is quite a bit faster.
The Airport Extreme review seems to be measuring throughput from Macbook to Macbook via wireless.

Macbook1 <-> Airport Extreme <-> Macbook 2 . Which I guess might explain the slowness.

You know, it would be good to have this sort of real-world test standardised.
Perhaps there's a version of this iPerf for Mac?

C.

I don't know if it does or not. As I said result #2 is the same as I get from my current Airport Extreme from my MacBook to my wife's Aluminum PowerBook.
post #88 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

Macbook1 <-> Airport Extreme <-> Macbook 2 . Which I guess might explain the slowness.

They shouldn't be doing that because that means each bit of data is being sent twice through the wireless network. When you are trying to find the max throughput of a wireless network, you want to test single-hop over that network with nothing else interfering or on that network.
post #89 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

You can't convert one DC voltage into another.
But you *can* convert AC voltages. (using inductance)
And then you can turn AC into DC (using a rectifier)

DC-DC conversion (up and down) is possible, it's a question of complexity, cost and efficiency. AC step-up and step-down is often 99%+ efficient with passives, DC step-up and step-down is often between 60% to 80% efficient, with active circuitry. Computers often have step-down converters. At least one is on-board right next to the CPU.
post #90 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

They shouldn't be doing that because that means each bit of data is being sent twice through the wireless network. When you are trying to find the max throughput of a wireless network, you want to test single-hop over that network with nothing else interfering or on that network.

Good points. Maybe this is factored into the review. Because if we look at no.2 for 802.11g encrypted, that's showing 27.2Mbit/sec.
If this is hop 1 Mac1 to AirportExtreme + hop 2 AirportExtreme to Mac2, this means 27.2Mbit transfered in 0.5sec from Mac1 to AirportExtreme and 27.2Mbit transfered in 0.5sec from AirportExtreme to Mac2.

This would correlate to a throughput of 54.6mbit/sec transferred for hop 1 Mac1 to AirportExtreme. Which is 100% of 802.11g rated...(!!) I know companies like Dlink have G+ "speedbooster" which can achieve this with 802.11G-only clients, maybe AirportExtreme has some "speedbooster" features for 802.11g.

This would also correlate to a throughput of almost 100mbit/sec transferred for hop 1 Mac1 to AirportExtreme for the 802.11n-only@5ghz mode.

We'll need better data and testing benchmarks of draft-N devices including Airport Extreme. Data tested should also be virtually uncompressible information like mp3 files. And we need to know whether their figures are 1 hop or 2 hops.

Whichever way we interpret the data in this review, it shows only as many have mentioned, a 2x increase in speed over 802.11g, not 5x. But that extra speed *is* nice.
post #91 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Apple Inc. this week began to unleash the next-generation of Apple Wi-Fi, with the first shipments of its AirPort Extreme 802.11n Wireless Base Station making their way to select online customers and company retail stores.

If you're like us, you probably placed an order for one of these promising wireless network performance enhancers during the week of Macworld. And if you're like us, you're probably still waiting for that order to ship.

Even though our online order was placed way back when, it's not slated to leave Taiwan until around February 14. At the same time, however, we were able to swing by a local Apple retail store an pluck one off the shelf. Somewhat nonsensical from a customer relations standpoint, so pardon us while we grunt.

Nevertheless, they are shipping. If you're looking to pick one up this weekend, you best call around. While some Apple retail stores have received shipment, others have not. And there appears to no methodical procedure behind which stores are first to receive their inventory.
[portions omitted]



I ordered 2 units last week and I just got an e-mail from Apple that they have shipped.

Checking the Fedex tracking # reveals that they shipped today from Shanghai, China and will be delivered in Los Angeles TOMORROW!

-- neptune2000
post #92 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunilraman View Post

Whichever way we interpret the data in this review, it shows only as many have mentioned, a 2x increase in speed over 802.11g, not 5x. But that extra speed *is* nice.

Are you sure you are comparing actual payload speed vs. payload speed? You get some pretty good numbers that show as much as 5x the a/g typical payload speed of 20Mbps.
post #93 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Are you sure you are comparing actual payload speed vs. payload speed? You get some pretty good numbers that show as much as 5x the a/g typical payload speed of 20Mbps.

I'm just working off the review numbers that were shown We need better data in any case.
post #94 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoinks View Post

Excellent pictures - they put my phototography skills to shame.

I like the design very much and want an 802.11n access point. However, I have a couple of questions?
  1. How does the 802.11n perform in a mixed environment, e.g. with 802.11b&g devices as well as 802.11n clients? All the devices I have that connect wirelessly are 802.11g (iBook G4, PSP, DS) - I'll be purchasing a Macbook soon (about the same time Leopard is released).
  2. Can it act as an wireless access point client or bridge? At present I have two identical US Robotics wireless routers - one is set up as an access point that connects directly to my ADSL modem and my web server (a Mac Mini). The other is in another room set-up as an access point client. The client has a hub connected and I am then able to directly connect to my xbox360, Slingbox and Pinnacle Showcenter.

1. you can mix equipment with all three protocols b/g and n.

2. It can perform as a bridge. In fact you can have up to 3 units, 2 of them as bridges, as long as they are on different channels, separated by 4 channels (like 1, 6 and 11, I believe). You should be able to do all that you describe above. I'm getting 3 units, one for each of my floors.

-- neptune2000
post #95 of 106
I returned mine today.

A disappointing piece of hardware, speedwise, and it wouldn't work with my external drive.
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
post #96 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by neptune2000 View Post

1. you can mix equipment with all three protocols b/g and n.

2. It can perform as a bridge. In fact you can have up to 3 units, 2 of them as bridges, as long as they are on different channels, separated by 4 channels (like 1, 6 and 11, I believe). You should be able to do all that you describe above.

n takes the entire spectrum, from channel 1 to 11. You would need to use the 5 GHz band for your n to prevent the b and g from interfering with your n network. It's probably not completely destructive interference, but I think they would be slowing each other down.

Quote:
I'm getting 3 units, one for each of my floors.

...of an apartment complex? That's a lot for a house, and a lot of power consumption too. I can get a connection two floors down from the top with my single "g" access point. If speed is of the most importance, I use the wired networks.
post #97 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

n takes the entire spectrum, from channel 1 to 11. You would need to use the 5 GHz band for your n to prevent the b and g from interfering with your n network. It's probably not completely destructive interference, but I think they would be slowing each other down.



...of an apartment complex? That's a lot for a house, and a lot of power consumption too. I can get a connection two floors down from the top with my single "g" access point. If speed is of the most importance, I use the wired networks.

I'm not sure what that persons dilemma is and I'm sure 802.11n routers are different but in my particular situation a 802.11g router will not cover an entire floor of my house with or without high gain external antennas. I'm hoping 802.11n will solve this. For now I've more centrally located the router in a room I spend most of my time.
post #98 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiopollution View Post

I returned mine today.
A disappointing piece of hardware, speedwise, and it wouldn't work with my external drive.

Sorry to hear that mate. You have any benchmarks, or anything at all to say, or *sounds like it*, you're just over it. Period...??
post #99 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerMacBandit View Post

I'm not sure what that persons dilemma is and I'm sure 802.11n routers are different but in my particular situation a 802.11g router will not cover an entire floor of my house with or without high gain external antennas. I'm hoping 802.11n will solve this. For now I've more centrally located the router in a room I spend most of my time.

In general it looks like the AirportExtreme should have a lot of solid range due to MIMO. It looks like playing in the 802.11n/g/b space @ 2.4ghz won't show good speeds for n-enabled devices though.

The key is 802.11n-only @ 5ghz and then we'll see 100mbit/sec throughputs at solid range indoor.

Again, we await clearer data and benchmarks, please post them anyone if you have it.
post #100 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunilraman View Post

Sorry to hear that mate. You have any benchmarks, or anything at all to say, or *sounds like it*, you're just over it. Period...??

Since I'm using a Core Duo MBP, I wasn't able to test the 'n' capabilities of the router. It 'felt' slower than my Linksys router that I've flashed with HyperWRT, though, and I don't think I want to give up the extra features offered by that custom firmware.

I would have kept the router, despite that, if the AE(n) had actually been able to mount my Lacie Bigger Disk Extreme. It wouldn't and Apple couldn't give me any obvious reason why that was so. Considering the drive worked perfectly when plugged directly into my MBP, it was obviously an issue with the Airport Extreme and Lacie drives running internal RAID arrays.

AirDisk would have been great but the money I now have in my pocket will be used towards a NAS drive.
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
post #101 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiopollution View Post

Since I'm using a Core Duo MBP, I wasn't able to test the 'n' capabilities of the router. It 'felt' slower than my Linksys router that I've flashed with HyperWRT, though, and I don't think I want to give up the extra features offered by that custom firmware.

I would have kept the router, despite that, if the AE(n) had actually been able to mount my Lacie Bigger Disk Extreme. It wouldn't and Apple couldn't give me any obvious reason why that was so. Considering the drive worked perfectly when plugged directly into my MBP, it was obviously an issue with the Airport Extreme and Lacie drives running internal RAID arrays.

AirDisk would have been great but the money I now have in my pocket will be used towards a NAS drive.

I've just discovered the TCP/UDP port-specific traffic prioritisation of this WRT firmware hacking stuff, and I say, I wanna wanna bad...! I'll need it if (probably) I "return" (move) to Kuala Lumpur next week. Dealing with poor DSL and Internet connectivity in general, I need a router that can prioritise p2p, gaming, web, and other packet so that my family and my neighbour and myself can all share the connection appropriately.

AirportExtreme is nice, but this hack-a-$60 router into a $600 router sounds too good not to try.

The fact that you had no n-clients I think made it not so unattractive to start with. They'll take a while to come up with software/ firmware updates to get it to work with these drives that have "issues" (on the Apple side).......
post #102 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunilraman View Post

AirportExtreme is nice, but this hack-a-$60 router into a $600 router sounds too good not to try.

The fact that you had no n-clients I think made it not so unattractive to start with. They'll take a while to come up with software/ firmware updates to get it to work with these drives that have "issues" (on the Apple side).......


You might be able to add high-dollar software features into a cheap device, but the hardware is often still pretty cheap. The WRTs are a little heat sensitive and the radios seem to lose range over time.
post #103 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

You might be able to add high-dollar software features into a cheap device, but the hardware is often still pretty cheap. The WRTs are a little heat sensitive and the radios seem to lose range over time.

If that's the case, I haven't noticed it yet.

Considering the cost of a replacement unit, coupled with the high-$ features of the WRT firmware, it seems like an easy choice to make if someone is looking for a router with more flexibility than any stock unit at 3 times the price.

The limitiations of the AE(n) don't justify the price, to me. The HD mounting issue was the icing on the cake.
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
post #104 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiopollution View Post

If that's the case, I haven't noticed it yet.

Considering the cost of a replacement unit, coupled with the high-$ features of the WRT firmware, it seems like an easy choice to make if someone is looking for a router with more flexibility than any stock unit at 3 times the price.

The limitiations of the AE(n) don't justify the price, to me. The HD mounting issue was the icing on the cake.

Can you point me in the direction of where I'd go to learn to do stuff like that? My girlfriend just got a new router so she gave me back the WRT54G ver2 I lent her for the past year. I wanna see what I can do with it, since it looks like it can't be used to extend the range of my current network.
Quote:
Originally Posted by appleinsider vBulletin Message

You have been banned for the following reason:
Three personal attacks in one post. Congratulations.
Date the ban will be lifted:...
Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by appleinsider vBulletin Message

You have been banned for the following reason:
Three personal attacks in one post. Congratulations.
Date the ban will be lifted:...
Reply
post #105 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecking View Post

Can you point me in the direction of where I'd go to learn to do stuff like that? My girlfriend just got a new router so she gave me back the WRT54G ver2 I lent her for the past year. I wanna see what I can do with it, since it looks like it can't be used to extend the range of my current network.

http://www.thibor.co.uk/

You'll love it.
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
post #106 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiopollution View Post

http://www.thibor.co.uk/

You'll love it.

Thanks! I'm checking this out right now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by appleinsider vBulletin Message

You have been banned for the following reason:
Three personal attacks in one post. Congratulations.
Date the ban will be lifted:...
Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by appleinsider vBulletin Message

You have been banned for the following reason:
Three personal attacks in one post. Congratulations.
Date the ban will be lifted:...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › High-quality AirPort Extreme 802.11n unboxing photos