ADSL modems have to worry about power surges in the line. Improper earth connection during a thunderstorm can fry your modem. I am not sure if you want that to happen to an Apple product.
Also, ADSL modulation varies from country to country. Try looking for a universal firmware upgrade for your modem that will work in any country. The manufacturers clearly state that unless you use the version that is meant for your country, the device wont work.
Again for configuration, you have worry about at least four different types of modulation - T1413, GDMT, GLITE, MMODE, etc.
My ISP has a great service, and is the fifth cheapest in the UK. That's precisely because they don't give you a modem, and other stuff you may not need. You get an ADSL connection that's reliable, some webspace, email services, and that's it. No extras.
Re your first point: why do you not complain about the modem being in Airport? What about power-over-ethernet? (I'm assuming you don't use that.)
Apple have long gone for the technique of making their devices do a heck of a lot, and if you need the functionality then that's great. I don't hear people complaining that their G5 comes with digital sound when all they do is use Word!
(The debate about iMacs including monitors is the exception, I'll admit )
no one uses ADSL here, everyone uses cable. why do i want ADSL in a base station?
ADSL modems have to worry about power surges in the line. Improper earth connection during a thunderstorm can fry your modem. I am not sure if you want that to happen to an Apple product.
Also, ADSL modulation varies from country to country. Try looking for a universal firmware upgrade for your modem that will work in any country. The manufacturers clearly state that unless you use the version that is meant for your country, the device wont work.
Again for configuration, you have worry about at least four different types of modulation - T1413, GDMT, GLITE, MMODE, etc.
Why deal with all that hassle?
First point: they already have landline modems. Since they connect to the same phone lines, then they're susceptible to the same spikes.
Second point: Apple have solved that with their landline modems - a little country selector when first setting up chooses the right firmware.
Re: hassle - to sell more of the buggers! I still have yet to find a compelling reason for buying an Airport Extreme basestation, if you're going to be using ADSL... I'd go for the "all-in-one-package" device every time, for cheapness and convenience. Airport Express is slightly more compelling, as it adds a feature that the one-box routers don't have (yet?).
Quote:
Originally posted by applenut
no one uses ADSL here, everyone uses cable. why do i want ADSL in a base station?
I can't believe more people use cable than ADSL. Over here, only the major roads in the cities have cable. There are many more people who live out back of beyond and can't get cable than there are people who can't get ADSL. Is that not true in the US?
Yeesh, arguing with you guys is like wrestling in treacle! I sometimes get the feeling that you've all decided "If I won't use it, it's crap and shouldn't exist". I'm not proposing they take anything out to make way for it here
...I can't believe more people use cable than ADSL. Over here, only the major roads in the cities have cable. There are many more people who live out back of beyond and can't get cable than there are people who can't get ADSL. Is that not true in the US?
Yeesh, arguing with you guys is like wrestling in treacle! I sometimes get the feeling that you've all decided "If I won't use it, it's crap and shouldn't exist". I'm not proposing they take anything out to make way for it here
Amorya
It is just as hard for people on this side of the pond to believe that not everyone, at least clost to any medium sized city, does not have access to Cable. It is prevolent enough here that I do not personally know anyone who does not have access to Cable. Some of them can not get internet access through their cable but in most cases when they cannot get it via cable they also cannot get it through DSL either.
I don't understand why you're so set on this idea of an ADSL Extreme basestation. Apple did the right thing by incorporating a modem because most users still use dial-up not broadband. Apple did the right thing by settling on ethernet because it is an industry standard. Both ethernet and a dial-up modem are easily and cheaply implemented within a small package.
Now you're insistence the Apple should throw in ADSL to suit you seems silly to me because if Apple decided to throw in ADSL support then you're adding to the cost of the device. Most ISP's supply ADSL modems or sell their users ADSL modems on the cheap as a promotion so you're adding equipment to a device which 99.99% of users already have. You are needlessly increasing costs for 99.99% of users or reducing Apple's margins so .01% of users could use the Express as a ADSL modem/router. Next if you're going to support one standard then you need to support the other prevalent standard--cable modem.
You'd have to add a cable modem into the fray otherwise those who use such devices wouldn't have any incentive to by this beast from Apple. You've no substantially increased costs for all users of the Express so the .01% of users could use the Express as a do-all device though most people already have the modem equipment anyway.
Why bother? Why would I buy an Express which would be $50more with ADSL support when I have a modem already? Why would I buy an Express with ADSL support if I use a cable modem? Why would I buy an Express that was $100 that incorporated a cable and ADSL modem when I have the equipment for one standard(the only one I use) already? There is no sound logical reason to include non industry wide functionality (to standards are widely used ADSL, and Cable) to a device if said addition increases cost substantially. None. Stick with the standards and you'll make more people happy.
PS Modems are cheap (less than $10 to produce) so you're not adding to the cost substantially by including one and you're catering to the largest market--Non-broadband users.
Personally, I think you should drop the ADSL rant. If you decide to buy an Express you'll need to get an ADSL modem with ethernet out. If you do decide to upgrade your ADSL modem then you have a choice to make. Should you get an all encompassing ADSL modem like I have, or should you get one with the fewest options and add an Express? Its up to you though your wants and/or needs should not be cause to increase the costs for all other users in the market.
It is just as hard for people on this side of the pond to believe that not everyone, at least clost to any medium sized city, does not have access to Cable. It is prevolent enough here that I do not personally know anyone who does not have access to Cable. Some of them can not get internet access through their cable but in most cases when they cannot get it via cable they also cannot get it through DSL either.
Ah, ok. I didn't know it was so prevalent. Over here I reckon very few people across the whole of the High Peak (the area where I live - fairly rural, lots of villages) can get it.
ADSL's not available everywhere, but they roll it out when they get 300-400 odd signatures. So you get lots of community rallies to bring broadband to villages... mine was a campaign called broadband4whaleybridge, which did posters and leaflet campaigns etc. Very community building It worked, anyhow - we got broadband a few years ago.
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
Why bother? Why would I buy an Express which would be $50more with ADSL support when I have a modem already? Why would I buy an Express with ADSL support if I use a cable modem? Why would I buy an Express that was $100 that incorporated a cable and ADSL modem when I have the equipment for one standard(the only one I use) already? There is no sound logical reason to include non industry wide functionality (to standards are widely used ADSL, and Cable) to a device if said addition increases cost substantially. None. Stick with the standards and you'll make more people happy.
I'm set on it because loads of companies offer such a beast, and for about £45 ($70 or so) for the whole unit.
So cost clearly isn't prohibitive.
I'm set on it because I think a lot of people would buy them. Basically, as it stands, I could either buy a combined router/WAP/ADSL box for £45, or an Apple router/WAP for £100 plus an ethernet modem (which I now know exist ) for £30.
If the Apple device had the ADSL router built in, like many of the competitors do, I could just about justify the extra cost for the Apple quality/User Experience. But if I have a separate ADSL modem, then not only do I need to buy another device, but it means more cryptic setup screens since not everything's Apple.
PWR-CE74 is a 4 Port 10/100Mbps Ethernet Switch with Full Rate Annex A/B Wireless ADSL Router using Conexant chipset solution with complete set of industry standard features for high speed access to the Internet.
£46.82 + VAT
Or you can get this one if you fancy Airport Extreme type speeds...
Quote:
The new Actiontec 54 Mbps Wireless DSL Gateway is really many devices rolled into one. It?s a full rate ADSL modem that?s upgradeable to the new, faster ADSL 2/2+protocol. It?s a router, capable of networking up to four computers, via embedded ethernet ports, with a minimum amount of hassle. And, it?s a wireless device, allowing your customer to have the freedom to connect to the Internet without being anchored by cables or cords, surfing at more than 5 times the speed of older devices.
As for why would you buy an Airport Express with modem if you have a modem already... Well, you probably wouldn't. If you've already got a modem, then obviously you don't need the device I'm talking about. I'm aiming it at the huge range of people who don't have a modem already, or who have only a USB modem and so can't do net sharing very well.
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
PS Modems are cheap (less than $10 to produce) so you're not adding to the cost substantially by including one and you're catering to the largest market--Non-broadband users.
I reckon ADSL modems can't cost much more than that. If they can sell one retail for £24, then they can probably make the thing for £10... which isn't that more than $10, especially when you factor in the higher cost of everything in the UK!
As for dropping the rant.... well, I'll run out of energy soon I'm sure. My opinions won't change though
I'm sure Apple would make back their dev costs at least, even if they just added this feature to the top-end model (so people who didn't want it wouldn't have to pay for it). Such devices will always exist, so why doesn't Apple make one?
BTW, if another company could make config software as easy-to-use as Apple's (and not through a ******* web browser - I want a proper client app thankyouverymuch!) then I'd give up my rant in a second.
I don't know what you need to do to make your ADSL modem work, but there is 0 set-up time for my cable modem, just make sure that ethernet is setup correctly and it works. Now I'm not networking it, wireless or wired, but I imagine that most of the work you need to get it configured is in the Airport setup programs as long as there is an Apple driver for the modem that you are using.
I'm set on it because loads of companies offer such a beast, and for about £45 ($70 or so) for the whole unit.
So cost clearly isn't prohibitive.
Again with the ADSL. What about cable modem users. What about the 99.99% of users who already have modems. You fixating on adding costs for all users though most have modems already.
Quote:
I'm set on it because I think a lot of people would buy them. Basically, as it stands, I could either buy a combined router/WAP/ADSL box for £45, or an Apple router/WAP for £100 plus an ethernet modem (which I now know exist ) for £30.
Again "most" people would not. "most" people don't use ADSL. "Most" people use dialup. The remaining use Cable or ADSL. Why do you think adding costs to a device to suit a minority will yeild a positive selling point?
Quote:
If the Apple device had the ADSL router built in, like many of the competitors do, I could just about justify the extra cost for the Apple quality/User Experience. But if I have a separate ADSL modem, then not only do I need to buy another device, but it means more cryptic setup screens since not everything's Apple.
Or you can get this one if you fancy Airport Extreme type speeds...
Which of the competetors offer ADSL.Cable/Phone line router/WAP/modems? None. When you buy a modem you can choose the option of a plain modem or a multifunctiuonal modem. If the above two links provide the device you seek then why don't you buy one of them?
Quote:
As for why would you buy an Airport Express with modem if you have a modem already... Well, you probably wouldn't. If you've already got a modem, then obviously you don't need the device I'm talking about. I'm aiming it at the huge range of people who don't have a modem already, or who have only a USB modem and so can't do net sharing very well.
Ahhh I see the problem, you don't seem to understand how how connecting to the internet (or rather your ISP) works. By including a modem in the wireless router Apple is enabeling the largest market to connect to the net from any room in their house on any computer with a wireless card vie dialup. The builtin modem can connect to an ISP allowing all computers to access said connection.
Quote:
I reckon ADSL modems can't cost much more than that. If they can sell one retail for £24, then they can probably make the thing for £10... which isn't that more than $10, especially when you factor in the higher cost of everything in the UK!
I doubt it. Even if the cost of producting the card was £10 that's still a two fold increase in price for a minority market.
Quote:
I'm sure Apple would make back their dev costs at least, even if they just added this feature to the top-end model (so people who didn't want it wouldn't have to pay for it). Such devices will always exist, so why doesn't Apple make one?
Amorya [/B]
So now you talking about segmenting a product into four devices---1)No broad dand modem, 2)ADSL modem, 3)Cable modem, and 4) ADSL/Cable modem. How is that going to reduce costs? Another thing you don't seem to consider is the fact that people change from one technology to another ie I went form cable to DSL. What would have happened if I had bought one of your devices? I'd be stuck. My ISP GAVE me my modem as part of the promotion so if I get the Apple device then I'm free to switch back to Cable at no cost for un-needed functionality. I'm sorry you ISP didn't give you a modem; however most do or most rteduce the purchase price for the customer. Incorporating such functionality into the Apple device would be a waste due to the segmented market. We all don't use ADSL why foister it upon us. Why add $20 to the cost to suit small market? Why add $20 to the cost for un-needed functionality being most users are given modems for free? When you compare the Apple unit to a Linksys unit then you are also looking at a $40 price difference for airTunes functionality. adding $20 here and $30 there to the cost of a unit (which is supposed to be a slimmed down unit anyway) would be a silly way to sell a product.
I don't know what you need to do to make your ADSL modem work, but there is 0 set-up time for my cable modem, just make sure that ethernet is setup correctly and it works. Now I'm not networking it, wireless or wired, but I imagine that most of the work you need to get it configured is in the Airport setup programs as long as there is an Apple driver for the modem that you are using.
Again with the ADSL. What about cable modem users. What about the 99.99% of users who already have modems. You fixating on adding costs for all users though most have modems already.
Cable modem users will be no worse off than before. If they really don't want a redundant device, they could just buy the low-end base-station instead of the top-end one.
Also, I'm not proposing Apple increase price. I've given examples of the retail cost of modems, to show how cheap they must be to produce...
Quote:
Again "most" people would not. "most" people don't use ADSL. "Most" people use dialup. The remaining use Cable or ADSL. Why do you think adding costs to a device to suit a minority will yeild a positive selling point?
Maybe that's true for where you live. More people use ADSL than any other form of broadband in this country.
Quote:
Which of the competetors offer ADSL.Cable/Phone line router/WAP/modems? None. When you buy a modem you can choose the option of a plain modem or a multifunctiuonal modem. If the above two links provide the device you seek then why don't you buy one of them?
I will. The problem is their configuration screens all SUCK! Apple have got that bit right.
Quote:
Ahhh I see the problem, you don't seem to understand how how connecting to the internet (or rather your ISP) works. By including a modem in the wireless router Apple is enabeling the largest market to connect to the net from any room in their house on any computer with a wireless card vie dialup. The builtin modem can connect to an ISP allowing all computers to access said connection.
Erm, I understand exactly how connecting to the net works. I'm not sure what your point is here... I've done exactly what you're describing before with my Graphite base-station and a dial-up modem.
Quote:
I doubt it. Even if the cost of producting the card was £10 that's still a two fold increase in price for a minority market.
sorry, two-fold increase in price? Where on earth did you get that idea?
The Airport Extreme base station (low end) is £150. The top end is £190. These prices are straight from the Apple store. If £10 was added to the top end, it would be a 5% increase... and that's assuming Apple didn't eat the extra cost from their margins in an effort to boost sales.
Quote:
So now you talking about segmenting a product into four devices---1)No broad dand modem, 2)ADSL modem, 3)Cable modem, and 4) ADSL/Cable modem
No, I'm not talking about cable modems at all. You want them to add one of those, go make your own rant!
As I've said, cable has so little market share here that I doubt 80% of the population even know it's a way to access the net.
Quote:
My ISP GAVE me my modem as part of the promotion
So you still paid for it - just indirectly, through the monthly fee. I'm not sorry at all that my ISP didn't give me a modem - their monthly fee was significantly less because they weren't having to fund one.
Quote:
We all don't use ADSL why foister it upon us.
Then don't buy the smegging top-end base-station!
Quote:
most users are given modems for free?
Erm, no. Most users pay for modems as part of their monthly fee. That's different.
Quote:
When you compare the Apple unit to a Linksys unit then you are also looking at a $40 price difference for airTunes functionality.
I'm not talking about Airport Express. I don't think that should have an ADSL modem in - I'm talking about Airport Extreme. They still sell the UFO-type base stations, or hadn't you noticed?
BTW, on the Apple Store homepage, they list an ADSL modem higher up than they list Airport Extreme. Says something about which one is more in demand? It seems most people are buying Express these days... I reckon putting the ADSL modem in Extreme would bring some extra customers to it... customers who wouldn't otherwise have bought Apple because they wanted the all-in-one device.
I don't see anything similar to a v.90 or v.92 for ADSL modems. For modems, you have to deal with pulse and tone dialling and you are covered for the most part.
Quote:
ADSL Standards
In 1995, ANSI approved Issue 1 of its ADSL DMT standard (T1.413) with an annex contributed by the European Technical Standards Institute (ETSI). The latest version of the ANSI T1.413 ADSL standard is Issue 2, which was released in 1998). The main changes from T1.413 Issue 1 to Issue 2 are as follows:
Rates > 8 Mbps are now provided for;
Transport of a network timing reference is specified;
Reduced overhead modes are defined;
Loop timing is made mandatory and some activation and acknowledgment signals are changed to facilitate it;
State machines are defined for both ATU-C and ATU-R;
An expanded initialization sequence is added to enable rate adaptation.
The International Telecommunications Union (ITU) is now working toward a G.dmt standard for ADSL which is modeled after ANSI T1.413 Issue 2 and ETSI Technical Report 328. A G.Lite standard from the ITU is also on the way.
ADSL Principles
ADSL modems, as specified in the ANSI and ITU standards, make use of technology that is very different from ITU V-series modems.
ANSI ADSL uses the Discrete Multi-Tone (DMT) technique. The DMT line code sends multiple tones of data over the line allocating more data to the lower frequencies where there are less analog impairments.
ADSL modems also split incoming data into two streams - a fast stream and an interleaved stream. Interleaving a portion of the data facilitates error correction by giving protection against noise bursts at the cost of higher latency. This means that some of the components are doubled, one for the fast stream and one for the interleaved stream.
As I've said, cable has so little market share here that I doubt 80% of the population even know it's a way to access the net.
and you are so little of the market worldwide that i doubt it would even be remotely worth the trouble.
cable rules here. DSL is second. others distant thirds.
apple doesn't make products for mininscule markets. they make products that they can sell on a large base. if that means they arent as focused for a specific area then tough
The airport base station should have an ADSL router built in, or should I say there should be an ADSL version of the Airport base station.
Yes Airport is easier to configure than a third party wireless router, but if you don't buy a third party wireless router you still have to configure a standard ADSL router.
It is almost impossible to justify the Airport solution. Third party wireless routers are cheaper and do not require a degree in computer science to configure. Apple is definitely missing a trick here.
and you are so little of the market worldwide that i doubt it would even be remotely worth the trouble.
cable rules here. DSL is second. others distant thirds.
apple doesn't make products for mininscule markets. they make products that they can sell on a large base. if that means they arent as focused for a specific area then tough
Um, we're currently the third most connected country in the world (according to BBC news)... behind the US and Japan. Hardly insignificant.
Comments
Also, ADSL modulation varies from country to country. Try looking for a universal firmware upgrade for your modem that will work in any country. The manufacturers clearly state that unless you use the version that is meant for your country, the device wont work.
Again for configuration, you have worry about at least four different types of modulation - T1413, GDMT, GLITE, MMODE, etc.
Why deal with all that hassle?
Originally posted by Amorya
My ISP has a great service, and is the fifth cheapest in the UK. That's precisely because they don't give you a modem, and other stuff you may not need. You get an ADSL connection that's reliable, some webspace, email services, and that's it. No extras.
Re your first point: why do you not complain about the modem being in Airport? What about power-over-ethernet? (I'm assuming you don't use that.)
Apple have long gone for the technique of making their devices do a heck of a lot, and if you need the functionality then that's great. I don't hear people complaining that their G5 comes with digital sound when all they do is use Word!
(The debate about iMacs including monitors is the exception, I'll admit
no one uses ADSL here, everyone uses cable. why do i want ADSL in a base station?
Originally posted by talksense101
ADSL modems have to worry about power surges in the line. Improper earth connection during a thunderstorm can fry your modem. I am not sure if you want that to happen to an Apple product.
Also, ADSL modulation varies from country to country. Try looking for a universal firmware upgrade for your modem that will work in any country. The manufacturers clearly state that unless you use the version that is meant for your country, the device wont work.
Again for configuration, you have worry about at least four different types of modulation - T1413, GDMT, GLITE, MMODE, etc.
Why deal with all that hassle?
First point: they already have landline modems. Since they connect to the same phone lines, then they're susceptible to the same spikes.
Second point: Apple have solved that with their landline modems - a little country selector when first setting up chooses the right firmware.
Re: hassle - to sell more of the buggers! I still have yet to find a compelling reason for buying an Airport Extreme basestation, if you're going to be using ADSL... I'd go for the "all-in-one-package" device every time, for cheapness and convenience. Airport Express is slightly more compelling, as it adds a feature that the one-box routers don't have (yet?).
Originally posted by applenut
no one uses ADSL here, everyone uses cable. why do i want ADSL in a base station?
I can't believe more people use cable than ADSL. Over here, only the major roads in the cities have cable. There are many more people who live out back of beyond and can't get cable than there are people who can't get ADSL. Is that not true in the US?
Yeesh, arguing with you guys is like wrestling in treacle! I sometimes get the feeling that you've all decided "If I won't use it, it's crap and shouldn't exist". I'm not proposing they take anything out to make way for it here
Amorya
Originally posted by Amorya
...I can't believe more people use cable than ADSL. Over here, only the major roads in the cities have cable. There are many more people who live out back of beyond and can't get cable than there are people who can't get ADSL. Is that not true in the US?
Yeesh, arguing with you guys is like wrestling in treacle! I sometimes get the feeling that you've all decided "If I won't use it, it's crap and shouldn't exist". I'm not proposing they take anything out to make way for it here
Amorya
It is just as hard for people on this side of the pond to believe that not everyone, at least clost to any medium sized city, does not have access to Cable. It is prevolent enough here that I do not personally know anyone who does not have access to Cable. Some of them can not get internet access through their cable but in most cases when they cannot get it via cable they also cannot get it through DSL either.
Now you're insistence the Apple should throw in ADSL to suit you seems silly to me because if Apple decided to throw in ADSL support then you're adding to the cost of the device. Most ISP's supply ADSL modems or sell their users ADSL modems on the cheap as a promotion so you're adding equipment to a device which 99.99% of users already have. You are needlessly increasing costs for 99.99% of users or reducing Apple's margins so .01% of users could use the Express as a ADSL modem/router. Next if you're going to support one standard then you need to support the other prevalent standard--cable modem.
You'd have to add a cable modem into the fray otherwise those who use such devices wouldn't have any incentive to by this beast from Apple. You've no substantially increased costs for all users of the Express so the .01% of users could use the Express as a do-all device though most people already have the modem equipment anyway.
Why bother? Why would I buy an Express which would be $50more with ADSL support when I have a modem already? Why would I buy an Express with ADSL support if I use a cable modem? Why would I buy an Express that was $100 that incorporated a cable and ADSL modem when I have the equipment for one standard(the only one I use) already? There is no sound logical reason to include non industry wide functionality (to standards are widely used ADSL, and Cable) to a device if said addition increases cost substantially. None. Stick with the standards and you'll make more people happy.
PS Modems are cheap (less than $10 to produce) so you're not adding to the cost substantially by including one and you're catering to the largest market--Non-broadband users.
Personally, I think you should drop the ADSL rant. If you decide to buy an Express you'll need to get an ADSL modem with ethernet out. If you do decide to upgrade your ADSL modem then you have a choice to make. Should you get an all encompassing ADSL modem like I have, or should you get one with the fewest options and add an Express? Its up to you though your wants and/or needs should not be cause to increase the costs for all other users in the market.
Originally posted by @homenow
It is just as hard for people on this side of the pond to believe that not everyone, at least clost to any medium sized city, does not have access to Cable. It is prevolent enough here that I do not personally know anyone who does not have access to Cable. Some of them can not get internet access through their cable but in most cases when they cannot get it via cable they also cannot get it through DSL either.
Ah, ok. I didn't know it was so prevalent. Over here I reckon very few people across the whole of the High Peak (the area where I live - fairly rural, lots of villages) can get it.
ADSL's not available everywhere, but they roll it out when they get 300-400 odd signatures. So you get lots of community rallies to bring broadband to villages... mine was a campaign called broadband4whaleybridge, which did posters and leaflet campaigns etc. Very community building
Originally posted by faust9
Why bother? Why would I buy an Express which would be $50more with ADSL support when I have a modem already? Why would I buy an Express with ADSL support if I use a cable modem? Why would I buy an Express that was $100 that incorporated a cable and ADSL modem when I have the equipment for one standard(the only one I use) already? There is no sound logical reason to include non industry wide functionality (to standards are widely used ADSL, and Cable) to a device if said addition increases cost substantially. None. Stick with the standards and you'll make more people happy.
I'm set on it because loads of companies offer such a beast, and for about £45 ($70 or so) for the whole unit.
So cost clearly isn't prohibitive.
I'm set on it because I think a lot of people would buy them. Basically, as it stands, I could either buy a combined router/WAP/ADSL box for £45, or an Apple router/WAP for £100 plus an ethernet modem (which I now know exist
If the Apple device had the ADSL router built in, like many of the competitors do, I could just about justify the extra cost for the Apple quality/User Experience. But if I have a separate ADSL modem, then not only do I need to buy another device, but it means more cryptic setup screens since not everything's Apple.
Here's the kind of device I'm after...
PWR-CE74 is a 4 Port 10/100Mbps Ethernet Switch with Full Rate Annex A/B Wireless ADSL Router using Conexant chipset solution with complete set of industry standard features for high speed access to the Internet.
£46.82 + VAT
Or you can get this one if you fancy Airport Extreme type speeds...
The new Actiontec 54 Mbps Wireless DSL Gateway is really many devices rolled into one. It?s a full rate ADSL modem that?s upgradeable to the new, faster ADSL 2/2+protocol. It?s a router, capable of networking up to four computers, via embedded ethernet ports, with a minimum amount of hassle. And, it?s a wireless device, allowing your customer to have the freedom to connect to the Internet without being anchored by cables or cords, surfing at more than 5 times the speed of older devices.
As for why would you buy an Airport Express with modem if you have a modem already... Well, you probably wouldn't. If you've already got a modem, then obviously you don't need the device I'm talking about. I'm aiming it at the huge range of people who don't have a modem already, or who have only a USB modem and so can't do net sharing very well.
Originally posted by faust9
PS Modems are cheap (less than $10 to produce) so you're not adding to the cost substantially by including one and you're catering to the largest market--Non-broadband users.
I reckon ADSL modems can't cost much more than that. If they can sell one retail for £24, then they can probably make the thing for £10... which isn't that more than $10, especially when you factor in the higher cost of everything in the UK!
As for dropping the rant.... well, I'll run out of energy soon I'm sure. My opinions won't change though
I'm sure Apple would make back their dev costs at least, even if they just added this feature to the top-end model (so people who didn't want it wouldn't have to pay for it). Such devices will always exist, so why doesn't Apple make one?
Amorya
Amorya
Originally posted by Amorya
I'm set on it because loads of companies offer such a beast, and for about £45 ($70 or so) for the whole unit.
So cost clearly isn't prohibitive.
Again with the ADSL. What about cable modem users. What about the 99.99% of users who already have modems. You fixating on adding costs for all users though most have modems already.
I'm set on it because I think a lot of people would buy them. Basically, as it stands, I could either buy a combined router/WAP/ADSL box for £45, or an Apple router/WAP for £100 plus an ethernet modem (which I now know exist
Again "most" people would not. "most" people don't use ADSL. "Most" people use dialup. The remaining use Cable or ADSL. Why do you think adding costs to a device to suit a minority will yeild a positive selling point?
If the Apple device had the ADSL router built in, like many of the competitors do, I could just about justify the extra cost for the Apple quality/User Experience. But if I have a separate ADSL modem, then not only do I need to buy another device, but it means more cryptic setup screens since not everything's Apple.
Here's the kind of device I'm after...
Or you can get this one if you fancy Airport Extreme type speeds...
Which of the competetors offer ADSL.Cable/Phone line router/WAP/modems? None. When you buy a modem you can choose the option of a plain modem or a multifunctiuonal modem. If the above two links provide the device you seek then why don't you buy one of them?
As for why would you buy an Airport Express with modem if you have a modem already... Well, you probably wouldn't. If you've already got a modem, then obviously you don't need the device I'm talking about. I'm aiming it at the huge range of people who don't have a modem already, or who have only a USB modem and so can't do net sharing very well.
Ahhh I see the problem, you don't seem to understand how how connecting to the internet (or rather your ISP) works. By including a modem in the wireless router Apple is enabeling the largest market to connect to the net from any room in their house on any computer with a wireless card vie dialup. The builtin modem can connect to an ISP allowing all computers to access said connection.
I reckon ADSL modems can't cost much more than that. If they can sell one retail for £24, then they can probably make the thing for £10... which isn't that more than $10, especially when you factor in the higher cost of everything in the UK!
I doubt it. Even if the cost of producting the card was £10 that's still a two fold increase in price for a minority market.
I'm sure Apple would make back their dev costs at least, even if they just added this feature to the top-end model (so people who didn't want it wouldn't have to pay for it). Such devices will always exist, so why doesn't Apple make one?
Amorya [/B]
So now you talking about segmenting a product into four devices---1)No broad dand modem, 2)ADSL modem, 3)Cable modem, and 4) ADSL/Cable modem. How is that going to reduce costs? Another thing you don't seem to consider is the fact that people change from one technology to another ie I went form cable to DSL. What would have happened if I had bought one of your devices? I'd be stuck. My ISP GAVE me my modem as part of the promotion so if I get the Apple device then I'm free to switch back to Cable at no cost for un-needed functionality. I'm sorry you ISP didn't give you a modem; however most do or most rteduce the purchase price for the customer. Incorporating such functionality into the Apple device would be a waste due to the segmented market. We all don't use ADSL why foister it upon us. Why add $20 to the cost to suit small market? Why add $20 to the cost for un-needed functionality being most users are given modems for free? When you compare the Apple unit to a Linksys unit then you are also looking at a $40 price difference for airTunes functionality. adding $20 here and $30 there to the cost of a unit (which is supposed to be a slimmed down unit anyway) would be a silly way to sell a product.
Originally posted by @homenow
I don't know what you need to do to make your ADSL modem work, but there is 0 set-up time for my cable modem, just make sure that ethernet is setup correctly and it works. Now I'm not networking it, wireless or wired, but I imagine that most of the work you need to get it configured is in the Airport setup programs as long as there is an Apple driver for the modem that you are using.
http://www.amoryanorth.com/archives/...es_anythi.html
Again with the ADSL. What about cable modem users. What about the 99.99% of users who already have modems. You fixating on adding costs for all users though most have modems already.
Cable modem users will be no worse off than before. If they really don't want a redundant device, they could just buy the low-end base-station instead of the top-end one.
Also, I'm not proposing Apple increase price. I've given examples of the retail cost of modems, to show how cheap they must be to produce...
Again "most" people would not. "most" people don't use ADSL. "Most" people use dialup. The remaining use Cable or ADSL. Why do you think adding costs to a device to suit a minority will yeild a positive selling point?
Maybe that's true for where you live. More people use ADSL than any other form of broadband in this country.
Which of the competetors offer ADSL.Cable/Phone line router/WAP/modems? None. When you buy a modem you can choose the option of a plain modem or a multifunctiuonal modem. If the above two links provide the device you seek then why don't you buy one of them?
I will. The problem is their configuration screens all SUCK! Apple have got that bit right.
Ahhh I see the problem, you don't seem to understand how how connecting to the internet (or rather your ISP) works. By including a modem in the wireless router Apple is enabeling the largest market to connect to the net from any room in their house on any computer with a wireless card vie dialup. The builtin modem can connect to an ISP allowing all computers to access said connection.
Erm, I understand exactly how connecting to the net works. I'm not sure what your point is here... I've done exactly what you're describing before with my Graphite base-station and a dial-up modem.
I doubt it. Even if the cost of producting the card was £10 that's still a two fold increase in price for a minority market.
sorry, two-fold increase in price? Where on earth did you get that idea?
The Airport Extreme base station (low end) is £150. The top end is £190. These prices are straight from the Apple store. If £10 was added to the top end, it would be a 5% increase... and that's assuming Apple didn't eat the extra cost from their margins in an effort to boost sales.
So now you talking about segmenting a product into four devices---1)No broad dand modem, 2)ADSL modem, 3)Cable modem, and 4) ADSL/Cable modem
No, I'm not talking about cable modems at all. You want them to add one of those, go make your own rant!
As I've said, cable has so little market share here that I doubt 80% of the population even know it's a way to access the net.
My ISP GAVE me my modem as part of the promotion
So you still paid for it - just indirectly, through the monthly fee. I'm not sorry at all that my ISP didn't give me a modem - their monthly fee was significantly less because they weren't having to fund one.
We all don't use ADSL why foister it upon us.
Then don't buy the smegging top-end base-station!
most users are given modems for free?
Erm, no. Most users pay for modems as part of their monthly fee. That's different.
When you compare the Apple unit to a Linksys unit then you are also looking at a $40 price difference for airTunes functionality.
I'm not talking about Airport Express. I don't think that should have an ADSL modem in - I'm talking about Airport Extreme. They still sell the UFO-type base stations, or hadn't you noticed?
BTW, on the Apple Store homepage, they list an ADSL modem higher up than they list Airport Extreme. Says something about which one is more in demand? It seems most people are buying Express these days... I reckon putting the ADSL modem in Extreme would bring some extra customers to it... customers who wouldn't otherwise have bought Apple because they wanted the all-in-one device.
Amorya
ADSL Standards
In 1995, ANSI approved Issue 1 of its ADSL DMT standard (T1.413) with an annex contributed by the European Technical Standards Institute (ETSI). The latest version of the ANSI T1.413 ADSL standard is Issue 2, which was released in 1998). The main changes from T1.413 Issue 1 to Issue 2 are as follows:
Rates > 8 Mbps are now provided for;
Transport of a network timing reference is specified;
Reduced overhead modes are defined;
Loop timing is made mandatory and some activation and acknowledgment signals are changed to facilitate it;
State machines are defined for both ATU-C and ATU-R;
An expanded initialization sequence is added to enable rate adaptation.
The International Telecommunications Union (ITU) is now working toward a G.dmt standard for ADSL which is modeled after ANSI T1.413 Issue 2 and ETSI Technical Report 328. A G.Lite standard from the ITU is also on the way.
ADSL Principles
ADSL modems, as specified in the ANSI and ITU standards, make use of technology that is very different from ITU V-series modems.
ANSI ADSL uses the Discrete Multi-Tone (DMT) technique. The DMT line code sends multiple tones of data over the line allocating more data to the lower frequencies where there are less analog impairments.
ADSL modems also split incoming data into two streams - a fast stream and an interleaved stream. Interleaving a portion of the data facilitates error correction by giving protection against noise bursts at the cost of higher latency. This means that some of the components are doubled, one for the fast stream and one for the interleaved stream.
Give ADSL some more time to mature.
Originally posted by Amorya
As I've said, cable has so little market share here that I doubt 80% of the population even know it's a way to access the net.
and you are so little of the market worldwide that i doubt it would even be remotely worth the trouble.
cable rules here. DSL is second. others distant thirds.
apple doesn't make products for mininscule markets. they make products that they can sell on a large base. if that means they arent as focused for a specific area then tough
Yes Airport is easier to configure than a third party wireless router, but if you don't buy a third party wireless router you still have to configure a standard ADSL router.
It is almost impossible to justify the Airport solution. Third party wireless routers are cheaper and do not require a degree in computer science to configure. Apple is definitely missing a trick here.
As I've said, cable has so little market share here that I doubt 80% of the population even know it's a way to access the net.
I think you view may be a bit askew.
UK Broadband Statistics
Total broadband subscribers: Over 2.05 million
End-users of cable modem services: Over 1 million
End users of ADSL services: [b]Over 1,000,000[b]
So its roughly half cable, half ADSL. I hope 80% of the UK population is as oblivious as you.
Originally posted by applenut
and you are so little of the market worldwide that i doubt it would even be remotely worth the trouble.
cable rules here. DSL is second. others distant thirds.
apple doesn't make products for mininscule markets. they make products that they can sell on a large base. if that means they arent as focused for a specific area then tough
Um, we're currently the third most connected country in the world (according to BBC news)... behind the US and Japan. Hardly insignificant.
Originally posted by Amorya
Um, we're currently the third most connected country in the world (according to BBC news)... behind the US and Japan. Hardly insignificant.
that means nothing.
numbers mean something. not rankings.