Apple has a natural mesh wifi option which would be to take a page out of Amazons book for their Echo smart speakers that can act as wifi extenders.
Eero and other mesh wifi devices are slowly encroaching on smart home connectivity such as being thread hubs or zigbee hubs. This is a slow constriction of Apples home aspirations and I see no gameplan to remain relevant.
Why not have the HomePods act as mesh wifi? Clearly the trend is to have the computational horsepower and add some augmented wifi circuitry and antennas. Not ideal likely but could potentially work.
Apple with its gross margin targets will unlikely compete successfully with dedicated mass market mesh wifi.
I thought at their initial introduction that HomePods would also be mesh routers. They weren’t, of course, and on further thought it probably isn’t a great idea. HomePod placement will always be about the best place for music playback and the best place for issuing Siri voice commands.
Mesh router placement is about maximizing backhaul to the primary router while also maximizing WiFi coverage.
If HomePods were also mesh routers, users would still prioritize audio for placing them and then complain about spotty WiFi coverage. A combo device just isn’t ideal.
I don't think that would be a problem. Anything with a cable on it isn't likely to be in an open space, so a router/mesh and HomePod combo could work well.
Even better would be a stackable solution where users could decide which elements to stack and allow for futureproofing by replacing them for upgraded versions, leaving the main audio hardware in place.
Apple has a natural mesh wifi option which would be to take a page out of Amazons book for their Echo smart speakers that can act as wifi extenders.
Eero and other mesh wifi devices are slowly encroaching on smart home connectivity such as being thread hubs or zigbee hubs. This is a slow constriction of Apples home aspirations and I see no gameplan to remain relevant.
Why not have the HomePods act as mesh wifi? Clearly the trend is to have the computational horsepower and add some augmented wifi circuitry and antennas. Not ideal likely but could potentially work.
Apple with its gross margin targets will unlikely compete successfully with dedicated mass market mesh wifi.
I thought at their initial introduction that HomePods would also be mesh routers. They weren’t, of course, and on further thought it probably isn’t a great idea. HomePod placement will always be about the best place for music playback and the best place for issuing Siri voice commands.
Mesh router placement is about maximizing backhaul to the primary router while also maximizing WiFi coverage.
If HomePods were also mesh routers, users would still prioritize audio for placing them and then complain about spotty WiFi coverage. A combo device just isn’t ideal.
I don't think that would be a problem. Anything with a cable on it isn't likely to be in an open space, so a router/mesh and HomePod combo could work well.
Even better would be a stackable solution where users could decide which elements to stack and allow for futureproofing by replacing them for upgraded versions, leaving the main audio hardware in place.
It’s not about being in an open space. It’s about placing theoretical combo HomePods/mesh routers on the furthest wall of the furthest room from the primary router, because that’s the ideal place for audio in that room, but entirely suboptimal for the purposes of providing effective WiFi coverage for everything else.
Also, stackable, swappable components? You know this is in reference to Apple devices, right?
All companies have resource limitations and must strategically prioritize how they allocate their limited resources to different initiatives. In addition to resources there are also strategic goals and the matter of focus. It comes down to deciding where they want to apply their focus and how they want to invest in everything they've decide to go after. It's not a case of everything in their focus getting the same level of support. It's a prioritized, tiered system where the most strategically important things get top priority for resources while lower priority things get lower priority for resources. At some point lower tier things may get no priority and are abandoned or postponed indefinitely. There is no such thing as "everything we do is top priority." Saying that is like saying "we have no priorities."
It's pretty clear where Apple's priorities are today and where their priorities were leading up to today. Products like Apple TV and HomeKIt are still alive, as is the iPad mini and iMac, but they certainly aren't getting the kind of love that iPhone, Apple Vision Pro, "AI," Apple Silicon, and MacBook Pro/Air are getting. My guess is that Apple puts its highest priority on products that can dominate the markets they serve. In my opinion, HomeKit is probably in a slow burn mode because of open standards based initiatives like Matter and Thread. Apple can certainly play in an open standards based market, but can they dominate such a market? In terms of Matter/Thread compatible devices, Apple doesn't really have a big footprint when it comes to the number and variety of devices it sources into that market. My guess is that Apple will keep their finger on the pulse of what's happening in the open standards area, but they probably feel no compelling reason to try to drive that market. They'll jump in when an opportunity presents itself where they can differentiate their offerings from the crowd and reap the benefits with a relatively low investment in resources, but the bulk of their strategic investments will continue to be areas where they become the de facto standard by driving the market and dominating when it comes to profitability.
I'd say the market for general purpose networking gear like AirPort routers is not even on Apple's lowest level of funded initiatives. They currently have no need to play in that market.
Fair analysis, but I disagree with the conclusion. Apple famously stayed away from making a TV (contrary what Gene Muenster claimed for years) because it is indeed a race to the bottom of price list and thus low profit. But yet, Apple did get into a streaming box in a big way, including making content for it on ATV+. Apple also stayed away from monitors for many years, but then offered a premium display for a specific application. Apple really didn't need to "play in that market" but thought they had something to add.
Apple has specific expertise in security and privacy, something many people want and will pay for. Sure, maybe just a copy of the current mesh systems isn't attractive, but combined with router based, controlled, and subscription based VPN...maybe. What else subscription wise would be attractive on a router? Maybe one of the space based services (Starlink and the Amazon competitor?)
Apple has a natural mesh wifi option which would be to take a page out of Amazons book for their Echo smart speakers that can act as wifi extenders.
Eero and other mesh wifi devices are slowly encroaching on smart home connectivity such as being thread hubs or zigbee hubs. This is a slow constriction of Apples home aspirations and I see no gameplan to remain relevant.
Why not have the HomePods act as mesh wifi? Clearly the trend is to have the computational horsepower and add some augmented wifi circuitry and antennas. Not ideal likely but could potentially work.
Apple with its gross margin targets will unlikely compete successfully with dedicated mass market mesh wifi.
I thought at their initial introduction that HomePods would also be mesh routers. They weren’t, of course, and on further thought it probably isn’t a great idea. HomePod placement will always be about the best place for music playback and the best place for issuing Siri voice commands.
Mesh router placement is about maximizing backhaul to the primary router while also maximizing WiFi coverage.
If HomePods were also mesh routers, users would still prioritize audio for placing them and then complain about spotty WiFi coverage. A combo device just isn’t ideal.
I don't think that would be a problem. Anything with a cable on it isn't likely to be in an open space, so a router/mesh and HomePod combo could work well.
Even better would be a stackable solution where users could decide which elements to stack and allow for futureproofing by replacing them for upgraded versions, leaving the main audio hardware in place.
It’s not about being in an open space. It’s about placing theoretical combo HomePods/mesh routers on the furthest wall of the furthest room from the primary router, because that’s the ideal place for audio in that room, but entirely suboptimal for the purposes of providing effective WiFi coverage for everything else.
Also, stackable, swappable components? You know this is in reference to Apple devices, right?
I actually have two mesh systems running off two routers. The mesh satellites are in what you would describe as 'bad places' but my management app has a floor plan of my flat which shows a map of the signal strength in each room. My entire flat shows up in green with an signal connection described as 'excellent'. And that is with running the entire mesh on 'medium' power. I can choose between three signal strength options.
There is no reason Apple couldn't develop a stackable ring setup with different rings for different features sitting under a HomePod. Air quality sensors, networking, lighting, storage, IoT uses etc and let the user mix and match.
Apple has a natural mesh wifi option which would be to take a page out of Amazons book for their Echo smart speakers that can act as wifi extenders.
Eero and other mesh wifi devices are slowly encroaching on smart home connectivity such as being thread hubs or zigbee hubs. This is a slow constriction of Apples home aspirations and I see no gameplan to remain relevant.
Why not have the HomePods act as mesh wifi? Clearly the trend is to have the computational horsepower and add some augmented wifi circuitry and antennas. Not ideal likely but could potentially work.
Apple with its gross margin targets will unlikely compete successfully with dedicated mass market mesh wifi.
I thought at their initial introduction that HomePods would also be mesh routers. They weren’t, of course, and on further thought it probably isn’t a great idea. HomePod placement will always be about the best place for music playback and the best place for issuing Siri voice commands.
Mesh router placement is about maximizing backhaul to the primary router while also maximizing WiFi coverage.
If HomePods were also mesh routers, users would still prioritize audio for placing them and then complain about spotty WiFi coverage. A combo device just isn’t ideal.
I don't think that would be a problem. Anything with a cable on it isn't likely to be in an open space, so a router/mesh and HomePod combo could work well.
Even better would be a stackable solution where users could decide which elements to stack and allow for futureproofing by replacing them for upgraded versions, leaving the main audio hardware in place.
It’s not about being in an open space. It’s about placing theoretical combo HomePods/mesh routers on the furthest wall of the furthest room from the primary router, because that’s the ideal place for audio in that room, but entirely suboptimal for the purposes of providing effective WiFi coverage for everything else.
Also, stackable, swappable components? You know this is in reference to Apple devices, right?
I actually have two mesh systems running off two routers. The mesh satellites are in what you would describe as 'bad places' but my management app has a floor plan of my flat which shows a map of the signal strength in each room. My entire flat shows up in green with an signal connection described as 'excellent'. And that is with running the entire mesh on 'medium' power. I can choose between three signal strength options.
There is no reason Apple couldn't develop a stackable ring setup with different rings for different features sitting under a HomePod. Air quality sensors, networking, lighting, storage, IoT uses etc and let the user mix and match.
If your flat is truly a flat, it’s likely not challenging for much of any WiFi configuration, so your personal anecdotal observations don’t say much.
A larger, multi-level house presents challenges your flat wouldn’t. Primary routers will often live where the wired broadband comes into the house, like in a bottom-floor den on one side of the house. Satellite mesh routers then have to be placed in locations that will pick up and carry forward the strongest possible signal from the primary router, and then broadcast their own coverage area on other floors that are optimal for everything that needs the signal. Those prime router locations often won’t coincide with the optimal placement of speakers. Users of theoretical combo devices would then be in a position of placing speakers where speakers should be and get poor WiFi coverage in parts of the home, or would follow instructions for router placement, and be unable to put speakers where they belong for prime listening.
Apple doesn’t combine devices when the result would be suboptimal, even when others take a superficial too-clever-by-half view and insist that they should make the combo devices, just because it seems like a cool idea.
This is why I recommend to my clients more advanced, professional routers, like the ones from Netgate, running pfSense software. Combined with VLANs and separate Wi-Fi access points that allow the configuration of multiple SSIDs, I set up my clients’ main LAN, a guest network and an IoT network. Unfortunately, I am not sure, whether having full access from the main LAN to the IoT subnet and none in the reverse direction is sufficient firewalling. I would like to see Apple provide concrete guidance.
Isolating IoT from the rest of your home network is a best practice and should be standard in this day and age. Apple, let’s be open about it, so that any router manufacturer can implement these best practices without requiring certification.
For consumers in their home? HomeKit is basically a consumer product. If Apple wanted to implement this, they should bring back AirPort, a device that can support all of their technology. But I digress. Offering a superior ecosystem would be a monopoly!
Absolutely. Still running on Airport Extremes too, fantastic kit.
While I liked mine, when I switched to a newer system a few years ago, the increase in speed and reliability for my wifi network was obvious and unquestionable. And that was in 2018. To see that you’re still limping along with Airport Extremes in 2024 impresses me.
All companies have resource limitations and must strategically prioritize how they allocate their limited resources to different initiatives. In addition to resources there are also strategic goals and the matter of focus. It comes down to deciding where they want to apply their focus and how they want to invest in everything they've decide to go after. It's not a case of everything in their focus getting the same level of support. It's a prioritized, tiered system where the most strategically important things get top priority for resources while lower priority things get lower priority for resources. At some point lower tier things may get no priority and are abandoned or postponed indefinitely. There is no such thing as "everything we do is top priority." Saying that is like saying "we have no priorities."
It's pretty clear where Apple's priorities are today and where their priorities were leading up to today. Products like Apple TV and HomeKIt are still alive, as is the iPad mini and iMac, but they certainly aren't getting the kind of love that iPhone, Apple Vision Pro, "AI," Apple Silicon, and MacBook Pro/Air are getting. My guess is that Apple puts its highest priority on products that can dominate the markets they serve. In my opinion, HomeKit is probably in a slow burn mode because of open standards based initiatives like Matter and Thread. Apple can certainly play in an open standards based market, but can they dominate such a market? In terms of Matter/Thread compatible devices, Apple doesn't really have a big footprint when it comes to the number and variety of devices it sources into that market. My guess is that Apple will keep their finger on the pulse of what's happening in the open standards area, but they probably feel no compelling reason to try to drive that market. They'll jump in when an opportunity presents itself where they can differentiate their offerings from the crowd and reap the benefits with a relatively low investment in resources, but the bulk of their strategic investments will continue to be areas where they become the de facto standard by driving the market and dominating when it comes to profitability.
I'd say the market for general purpose networking gear like AirPort routers is not even on Apple's lowest level of funded initiatives. They currently have no need to play in that market.
Fair analysis, but I disagree with the conclusion. Apple famously stayed away from making a TV (contrary what Gene Muenster claimed for years) because it is indeed a race to the bottom of price list and thus low profit. But yet, Apple did get into a streaming box in a big way, including making content for it on ATV+. Apple also stayed away from monitors for many years, but then offered a premium display for a specific application. Apple really didn't need to "play in that market" but thought they had something to add.
Apple has specific expertise in security and privacy, something many people want and will pay for. Sure, maybe just a copy of the current mesh systems isn't attractive, but combined with router based, controlled, and subscription based VPN...maybe. What else subscription wise would be attractive on a router? Maybe one of the space based services (Starlink and the Amazon competitor?)
As you mentioned, there are exceptions to the pattern of Apple totally avoiding commodity markets and markets where they can't dominate. Sometimes they do invest in a very narrow scope where they can extract great margins and differentiate their product from the myriad of competitors by taking advantage of unique capabilities that Apple products have over the competition. The Studio Display and Pro Display XDR fall into this category. Look at the margins they pull from these products!
Apple's avoidance of the TV market is clearly in line with Apple's avoidance of markets that they cannot dominate or command high margins. As you say, racing to the bottom is not a game that Apple plays. However, Apple is not leaving all of the money a potential Apple branded TV may have put on the table. Their TV+ app being installed on most every modern smart TV. This gives Apple a small piece of that pie at what must be a fairly low investment. To me it looks like once Apple decided to play in the streaming market with TV+ any ambitions around building their own TV plummeted to zero. If they were actually working on a TV at the time I'm sure a lot of senior executives breath a sigh of relief every time they walk through a Walmart or Best Buy and see the miniscule price tags on smart TVs with decent/good enough specs. Apple doesn't play in the "good enough" markets either.
I agree that Apple is very strong on privacy and security. They do everything within their power to create as safe and secure an environment as they can for their customers. But they can only do so much when it comes to connectivity with the outside world. Most connectivity infrastructure, including security and encryption, is based on open standards that Apple has to follow if they want to allow their customers to communicate with the rest of the world. Unless they control both sides of the communication connection, they must follow the standards. In cases like iMessage Apple does control both sides for whatever is in the "Blue Bubble" trust domain. Apple also provides a mechanism to allow standards-based connections (SMS and eventually RCS) to bypass Apple's Blue Bubble domain, and they make it very apparent when you're stepping outside the trusty Blue Bubble. Apple is kind of doing the same thing with IP based communication with Private Relay, which is effectively a limited scope VPN.
What does this mean in terms of Apple jumping into "general purpose networking gear" market? If Apple really wanted to provide a higher level of security than what general purpose networking companies are providing today they would probably have to follow a similar pattern as they do with Blue Bubble messaging. The hardware that implements your side of the Blue Bubble for messaging is your Apple device, iPhone, iPad, Mac, etc. Everyone inside the Blue Bubble has an Apple device that allows them to connect securely within the Blue Bubble. Could a similar model be implemented for all of your IP based connections to the outside world? Not in totality, but Apple could provide a router/gateway device that connects securely, perhaps using a black channel, to an Apple server farm that has ways of detecting nefarious packets coming from or going to your network. They could also mask your IP information just like a regular VPN does. This Apple router/gateway device would put your entire network inside a Blue Cloud that is managed by Apple. Just like iMessage, those on the other side of the connection, like streaming services, banks, business portals, etc., could also have a Blue Cloud enabled device to allow a trusted domain in which to communicate. But access to most of the internet would probably still be in the "Green Cloud."
None of this is any different than what secure VPNs provide today at a device level with software, other than being a router/gateway device you can put at the head of your network. Is this a general purpose networking device? No, it's an Apple domain specific device. Perhaps Apple will do something like this and call it a Private Relay Pro gateway to build on what they've already done. Or they could do nothing and wait for the folks who own the Internet communication standards to put something akin to this into the official standards.
Apple has a natural mesh wifi option which would be to take a page out of Amazons book for their Echo smart speakers that can act as wifi extenders.
Eero and other mesh wifi devices are slowly encroaching on smart home connectivity such as being thread hubs or zigbee hubs. This is a slow constriction of Apples home aspirations and I see no gameplan to remain relevant.
Why not have the HomePods act as mesh wifi? Clearly the trend is to have the computational horsepower and add some augmented wifi circuitry and antennas. Not ideal likely but could potentially work.
Apple with its gross margin targets will unlikely compete successfully with dedicated mass market mesh wifi.
I thought at their initial introduction that HomePods would also be mesh routers. They weren’t, of course, and on further thought it probably isn’t a great idea. HomePod placement will always be about the best place for music playback and the best place for issuing Siri voice commands.
Mesh router placement is about maximizing backhaul to the primary router while also maximizing WiFi coverage.
If HomePods were also mesh routers, users would still prioritize audio for placing them and then complain about spotty WiFi coverage. A combo device just isn’t ideal.
I don't think that would be a problem. Anything with a cable on it isn't likely to be in an open space, so a router/mesh and HomePod combo could work well.
Even better would be a stackable solution where users could decide which elements to stack and allow for futureproofing by replacing them for upgraded versions, leaving the main audio hardware in place.
It’s not about being in an open space. It’s about placing theoretical combo HomePods/mesh routers on the furthest wall of the furthest room from the primary router, because that’s the ideal place for audio in that room, but entirely suboptimal for the purposes of providing effective WiFi coverage for everything else.
Also, stackable, swappable components? You know this is in reference to Apple devices, right?
I actually have two mesh systems running off two routers. The mesh satellites are in what you would describe as 'bad places' but my management app has a floor plan of my flat which shows a map of the signal strength in each room. My entire flat shows up in green with an signal connection described as 'excellent'. And that is with running the entire mesh on 'medium' power. I can choose between three signal strength options.
There is no reason Apple couldn't develop a stackable ring setup with different rings for different features sitting under a HomePod. Air quality sensors, networking, lighting, storage, IoT uses etc and let the user mix and match.
If your flat is truly a flat, it’s likely not challenging for much of any WiFi configuration, so your personal anecdotal observations don’t say much.
A larger, multi-level house presents challenges your flat wouldn’t. Primary routers will often live where the wired broadband comes into the house, like in a bottom-floor den on one side of the house. Satellite mesh routers then have to be placed in locations that will pick up and carry forward the strongest possible signal from the primary router, and then broadcast their own coverage area on other floors that are optimal for everything that needs the signal. Those prime router locations often won’t coincide with the optimal placement of speakers. Users of theoretical combo devices would then be in a position of placing speakers where speakers should be and get poor WiFi coverage in parts of the home, or would follow instructions for router placement, and be unable to put speakers where they belong for prime listening.
Apple doesn’t combine devices when the result would be suboptimal, even when others take a superficial too-clever-by-half view and insist that they should make the combo devices, just because it seems like a cool idea.
My mesh systems are designed precisely for the challenging multi level environments you describe, although I run a Huawei Q2 model and a Huawei Mesh 3 system which aren't the top end stuff. If I had a multi level flat or house I would have opted for the Mesh 7 but at a much higher price. The Q2 has the option for PLC backhaul if necessary although that older system isn't WiFi 6. The Mesh 3 and 7 are.
My flat has brick walls too.
Of course, Huawei also does FTTR so if you really wanted to squeeze the absolute maximum out of your home instalation you would choose that (via manual or robotic install) or an 'invisible' surface mounted option and use it with a mesh system.
On top of that, Huawei (in China for the moment) also has a family home storage solution where multiple users can seamlessly store their files to a local unit.
Exactly the kind of device Apple would make.
These are the kinds of solutions Apple could do fairly easily (with the exception perhaps of the FTTR/O).
Apple did do combo devices. That is what the Time Capsule was. Combined router/switch/storage.
All companies have resource limitations and must strategically prioritize how they allocate their limited resources to different initiatives. In addition to resources there are also strategic goals and the matter of focus. It comes down to deciding where they want to apply their focus and how they want to invest in everything they've decide to go after. It's not a case of everything in their focus getting the same level of support. It's a prioritized, tiered system where the most strategically important things get top priority for resources while lower priority things get lower priority for resources. At some point lower tier things may get no priority and are abandoned or postponed indefinitely. There is no such thing as "everything we do is top priority." Saying that is like saying "we have no priorities."
It's pretty clear where Apple's priorities are today and where their priorities were leading up to today. Products like Apple TV and HomeKIt are still alive, as is the iPad mini and iMac, but they certainly aren't getting the kind of love that iPhone, Apple Vision Pro, "AI," Apple Silicon, and MacBook Pro/Air are getting. My guess is that Apple puts its highest priority on products that can dominate the markets they serve. In my opinion, HomeKit is probably in a slow burn mode because of open standards based initiatives like Matter and Thread. Apple can certainly play in an open standards based market, but can they dominate such a market? In terms of Matter/Thread compatible devices, Apple doesn't really have a big footprint when it comes to the number and variety of devices it sources into that market. My guess is that Apple will keep their finger on the pulse of what's happening in the open standards area, but they probably feel no compelling reason to try to drive that market. They'll jump in when an opportunity presents itself where they can differentiate their offerings from the crowd and reap the benefits with a relatively low investment in resources, but the bulk of their strategic investments will continue to be areas where they become the de facto standard by driving the market and dominating when it comes to profitability.
I'd say the market for general purpose networking gear like AirPort routers is not even on Apple's lowest level of funded initiatives. They currently have no need to play in that market.
Fair analysis, but I disagree with the conclusion. Apple famously stayed away from making a TV (contrary what Gene Muenster claimed for years) because it is indeed a race to the bottom of price list and thus low profit. But yet, Apple did get into a streaming box in a big way, including making content for it on ATV+. Apple also stayed away from monitors for many years, but then offered a premium display for a specific application. Apple really didn't need to "play in that market" but thought they had something to add.
Apple has specific expertise in security and privacy, something many people want and will pay for. Sure, maybe just a copy of the current mesh systems isn't attractive, but combined with router based, controlled, and subscription based VPN...maybe. What else subscription wise would be attractive on a router? Maybe one of the space based services (Starlink and the Amazon competitor?)
Apple's avoidance of the TV market is clearly in line with Apple's avoidance of markets that they cannot dominate or command high margins. As you say, racing to the bottom is not a game that Apple plays. However, Apple is not leaving all of the money a potential Apple branded TV may have put on the table. Their TV+ app being installed on most every modern smart TV. This gives Apple a small piece of that pie at what must be a fairly low investment. To me it looks like once Apple decided to play in the streaming market with TV+ any ambitions around building their own TV plummeted to zero.
To segue into related news, industry reports are pegging Apple TV+ at about 1/3 of 1 percent of the streaming market, right there with Discovery+ market share. But I agree with PED: Does Apple even care? TV is not a priority at Apple, and I'm guessing more of an executives pet project.
Apple has a natural mesh wifi option which would be to take a page out of Amazons book for their Echo smart speakers that can act as wifi extenders.
Eero and other mesh wifi devices are slowly encroaching on smart home connectivity such as being thread hubs or zigbee hubs. This is a slow constriction of Apples home aspirations and I see no gameplan to remain relevant.
Why not have the HomePods act as mesh wifi? Clearly the trend is to have the computational horsepower and add some augmented wifi circuitry and antennas. Not ideal likely but could potentially work.
Apple with its gross margin targets will unlikely compete successfully with dedicated mass market mesh wifi.
I thought at their initial introduction that HomePods would also be mesh routers. They weren’t, of course, and on further thought it probably isn’t a great idea. HomePod placement will always be about the best place for music playback and the best place for issuing Siri voice commands.
Mesh router placement is about maximizing backhaul to the primary router while also maximizing WiFi coverage.
If HomePods were also mesh routers, users would still prioritize audio for placing them and then complain about spotty WiFi coverage. A combo device just isn’t ideal.
I don't think that would be a problem. Anything with a cable on it isn't likely to be in an open space, so a router/mesh and HomePod combo could work well.
Even better would be a stackable solution where users could decide which elements to stack and allow for futureproofing by replacing them for upgraded versions, leaving the main audio hardware in place.
It’s not about being in an open space. It’s about placing theoretical combo HomePods/mesh routers on the furthest wall of the furthest room from the primary router, because that’s the ideal place for audio in that room, but entirely suboptimal for the purposes of providing effective WiFi coverage for everything else.
Also, stackable, swappable components? You know this is in reference to Apple devices, right?
I actually have two mesh systems running off two routers. The mesh satellites are in what you would describe as 'bad places' but my management app has a floor plan of my flat which shows a map of the signal strength in each room. My entire flat shows up in green with an signal connection described as 'excellent'. And that is with running the entire mesh on 'medium' power. I can choose between three signal strength options.
There is no reason Apple couldn't develop a stackable ring setup with different rings for different features sitting under a HomePod. Air quality sensors, networking, lighting, storage, IoT uses etc and let the user mix and match.
If your flat is truly a flat, it’s likely not challenging for much of any WiFi configuration, so your personal anecdotal observations don’t say much.
A larger, multi-level house presents challenges your flat wouldn’t. Primary routers will often live where the wired broadband comes into the house, like in a bottom-floor den on one side of the house. Satellite mesh routers then have to be placed in locations that will pick up and carry forward the strongest possible signal from the primary router, and then broadcast their own coverage area on other floors that are optimal for everything that needs the signal. Those prime router locations often won’t coincide with the optimal placement of speakers. Users of theoretical combo devices would then be in a position of placing speakers where speakers should be and get poor WiFi coverage in parts of the home, or would follow instructions for router placement, and be unable to put speakers where they belong for prime listening.
Apple doesn’t combine devices when the result would be suboptimal, even when others take a superficial too-clever-by-half view and insist that they should make the combo devices, just because it seems like a cool idea.
My mesh systems are designed precisely for the challenging multi level environments you describe, although I run a Huawei Q2 model and a Huawei Mesh 3 system which aren't the top end stuff. If I had a multi level flat or house I would have opted for the Mesh 7 but at a much higher price. The Q2 has the option for PLC backhaul if necessary although that older system isn't WiFi 6. The Mesh 3 and 7 are.
My flat has brick walls too.
Of course, Huawei also does FTTR so if you really wanted to squeeze the absolute maximum out of your home instalation you would choose that (via manual or robotic install) or an 'invisible' surface mounted option and use it with a mesh system.
On top of that, Huawei (in China for the moment) also has a family home storage solution where multiple users can seamlessly store their files to a local unit.
Exactly the kind of device Apple would make.
These are the kinds of solutions Apple could do fairly easily (with the exception perhaps of the FTTR/O).
Apple did do combo devices. That is what the Time Capsule was. Combined router/switch/storage.
I wasn’t asking for an inventory of your WiFi hardware, and providing one doesn’t contradict the point that router placement and speaker placement involve different and likely divergent priorities.
I know Apple did combo devices. They still do! The iPhone is an iPod, telephone and internet computer! What they aren’t doing as of late is making modular combo devices that facilitate swapping out parts for upgrades.
Apple has a natural mesh wifi option which would be to take a page out of Amazons book for their Echo smart speakers that can act as wifi extenders.
Eero and other mesh wifi devices are slowly encroaching on smart home connectivity such as being thread hubs or zigbee hubs. This is a slow constriction of Apples home aspirations and I see no gameplan to remain relevant.
Why not have the HomePods act as mesh wifi? Clearly the trend is to have the computational horsepower and add some augmented wifi circuitry and antennas. Not ideal likely but could potentially work.
Apple with its gross margin targets will unlikely compete successfully with dedicated mass market mesh wifi.
I thought at their initial introduction that HomePods would also be mesh routers. They weren’t, of course, and on further thought it probably isn’t a great idea. HomePod placement will always be about the best place for music playback and the best place for issuing Siri voice commands.
Mesh router placement is about maximizing backhaul to the primary router while also maximizing WiFi coverage.
If HomePods were also mesh routers, users would still prioritize audio for placing them and then complain about spotty WiFi coverage. A combo device just isn’t ideal.
I don't think that would be a problem. Anything with a cable on it isn't likely to be in an open space, so a router/mesh and HomePod combo could work well.
Even better would be a stackable solution where users could decide which elements to stack and allow for futureproofing by replacing them for upgraded versions, leaving the main audio hardware in place.
It’s not about being in an open space. It’s about placing theoretical combo HomePods/mesh routers on the furthest wall of the furthest room from the primary router, because that’s the ideal place for audio in that room, but entirely suboptimal for the purposes of providing effective WiFi coverage for everything else.
Also, stackable, swappable components? You know this is in reference to Apple devices, right?
I actually have two mesh systems running off two routers. The mesh satellites are in what you would describe as 'bad places' but my management app has a floor plan of my flat which shows a map of the signal strength in each room. My entire flat shows up in green with an signal connection described as 'excellent'. And that is with running the entire mesh on 'medium' power. I can choose between three signal strength options.
There is no reason Apple couldn't develop a stackable ring setup with different rings for different features sitting under a HomePod. Air quality sensors, networking, lighting, storage, IoT uses etc and let the user mix and match.
If your flat is truly a flat, it’s likely not challenging for much of any WiFi configuration, so your personal anecdotal observations don’t say much.
A larger, multi-level house presents challenges your flat wouldn’t. Primary routers will often live where the wired broadband comes into the house, like in a bottom-floor den on one side of the house. Satellite mesh routers then have to be placed in locations that will pick up and carry forward the strongest possible signal from the primary router, and then broadcast their own coverage area on other floors that are optimal for everything that needs the signal. Those prime router locations often won’t coincide with the optimal placement of speakers. Users of theoretical combo devices would then be in a position of placing speakers where speakers should be and get poor WiFi coverage in parts of the home, or would follow instructions for router placement, and be unable to put speakers where they belong for prime listening.
Apple doesn’t combine devices when the result would be suboptimal, even when others take a superficial too-clever-by-half view and insist that they should make the combo devices, just because it seems like a cool idea.
My mesh systems are designed precisely for the challenging multi level environments you describe, although I run a Huawei Q2 model and a Huawei Mesh 3 system which aren't the top end stuff. If I had a multi level flat or house I would have opted for the Mesh 7 but at a much higher price. The Q2 has the option for PLC backhaul if necessary although that older system isn't WiFi 6. The Mesh 3 and 7 are.
My flat has brick walls too.
Of course, Huawei also does FTTR so if you really wanted to squeeze the absolute maximum out of your home instalation you would choose that (via manual or robotic install) or an 'invisible' surface mounted option and use it with a mesh system.
On top of that, Huawei (in China for the moment) also has a family home storage solution where multiple users can seamlessly store their files to a local unit.
Exactly the kind of device Apple would make.
These are the kinds of solutions Apple could do fairly easily (with the exception perhaps of the FTTR/O).
Apple did do combo devices. That is what the Time Capsule was. Combined router/switch/storage.
I wasn’t asking for an inventory of your WiFi hardware, and providing one doesn’t contradict the point that router placement and speaker placement involve different and likely divergent priorities.
I know Apple did combo devices. They still do! The iPhone is an iPod, telephone and internet computer! What they aren’t doing as of late is making modular combo devices that facilitate swapping out parts for upgrades.
And, as I have said, and shown, there is no good reason why your speaker placement cannot be shared with your router placement. The speaker itself is Wi-Fi after all.
You had to qualify your statement with 'as of late' because in the past Apple has made modular equipment.
'modular' in the context I'm suggesting has two Apple traits applicable to it. Lock-in and tidiness and is entirely possible.
Although people love to claim Apple doesn't, or would never, do certain things, they often end up eating their own words.
I'd like to set-up my first Thread based home network. Before, I used wifi-based stuff "Works with Google TM (and controlled out of China)" products and their plethora of apps that you must link to Google Home, but have always been unhappy with the security, privacy and reliance on Internet-never-failing of this design.
At home my devices are all Apple, and I have a TV4K and Mac Mini that will work as always-on HomeKit / border router. What mesh wifi system should I be looking at? From my online reading I don't understand if a HomeKit network will function with an eero 6+ mesh or not. I think, think that HomeKit will work, and connect to the internet via eero, but that I wont have HomeKit Secure Router.
However, in emails with eero, they say: "Yes, in the meantime HomeKit is not available eero Pro 6E meaning the HomeKit border router (Mac Mini), won't be able to connect to the network due to it's capability issue."
If eero, with in-built Thread radio wont work, what will? What are the best non-professional solutions right now?
Comments
Even better would be a stackable solution where users could decide which elements to stack and allow for futureproofing by replacing them for upgraded versions, leaving the main audio hardware in place.
Apple has specific expertise in security and privacy, something many people want and will pay for. Sure, maybe just a copy of the current mesh systems isn't attractive, but combined with router based, controlled, and subscription based VPN...maybe. What else subscription wise would be attractive on a router? Maybe one of the space based services (Starlink and the Amazon competitor?)
There is no reason Apple couldn't develop a stackable ring setup with different rings for different features sitting under a HomePod. Air quality sensors, networking, lighting, storage, IoT uses etc and let the user mix and match.
Apple's avoidance of the TV market is clearly in line with Apple's avoidance of markets that they cannot dominate or command high margins. As you say, racing to the bottom is not a game that Apple plays. However, Apple is not leaving all of the money a potential Apple branded TV may have put on the table. Their TV+ app being installed on most every modern smart TV. This gives Apple a small piece of that pie at what must be a fairly low investment. To me it looks like once Apple decided to play in the streaming market with TV+ any ambitions around building their own TV plummeted to zero. If they were actually working on a TV at the time I'm sure a lot of senior executives breath a sigh of relief every time they walk through a Walmart or Best Buy and see the miniscule price tags on smart TVs with decent/good enough specs. Apple doesn't play in the "good enough" markets either.
I agree that Apple is very strong on privacy and security. They do everything within their power to create as safe and secure an environment as they can for their customers. But they can only do so much when it comes to connectivity with the outside world. Most connectivity infrastructure, including security and encryption, is based on open standards that Apple has to follow if they want to allow their customers to communicate with the rest of the world. Unless they control both sides of the communication connection, they must follow the standards. In cases like iMessage Apple does control both sides for whatever is in the "Blue Bubble" trust domain. Apple also provides a mechanism to allow standards-based connections (SMS and eventually RCS) to bypass Apple's Blue Bubble domain, and they make it very apparent when you're stepping outside the trusty Blue Bubble. Apple is kind of doing the same thing with IP based communication with Private Relay, which is effectively a limited scope VPN.
What does this mean in terms of Apple jumping into "general purpose networking gear" market? If Apple really wanted to provide a higher level of security than what general purpose networking companies are providing today they would probably have to follow a similar pattern as they do with Blue Bubble messaging. The hardware that implements your side of the Blue Bubble for messaging is your Apple device, iPhone, iPad, Mac, etc. Everyone inside the Blue Bubble has an Apple device that allows them to connect securely within the Blue Bubble. Could a similar model be implemented for all of your IP based connections to the outside world? Not in totality, but Apple could provide a router/gateway device that connects securely, perhaps using a black channel, to an Apple server farm that has ways of detecting nefarious packets coming from or going to your network. They could also mask your IP information just like a regular VPN does. This Apple router/gateway device would put your entire network inside a Blue Cloud that is managed by Apple. Just like iMessage, those on the other side of the connection, like streaming services, banks, business portals, etc., could also have a Blue Cloud enabled device to allow a trusted domain in which to communicate. But access to most of the internet would probably still be in the "Green Cloud."
None of this is any different than what secure VPNs provide today at a device level with software, other than being a router/gateway device you can put at the head of your network. Is this a general purpose networking device? No, it's an Apple domain specific device. Perhaps Apple will do something like this and call it a Private Relay Pro gateway to build on what they've already done. Or they could do nothing and wait for the folks who own the Internet communication standards to put something akin to this into the official standards.
My flat has brick walls too.
Of course, Huawei also does FTTR so if you really wanted to squeeze the absolute maximum out of your home instalation you would choose that (via manual or robotic install) or an 'invisible' surface mounted option and use it with a mesh system.
On top of that, Huawei (in China for the moment) also has a family home storage solution where multiple users can seamlessly store their files to a local unit.
Exactly the kind of device Apple would make.
These are the kinds of solutions Apple could do fairly easily (with the exception perhaps of the FTTR/O).
Apple did do combo devices. That is what the Time Capsule was. Combined router/switch/storage.
You had to qualify your statement with 'as of late' because in the past Apple has made modular equipment.
'modular' in the context I'm suggesting has two Apple traits applicable to it. Lock-in and tidiness and is entirely possible.
Although people love to claim Apple doesn't, or would never, do certain things, they often end up eating their own words.
At home my devices are all Apple, and I have a TV4K and Mac Mini that will work as always-on HomeKit / border router. What mesh wifi system should I be looking at? From my online reading I don't understand if a HomeKit network will function with an eero 6+ mesh or not. I think, think that HomeKit will work, and connect to the internet via eero, but that I wont have HomeKit Secure Router.
However, in emails with eero, they say:
"Yes, in the meantime HomeKit is not available eero Pro 6E meaning the HomeKit border router (Mac Mini), won't be able to connect to the network due to it's capability issue."
If eero, with in-built Thread radio wont work, what will? What are the best non-professional solutions right now?