Whirlpool

You know, it just occurred to me that I think I have had some issue with just about every piece of networking equipment I have ever owned. The ethernet stuff seems to be better these days but wireless stuff is still a hassle.

Why does it seem so hard for the networking manufacturers to get things both a) working and b) useable?

I assume you are talking about cheap residential gear?
It may seem like a simple device, but its quite complex, and they are building to a budget... low manufacturing cost normally means low quality.

I agree with the above. Cheap gear made for the home user will always be like this. There is some great gear out there, just need to bump the budget up..

I'm really not a fan of all this "All in One" crud that is on the market.... I see no way that you can get quality Modem/Router/Switch/Coffemaker/Wir­ eless/VoIP/Prioritisation/Firewall­ /Nat/ all in one unit for a low price.

Spend a bit more, get something that works, don't try to get something generic that does everything mediocrely.

I work for an IT department... It would be much better to get a $200 unit that worked all of the time instead of a $100 unit that worked half the time and required 2 hours/week on me fixing it... (2 hours and the $200 unit just paid for its extra cost)

Beneuto writes...

Why does it seem so hard for the networking manufacturers to get things both a) working and b) useable?

As has been mentioned before, it's the difference between enterprise grade and consumer grade gear. It's not uncommon to see Cisco 2600s with 5+ years of uptime.

Beneuto writes...

The ethernet stuff seems to be better these days but wireless stuff is still a hassle.

I must disagree, I have never had any problems with the hardware I have bought over time, I do tend to buy more expensive gear, but once set up properly I have never had any problems.

Wireless is not isolated to a transmitter and receiver. It is affected by every RF device in the vicinity, and since it is an open band area, every piece of junk under the sun is using it. ie. bluetooth, cordless phone, av senders, microwaves. And wifi in increasing volume. With demand for great speed it also requires a fairly broad range of frequencies. That same demand for speed means we are running draft equipment or strange proprietary standards which will not work with other equipment. Also no two environments are exactly the same.

So you are surprised it doesn't work. I am amazed it so often does.

...You know, it just occurred to me that I think I have had some issue with just about every piece of networking equipment I have ever owned.
...

Why does it seem so hard for the networking manufacturers to get things both a) working and b) useable?

Two things, not just limited to networking gear.
1) Expected value
2) Reliability

1.
When *YOU* purchase networking gear you make the decision principally on the criterion of price then feature set. Strictly speaking thats not true, its Feature set then price, then you check the price and settle for less. So you buy the cheapest gear.
If you were buying cars this way, you would end up with an indian 2 stroke moped with a tin chassis and wonder why it breaks down so often.

2. Reliability.
There is a parameter called MTBF.
Mean Time Between Failures.
If you check the specs and its not there, its either so low the vendor has not put it there or the vendor has not tested MTBF.
Both indication that you are buying shite.

Reputable vendors (e.g.: Cisco) have MTBF twice that of competition.
That matters when you want quality.

If you REALLY want good gear, look at the 'business grade' gear your ISP is recommending.

Wulf-Khan writes...

When *YOU* purchase networking gear you make the decision principally on the criterion of price then feature set. Strictly speaking thats not true, its Feature set then price, then you check the price and settle for less. So you buy the cheapest gear.
If you were buying cars this way, you would end up with an indian 2 stroke moped with a tin chassis and wonder why it breaks down so often.

Yes very true, and the same applies to consumer PC's and why so many are crap these days. But the thing is you have to look at it from the correct viewpoint. It's like buying a cheap DVD home player for $69, if it's cheap enough it doesn't matter if it only lasts a year, you just go out and buy a new one when it dies, people understand that principle for cheap whitegoods, but they seem to have a blind spot when it comes to cheap IT hardware. Basically if you but a $70 ADSL router/modem expect it to last a year at most, that way you won't be dissapointed.

Steve the (original) name pirate

Beneuto writes...

Why does it seem so hard for the networking manufacturers to get things both a) working and b) useable?

There is an old saying about bad workmen always blaming their tools

cursingeye writes...

I must disagree, I have never had any problems with the hardware I have bought over time, I do tend to buy more expensive gear, but once set up properly I have never had any problems

+1 but I don't buy expensive gear.

I've been networking for about 10 years with no problems.  I used a Netcomm NB1300+4 when I went ADSL until, just over a year ago, I bought a Dynalink RTA1025W because I decided to go wireless for some of my PCs.  The ethernet cards I used before I had built-in ports were the cheapest I could get.  The current PCI and PCMCIA wireless adapters are also the cheapest I could get (TP-Link).

So far the only network part to have died was a PCI ethernet card that got killed when Western Power destroyed the whole computer with power glitches.

I've been a network engineer for 7 years, and I have moments where I cave in to a customer's demands for a cheap solution, it always bites you on the arse.

D-Link is synonymous with FAIL. HP and Cisco have halo's, and Linksys/Billion is the good Samaritan.

So to the OP's post, failure is directly related to cost. You can apply that to almost anything and there will always be exceptions.

Curtis Bayne writes...

It's not uncommon to see Cisco 2600s with 5+ years of uptime.

I had to reset one of our CISCO 2900 switch last week... First time in 4 years that it was powered down. One bank of ports failed and a power reset fixed it.

<sorry in advance for hijack>

ok, i find it a bit difficult as a non savvy user, that u all say don't get cheap stuff, but i have trouble finding anything better than what is available to the average consumer. i generally don't have an issue with some extra cost if i get reliability, but since my 2nd all in one has died prematurely i want something decent. the link to my other post is below, and if you could actually recommend direct products that might fill my need, i would be grateful.

/forum-replies.cfm?t=974748#bottom

gjlh writes...

First time in 4 years that it was powered down.

We have a 2500 somewhere that has been running for over 6 years from memory.

Might hunt around the network this afternoon for it.

THe OP was referring to wireless networking not networking in general. And although I have no doubt Cisco wireless products are better made than some and hellishly expensive. If you bother to peak inside, the wireless card in a Cisco 857W for instance, is a standard Atheros chipset mini-pci which is the same card parked in lots of routers, for instance those terrible d-link's you deride.

Wireless signal will be just as affected by nearby wireless stations and dinky dlinks therefore.

Revs, all due, but the fact that Cisco uses Atheros has little to do with the overall quality of the product.

Beneuto writes...

The ethernet stuff seems to be better these days but wireless stuff is still a hassle.

I was trying to get people to concentrate on the issue. ie wireless is a hassle. Which is true no matter what level of equipment you use. Cisco is no different hardware wise in that department than the standard dlink, netgear or cheapo yum char brand. Wireless issues can afflict all due to interference.

Keep in mind that the following is written from a consumers' perspective.

Beneuto writes...

Why does it seem so hard for the networking manufacturers to get things both a) working and b) useable?

The name on the box usually has no relation to the manufacturer — or the platform developer.

If any of those take a blasé attitude to engineering and product development (or worse, they all do) then the product is likely to be crap. (Hence why there are so many alternative firmwares for the Linksys WRT54G/GL Broadcom platform.)

The ethernet stuff seems to be better these days but wireless stuff is still a hassle.

I can't recall an example of issues I've had with Ethernet, beyond a dodgy cable.

port writes...

The name on the box usually has no relation to the manufacturer — or the platform developer.

Yes, the market is currently full of randoms (Netgear, Netcomm, D-Link) who don't actually do any design on the insides, but only the housing and cosmetic stuff in the drivers.

So you'll see that although you have 2 different brands of router, they may hold the exact same hardware inside (Broadcom based routers anyone?)

Hooray for rebadge and flog.

(Don't get me wrong, Broadcom and Atheros hardware is quite good, if set up properly.)

fuziwuzi writes...

ok, i find it a bit difficult as a non savvy user, that u all say don't get cheap stuff, but i have trouble finding anything better than what is available to the average consumer

Hmm, I didn't, I said if you buy cheap stuff be prepared to replace it on a regular basis. I have no problem with a $69 DVD player dying in just over 12 months, I also have no problem with a $12 NIC or $70 adsl modem/router dying in a year or two. I purchase cheap stuff quite often because I expect standards to change, I have done no end of upgrading CD/CDRW and DVD/DVDRW drives, and now along comes Blue Ray.

I don't buy cheap in areas where I want to have along life though, I wouldn't buy a Shaw $35 PSU, I spend $120 minimum, same with motherboards.

i generally don't have an issue with some extra cost if i get reliability.......but i have trouble finding anything better than what is available

Agreed, however how many Cisco 1721-ADSL-DG Routers @ $595.00 do you think the average shop will sell if they are sitting on a shelf next to a Dlink for around $70? You don't see them in the shops because they would just sit on the shelf gathering dust while the Dlinks walked out.

To get enterprise reliability you need to shop at places that service that end of town (metaphorically speaking).

Steve the (original) name pirate

You will find that many products that use Ethernet, (the 802.3 standard) will be more reliable than Wireless for these reasons:-

- Ethernet has been around longer, therefore it has been refined/engineered to be more reliable, by more people for longer.

- Also, many vendors have made there own implementation of Ethernet capable devices - which, coupled with high customer demand - has driven down the price of such devices making it a more that viable option for manufacturers to use quality ethernet components in their product.

Hence why Ethernet is so cheap and reliable these days.

I'm not going to go into ".. as opposed to .." because it'll take forever.

I've been using networks since I was about 10 years old, I've NEVER had ANY trouble with ANY networking hardware. Not 1. HUBs, switches, network cards, wireless adaprters, all fine. Most of the HUBs and stuff I used were $12 ones, they all worked fine.

When I go to a customer site, "my network isn't working". They blame the hardware, I go out there, and see something like 60 HUBs daisy-chained together, well that's your problem isn't it. You need to use the stuff the way it's meant to be used, not for some spiderweb type configuration with stuff going everywhere. Wireless is easy, I don't have to drag cables through walls anymore, great stuff, no more making cables, no wall plates, no going up through manholes, no removing tiles off the roof.

Extronic writes...

I've been using networks since I was about 10 years old, I've NEVER had ANY trouble with ANY networking hardware. Not 1. HUBs, switches, network cards, wireless adaprters, all fine. Most of the HUBs and stuff I used were $12 ones, they all worked fine.

There's always exceptions. Have a read and you'll find people in this forum that have used many D-Links and never had one fail. Its not uncommon for a few people to have a good run.

Wireless is easy, I don't have to drag cables through walls anymore, great stuff, no more making cables, no wall plates, no going up through manholes, no removing tiles off the roof.

Have a look through the threads, how many wireless problems are there? And I'm not talking about a dead Wireless AP, I'm talking about:
- Bad/Weak signal
- Interference
- Incompatible products

Try and find an incompatible ethernet device off the shelf at Dick smith...

Compare the amount of Wireless problems to "My ethernet connection isn't working", then read them, how many are "oh, replaced the cable and it works".

Curtis Bayne writes...

It's not uncommon to see Cisco 2600s with 5+ years of uptime.

Hmmmm... I've seen Cisco 4700 routers with uptime of 10 years and counting!!

Litch writes...

You will find that many products that use Ethernet, (the 802.3 standard) will be more reliable than Wireless for these reasons:-

I think half the reason is actually that most of the common standards in use (below 1Gbps-speed specs) trasmit signals in the MHz range, whereas general personal wireless specs transmit GHz frequency signals/carriers. The circuitry required is quite different and the high-frequency stuff has way less tolerance for error and circuit quality.

There are documented projects out there where people make their own PHY layer for 10Mbps Ethernet with an ethernet jack and FPGA, using the dodgiest wiring you have ever seen. But since it's a relatively low speed signal with a nice eye-diagram ... it works fine. If you start heading into wireless, it's well beyond the abilities of many electronics enthusiasts and you need some serious (and expensive) equipment to make sure every part of your circuit works.

Litch writes...

There's always exceptions. Have a read and you'll find people in this forum that have used many D-Links and never had one fail. Its not uncommon for a few people to have a good run.

Indeed. I happen to be one of the exceptions where almost all my hardware at home has rarely if ever failed. The moment I started work for a small IT company a few years back was when I saw hardware problems: dead routers/switches, single dead port on a switch, etc.