TP-Link Omada EAPs and cloud controller

[Harnser]

There's a lot of love for Unifi on these forums, which it has thoroughly earned.

However I keep running across ads for TP-Link's Omada mesh system. It's cheaper, it's got ugly APs, and has anyone experience with it? How does it perform compared to Ubiquiti kit?

 

[Harnser]

It's not a Mesh system, in the same way that Unifi isn't a mesh system. They're both (supposedly) Software Defined Networks.

Thanks for the correction. I've seen "mesh" bandied around a lot in magazine articles but never defined, so I eventually assumed it meant a WiFi system where you could walk around and be transferred between APs. What does it really mean?

Here's a glorious example from a review:

In case you haven’t been keeping tabs on the wonderful world of wireless connectivity, mesh takes the flaky coverage of the traditional single router system and replace it with a better coverage by employing two or three units

which sounds like any system with multiple access points.

I'm sure Omada is great. Most TP-Link stuff is. But why would you buy Omada when you can buy Unifi? Or Meraki/DNA for that matter now that Cisco are hitting back against Unifi with their lower-end stuff.

I got called by a Cisco rep in February, and knowing the price of 4x AC-PRO and a 3-year cloud controller license, asked him how much the equivalent Meraki solution would cost. He priced up 4x MR33 and 5yr(!) meraki licenses, which came to £2k+VAT. I've heard a lot of good things about Meraki, but not enough for that price premium. Do they do more reasonable stuff?

Omada's software interface doesn't look very pretty, it's priced directly against Unifi (you'll save nothing if you spec like-for-like equipment)

I know little about networking and even less about how WiFi works, so was reading through the Omada access point specs seeing they had higher db transmit power than Unifi and thinking.. that means they are more powerful so the cheaper models are the equivalent.

When every manufacturer gives different details in their specs, how do you find like for like? I haven't found antenna radiation patterns for the Omada APs, or if they're 2x2, 3x3 or 4x4 (something I see bandied around with Unifi and which are more powerful).

there is a VAST knowledgebase of people who can use and implement Unifi, whereas TP-Link's forums have tumbleweed blowing through them.

That is true, and a very good point.

 

[Harnser]

In a conventional system with access points, each access point has a wired connection back to the router. In a mesh, the access points are connected over wireless LAN, either through a completely separate wireless lan system embedded in the access point, or using up some of the bandwidth of the standard wireless LAN. Mesh is almost always slower because it has to use half the available bandwidth just to communicate between access points. Latency is also higher in mesh systems.

Thanks, that makes complete sense.

Well, there are two things I would ask you to consider about your statement. Firstly, the maximum combined amplification and antenna gain are limited by law, so there is no possibility of one access point being more powerful than another. They're all effectively the same. And secondly, the issue of coverage (not range, range is measured in a straight line, coverage is how much area the access point will reach) is dictated mainly by the client (your phone, tablet, laptop etc.) Imagine I'm standing in the middle of a football field with a megaphone. And there are people in the stands. They can probably all hear me, but I can only hear the ones nearest the pitch and the ones in the upper tiers are completely inaudible. Unless you can give your phone or tablet a megaphone, your phone will always be able to hear your access point but the access point can't hear the phone. That's why the transmit power on the AP-AC-LR is the same as every other Unifi access point but the RECEIVE/Listening antenna gain is higher - that's what makes it Long Range.

Excellent points. The one about coverage being dictated by the client is why I've been asking in the other thread whether it's best to start with a single AP-AC-LR and see how it covers the house, or an AP-AC-PRO. With not much basis I've been leaning to the LR because staying connected to a weak client matters (no more black spots), but the "Pro" has pro in the name so must be better

I would very politely ask you to not use 'powerful'. Perhaps 'better coverage'?

I will and thanks for pointing it out. I'm happy to be corrected: I know there's a lot I don't know, a lot I don't know I don't know, and I'd rather know than not know.

The 2x2, 3x3, 4x4 just refers to how many send and receive channels (and antennae) they have. You can combine the channels to get more bandwidth (and therefore send data faster).

Is the number of channels/antennae about getting more bandwidth to a single device, or does it really only matter when serving a lot of devices?

Thanks @WJA96, Tuesday has started a good day because I have learned multiple new things!

 

[Harnser]

We have Omada now (3 EAP245's and 1 Wall) after having previously Uap-ac-lr, and switched as wasn't happy with their performance and really glad we switched. The Omada line is really simple, easy to use and has amazing performance for the money, they are easily the most consumer friendly solution in this area.

Thanks @apachegoose good to hear your experiences with them. Did you mount the EAP245s in the exact same locations as the AC-LRs, or was the equipment relocated? Curious if that contributed to the better coverage you experienced.

Well, as someone who buys LOTS of access points, I can assure you that I can't buy an EAP245 for half the price of an AP-AC-Pro. They're within £8 of each other at my distributor.

You have a good distributor For consumers not buying quantity the price difference is more marked.

 

[Harnser]

EAP245 is £90-ish vs. AP-AC-Pro is £130 retail. Not £180. Even a HDNano is only £160. So definitely not half the price.

Sure, but a larger difference than £8 at consumer prices too.