TRENDnet Ships 450 Mbps Dual Band Media Bridge

Status
Not open for further replies.

tetracycloide

Distinguished
Aug 20, 2010
36
0
18,530
0
Can someone that isn't a 'Director of Global Marketing' explain to me why I need a 450 Mbps dual-band router AND a 450 Mbps dual-band 'media bridge?' Why problem, exactly, does the media bridge solve that I would normally be plagued with by simply connecting my wireless internet-enabled TV to my router's wireless network directly?
 
G

Guest

Guest
@Tetracycloide.

Wireless bridges are usually deployed where running physical Ethernet cables is impossible or impractical.

Example: Your Internet modem and router are on the first floor of your 1900's circa house and your new home office is on the second floor and your wife tells you that you are NOT to ruin the house by running cables everywhere. You would then deploy one of these in your office to run to your desktop/NAS/TV whatever.

Usually, these bridges have a much larger wireless range than your run-of-the-mill built in wireless that your TV or USB adapter have, so you can be farther away from the routers access point and still pick up signal.

So you're really getting the best of both worlds. The fact that you don't have to run Ethernet to the far reaches of your house, and still have the security/performance of wired Ethernet on the client devices.
 

Uberragen21

Distinguished
Sep 3, 2009
285
0
18,810
11
To the average consumer, this is pointless. A typical wireless N router will have more than sufficient coverage range for medium to large houses (probably less than 3500 square feet). But there are always millions of variables that make a product like this viable to home consumers.
 

quotas47

Distinguished
Aug 26, 2009
107
0
18,680
0
The article is fine. Some of you commenting are missing the point. The point is it wirelessly extends your wired network across a normally unbridgeable physical gap, as Thinslicedbread says.
To Tetra, __-_-_-__, and Uber:

Yeah so you have a TV with wireless capability, a faster router than this, and no coverage issues, respectively.

Tetra, some people know that wireless =/= wireless. Some are faster. Some households want ethernet to ethernet. If you only have a wireless tv that you use internet on, I think most tech isn't for you. This is a wireless bridge. BRIDGE. Like how in urban areas they beam signals across buildings where they cannot lay cables simply. It lets you place your wireless router (which streams to your TV, laptop, Xbox 360 slim, Wii, iPhone, etc) and also place this wireless bridge which you can then plug multiple cabled devices into (desktop computer, old xbox, file server, wired network printer) This device could even bridge to a guest house.

__-_-_-__,
This doesn't have to be the fastest. As you probably know, with a 600Mbps router, you have to have the complimenting wireless adapter on the other end to get the max throughput. This is almost always going to have to be a laptop or desktop wireless adapter, requiring a much greater resource-requiring device than a Network Bridge like this. This bridging device, while slower than 600Mbps, will likely use less power, less space, and require less interaction/set up than another device you may use as a bridge.

Uber,
You are correct in that coverage usually isn't an issue, and SO right that there are always more variables than you can expect. A bridge shines through in situations where you want a fast point to point link across airspace. It's not meant to span coverage across the house.
You get coverage for wireless devices across the house from the wireless G and N at 2.4GHz. The 5.0GHz transmits point to point from the router to this bridge, allowing wired devices at another location to have a wireless, extremely fast uplink to the router.

To reiterate: Only wired devices connect to this bridge. It takes the fastest, unhindered 5.0GHz (802.11a) band from your router, and uses that as an express channel to bring other wired devices fast connectivity. It appears to also repeat the 2.4GHz signal on its side as well, allowing for essentially two B/G/N hotspots in your home for less wireless congestion, I assume.

Let me put it this way. This is a great product. The more wireless devices trying to talk to your 1 wireless router, the slower it's going to get. This device acts as a sort of bouncer for wired devices that you want to put on a wireless network for whatever reason. It makes sure they all share bandwidth through one wireless "Uplink" to your router in a fair way. This wireless bridge gives a second access point PLUS a way to convert some of those items to wired connections, and you greatly improve access, speed, and coverage.

I hope I explained this well enough.
 

kanaida

Distinguished
Mar 29, 2010
61
0
18,630
0
This is all crap until we can get gigabit internet connections from ISP's, and in the U.S they nickel and dime the crap out of things. If you're talking internet video streaming them 54Mbps already works just fine, at best you could use this for lan gaming, but even then, we've already got enough bandwidth.
 

Uberragen21

Distinguished
Sep 3, 2009
285
0
18,810
11
[citation][nom]kanaida[/nom]This is all crap until we can get gigabit internet connections from ISP's, and in the U.S they nickel and dime the crap out of things. If you're talking internet video streaming them 54Mbps already works just fine, at best you could use this for lan gaming, but even then, we've already got enough bandwidth.[/citation]
Don't forget the home network streaming of data, such as movies and network attached storage (NAS), etc. Those are severely limited by a slow home network, and can't always be directly linked to them. Most NAS systems don't have Wi-Fi built in, most are still wired. By placing this bridge near the device, it allows you to attach a wired network device to a wireless network without wires running through the whole house or through floors.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY