Slashdot Mirror


Apple's New, Improved Airport

timbck2 writes: "Apple has just released a new and greatly improved version of their Airport 802.11b wireless network access point, with better WEP encryption (128-bit now instead of 40-bit), better non-Mac PC integration, and a new LAN connection port. Here are the tech specs." An anonymous reader pointed to Apple's rather bland press release as well. This is a good upgrade to the Airport, with thanks probably due in part to companies like Linksys who are making much less expensive 802.11 base stations (which work great with Airport cards, too), though lacking a modem.

78 of 259 comments (clear)

  1. Link by PHanT0 · · Score: 2, Interesting


    On a related note, anyone have a link to that guy who hacked the airport and attached a Yeag directional antenna to get 11 Miles or something out of it?

    1. Re:Link by bonzoesc · · Score: 2

      It's been featured on slashdot before - I'm sure that typing in something in the search box at the bottom of the page would have been easier than replying.

    2. Re:Link by rf600r · · Score: 3, Informative

      yes

  2. This is good news by Raven42rac · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is excellent new for those looking for an excuse to jump into the wireless networking pool, It will be interesting to see how this will compete with Intel's upcoming 802.11A spec for wireless networking, speeds, security, etc. As we all know, the wireless field has potential, but enormous security holes need to be patched in order for it to gain widespread acceptance, and this is a step in the right direction.

    --
    I hate sigs.
  3. Re:Huh? by InstantCool · · Score: 2, Informative

    Since PC stands for Personal Computer, a Mac still qualifies as a PC.

    --
    InstantCool
  4. AOL support by crow · · Score: 5, Interesting

    While most people here probably don't use AOL, this is probably the most important change. Sure, they upped the encryption to 128-bit, increased the number of client computers it will support, and added a LAN ethernet port, but what really makes this a big deal is that it is the first time I've heard of a home router product supporting AOL. It's not too shocking to have one that will handle standard PPP connections, but to have it handle AOL's proprietary protocol is very noteworthy.

    This was probably done with AOL's support; Apple wouldn't want to risk problems with AOL tweaking its protocol to block AirPorts. So what sort of terms were involved in the deal? Did AOL do it in their own interest (it seems to me that they benefit), or did Apple pay them (they also benefit)?

    1. Re:AOL support by ZoneGray · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, "AOL Support" could mean that the setup program installs AOL software, creates a desktop icon, makes aol.com your home page, and offers to sign you up for an account.

      Gotta learn to read through the marketing-speak.

    2. Re:AOL support by crow · · Score: 2

      If you have a cable modem or DSL, then TCP/IP is all you need, but if you're using a modem, then you need to deal with PPP, and if your ISP uses something non-standard, then you either have to be able to deal with it, or switch ISPs.

    3. Re:AOL support by mactari · · Score: 4, Informative

      No probably. Read the FAQ, natch. :^)
      http://www.apple.com/airport/faq/

      Q: Why didn't AOL work with AirPort before?
      A: AOL has a unique login protocol, which kept AirPort from being able to establish an AOL connection. Working together, Apple and AOL have devised a method to allow AOL customers to use AirPort. In fact, AirPort is currently the only wireless solution that works with AOL.

      --

      It's all 0s and 1s. Or it's not.
    4. Re:AOL support by Quarters · · Score: 2

      How would this differ than just using AOL over a standard TCP/IP connection? My LinkSys cable/DSl 4 port gateway/router lets me connect to AOL just fine. I just have my AOL client set to use TCP/IP instead of a dialup connection.

      Luckily I don't have to use AOL all that often.

    5. Re:AOL support by 4mn0t1337 · · Score: 2
      first time I've heard of a home router product supporting AOL

      Could someone be a bit more clear here? I set up for my GF an Airport AP (as she has a iBook). She also has an AOL account and does most of her internet stuff through AOL.

      I have *never* had an issue with getting her AOL connection to work with Airport when she is over.

      But then again, I connect the AP to the LAN and have a DSL connection.
      Could the issue be with the authentication on a dial-up? (I have never used the modem half of it.)
      Or is it because I have a different machine doing the firewall/routing?

      --

      ______
      Once: you're a philosopher. Twice: a pervert.

    6. Re:AOL support by Sentry21 · · Score: 3, Informative

      How would this differ than just using AOL over a standard TCP/IP connection? My LinkSys cable/DSl 4 port gateway/router lets me connect to AOL just fine. I just have my AOL client set to use TCP/IP instead of a dialup connection.

      The difference is that the Airport can dial-in to AOL to login, while your use is over TCP/IP.

      --Dan

  5. Linksys good? Not necessarily.... by yack0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's funny they mention Linksys in the blurb here and 'how good they work'. Ever try and upgrade a Linksys device from your Mac? You CAN'T DO IT! Well, there are no instructions for it at linksys. There is no little tftp program on their site for Mac's to do it. They don't support Mac. (note the period). In an email I received this morning from Linksys they flat out told me that.

    While linksys is cheap, they won't support anything but windows users. That's all their is to it.

    Cheap hardware with no support - take your chances and hope someone on your LAN has a Windows box when you need an upgrade to your linksys (like to make the linksys work with your airport card ;)

    j

    --
    -- There is no sig line, only Zuul.
    1. Re:Linksys good? Not necessarily.... by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 2

      With MacOS X you can, though I had to hunt around a few Linux sites before I found the answer. Basically you first have to remove the admin password and then use tftp as normal and then replace the admin password once the firmware upgrade has been done ( this worked for me ). The same approach can be used for pre-MacOS X machines if you find yourself a tftp client for the OS.

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    2. Re:Linksys good? Not necessarily.... by geekoid · · Score: 2, Informative

      here

      that link is very long, not sure if it will be good.
      I went into there knowledge base and found mac support.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Linksys good? Not necessarily.... by macinslak · · Score: 2, Informative
      I do so wish moderators would read links before modding. The linked page only has to do with making their router play nice with an Airport base station, which is not really "Mac".

      Linksys really is ass on a stick though. They don't guarantee anything beyond the ability to route HTTP, and all that I have seen from them has been finicky and kept rather short uptimes.

    4. Re:Linksys good? Not necessarily.... by Megane · · Score: 2
      Their low-end model without a modem can only be configured over the USB port, requiring at least W98 or W2K. I got one last month and just used my desktop box at work to set it up. FWIW, their cheap AP is an OEM solution from Atmel, but they have a lot better support than Netgear's version. Linksys has the 1.4 version of the firmware on their web site (security fixes AND the ability to do wireless bridging), and removable antennas. Netgear's doesn't even say on the box that it requires a Windows machine with USB.

      FWIW, Addtron and SMC also make APs with this particular chipset. I don't know anything about SMC's, but Addtron's looks like a toy.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  6. More security improvements by musicmaster · · Score: 5, Informative

    They have done more than add 128 bits WEP. 128 bits WEP is still easy to crack.

    But Apple has added Radius and a firewall too. See their FAQ at http://www.apple.com/airport/faq/.

    1. Re:More security improvements by zpengo · · Score: 3, Redundant
      They have done more than add 128 bits WEP. 128 bits WEP is still easy to crack.

      What is it with airport security these days?

      --


      Got Rhinos?
  7. Security and the OSI model by MarcQuadra · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm still of the school that security should take place higher up on the OSI model.

    I don't like the idea of replacing hardware to ensure security.

    We need a secure DHCP variant and encrypted IP, not open DHCP and scrambled network frames. The reasons are numerous. Security should be handled in IP, not in hardware.

    --
    "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
    1. Re:Security and the OSI model by SCHecklerX · · Score: 2

      So use IPSec. That's what it's for. And IPV6 has IPSec built in, whenever it starts becoming mainstream.

    2. Re:Security and the OSI model by MarcQuadra · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Exactly, That's what should be happening, but instead we are seeing hardware-based encryption of the frames themselves, this is bad for several reasons:
      1. You must upgrade hardware if the security is cracked.
      2. It's bound to cause standards wars amongst vendors, all rushing to get better security, but producing a tangled web if incompatability.
      3. Why should frames be encrypted when we already have IPsec? This just throws a wrench in the works.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
  8. Linksys by LinuxOnHal · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The Airport Base station was long the only good value, as its competitor was Lucent, selling theirs for upwards of $700, so this was the only viable option. Then came Linksys. I really think they have a better product, since it does ethernet-ethernet wireless bridging, something apple has yet to add in. This is formerly something only $1900 Cisco Aironet Bridges could do, but linksys will do it for $200 or so.

    Apple does a good job with these though, they have only gotten better with the firmware updates. We own several at work, and throughput, reliability and multi-rate support has just gotten better through the versions.

    --
    Trying is the First Step to Failing --Homer Simpson
    1. Re:Linksys by darkov · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, they do support ethernet-ethernet wireless bridging. I have a Win box, a linux box and a Powerbook all hooked up to the base station with a cheap 8 port router and it works a treat. I use it to do my NAT. Also will serve DHCP too. What bothers me is that they don't have a DNS server in the box. That would make it much more useful. I have to use my ADSL modem to do that.

  9. Airport is great technology, but... by nbvb · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The thing that makes Airport so WONDERFUL is the integration on both their desktops and laptops.

    The built-in antennae make for some excellent reception on the laptops!

    On the other hand, the base station, while it looks cool, isn't that impressive. I bought a Linksys wireless station / firewall / router / 4-port 10/100 switch for $159. It was well worth the cash, and the range seems better than on the airport stations.

    On the other hand, the fact that it all integrates so perfectly (between Apple's airport, the Linksys, and my neighbor's PC laptop) speaks very highly of the whole thing. :-)

    --nbvb

    p.s. Also, just a heads up -- Apple's been shipping a 128-bit version of the Airport *CARD* for months. The /C revision of the card was secretly 128-bit. :-)

    1. Re:Airport is great technology, but... by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 2

      Amazon here lists the Linksys router/access point for $180, the Netgear variant for $225, and a SMC variation for $190. There's also D-Link's, for $195. They offer more ports (3-4), a print server, some have modems, but unles I'm much mistaken, none support more than 10 wireless users. Apple's does :) Oh, and Apple's was first, even if it is higher priced, by now. What Apple needs to add to it's lineup is an Apple print server... then when you hook it up to the Airport, you get a wireless print server, for 'free' :)

    2. Re:Airport is great technology, but... by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 2

      Uh, really? It can support 254 wireless users? I thought most wireless points had hard constraints due to bandwidth limitations?

  10. Re:Runway Length? by option8 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    silly me, i thought the range for 802.11b was supposed to be 150 ft. you must live in a ridiculously tall house, or have a lot that's several acres in size to be complaining about range. the example i remember is that if you stick a base station in the middle of a (american) football field, you'd get a signal all the way to both goal lines.

    now, if you have some kind of interference, then you're SOL. as for me, i've never had any problems with the range in my average-sized home, or in my average-sized back yard between my base station and my ibook, whereas my cordless phone breaks up walking out the back door.

  11. 128 bits of insecure encryption by hamjudo · · Score: 2, Insightful
    WEP is Wired Equivalency Protocol, it is like running a wire to your neighborhood script kiddy.

    Ignore WEP and use real security on your link. There are many options.

    1. Re:128 bits of insecure encryption by hamjudo · · Score: 2
      If you've got more than a handfull of users, then you want RADIUS or something like it to authenticate users/systems as they connect.

      RADIUS is just an authentication protocol, it doesn't provide privacy. Sript kiddies will have to pretend to be using systems that have active sessions. Ok, the script kiddie may not know what's going on, their scripts will have to pretend.

      RADIUS may work, but you've still got to replace WEP.

    2. Re:128 bits of insecure encryption by Megane · · Score: 3, Informative
      From the AirPort FAQ:

      Q: Which of the new features are available to existing AirPort customers through a software upgrade, and which are available only with the new AirPort Base Station?

      A: Upgrading your system to AirPort 2.0 software will provide additional functionality to both your card and your base station. Your AirPort Card will be upgraded to support 128-bit encryption and will be compatible with Cisco access points using LEAP.

      LEAP is apparently a good enough add-on to 128-bit WEP that Cisco uses it on their internal network. As I understand it, LEAP constantly changes the WEP key, which prevents it from staying constant long enough to be decoded through a sniffer attack.

      Unfortunately, this is only Cisco LEAP client support, so only the AirPort cards inside Macs and Powerbooks will be able to benefit from this, and not the base stations.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    3. Re:128 bits of insecure encryption by bconway · · Score: 2

      Whether or not it works as intended (yes, WEP is broken), it still functions as a deterant, and that's important. It's much more like having a locked door with the key buried somewhere underground in the yard versus an unlocked door. Someone could take the time to find it eventually, sure, but it's much easier to go up to the house with the unlocked door/wireless network.

      --
      Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
  12. WEP Security by rlp · · Score: 5, Informative

    A group of AT&T researchers broke WEP security (even the 128 bit version). See paper here. They recommend treating 802.11 connections as open and using things like SSL and SSH to protect sensitive data.

    --
    [Insert pithy quote here]
    1. Re:WEP Security by jandrese · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Thats what we do. Use 128 bit passwords, but then treat the link as insecure. Remember that good security comes in layers. The 128 bit WEP may not provide foolproof security, but it is certainly a deterrent to attack, and if you only run VPN traffic over the network you add yet another layer the cracker must compromise, and if you require that everything connected to the network have a good firewall (with a specified standard ruleset that allows only VPN traffic, and only to the IPs and MACs that we're expecting) then you add yet another layer of security.

      What I really want is for the cards to rotate the WEP codes on a regular basis (once ever second for instance) automatically. I actually implemented this on our WaveLans with FreeBSD, but unfortunatly it prevented Windows users from connecting because the Windows drivers weren't nearly as automatable. It also opens a big can of worms with keeping the machines synchronized (ntp helps, but what happens when someone goes away for awhile and their clock drifts?) and coming up with a way of producing the same pseudo-random number on all machines without it being predictable since you obviously can't send the encryption key over the air. This would obviously work a lot better if the cards themselves implemented it and just ran it transparently with only a little bit of extra configuration data (a 128 bit or bigger seed).

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    2. Re:WEP Security by BJH · · Score: 4, Informative

      Since it requires somewhere in the region of a gigabyte of data to go over the wireless network before it's possible to crack 128-bit WEP, I suggest you change the key update interval to something a little more realistic.

      Since 801.11b runs at a maximum of 11Mbps (theoretically, anyway - it's more like 3-5Mbps), it's easy to work out that an attacker would require a minimum of:

      (1000 * 8) / 11 / 60 = 12.1 minutes

      in order to compromise a fully-saturated WEP connection. (In actual fact, it'd take a lot longer than that for most networks.)

      So, set the key to update every ten minutes, and you're pretty much guaranteed to be safe.

  13. Other companies... by wal · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And why did other companies start making less expensive wireless base stations? Because everyone was buying Apple base stations...

    Apple has been putting out an affordable wireless product for much longer than Linksys.

    The original product may have had its bugs but I have ben using one for over a year now and that was just not possible with a PC (without a lot of moolah).

    1. Re:Other companies... by scumdamn · · Score: 2

      Actually, the Orinoco branded "Residential Gateway" was really just an airport without the cool apple software. If you ran the apple software, though, it worked with it just fine. The problem with the first generation stuff was that WEP was enabled out of box and that required some setting up. Consumer products should just work out of the box without any configuration besides plugging it in. The next generation products are broadcasting their SSIDs and have encryption disabled. And they all have two RJ45 ports. It's worthless without them as far as I'm concerned.

    2. Re:Other companies... by Arkham · · Score: 2, Informative
      This is true, but the Orinoco Residential Gateway did not come out until one year (to the day) after Apple released the AirPort Base Station.

      Apple was first to the wireless market with affordable bases by a year, and first with laptops that had built-in antennae for even longer.

      --
      - Vincit qui patitur.
  14. Still needs something... by FrankieBoy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've used the AirPort Base station since it's release and it's great at wireless for a mixed PC and Mac environment. Any 802.11b PCMCIA card will work with it, I use Orinoco and LinkSys cards with no problems.

    It's the best wireless base station around but it did have the WEP encryption vulnerability that was very publicized. If you crack one open you'll find a straight-off-the-shelf Orinoco Silver 64-bit card. I upgraded one of our base stations with the Gold version, which provides me with 128-bit WEP, but I'm glad that Apple finally decided to do the same.

    You can also attach a Lucent Range Extender antenna, which dramatically improves performance. Just pop the cover off, pull the little round tab off the PCMCIA card, attach the antenna lead, drill a hole in the cover to run the wire out and presto!

    I am surprised that they did not apply the 802.11a standard that some other base station makers have recently announced for increased bandwidth over the wireless portion of the LAN. Oh well, I'll just have to wait...

    1. Re:Still needs something... by jaoswald · · Score: 4, Informative

      I am surprised that they did not apply the 802.11a standard that some other base station makers have recently announced for increased bandwidth over the wireless portion of the LAN. Oh well, I'll just have to wait...

      802.11a isn't something you just "apply." It is a different range of spectrum entirely (5 GHz, not 2.5 GHz), requiring a totally new RF design.

    2. Re:Still needs something... by Pathwalker · · Score: 2
      I just added an external antenna to my airport last week - it was pretty easy; it took about 15-20 minutes.
      A few things to keep in mind if you do it:

      Carve a big chunk out of that black ring that supports everything - that plug takes more space than you might first guess.

      Have the cable exit the outer shell on the other side of the airport from where the cable connector is - it is much easier to run the cable around between the black framework and the outer shell instead of trying to get a tight enough bend in it to exit near the jack

      Be careful not to scratch the inside of the plastic shell - scratches really show up

      Signal strength seems much higher - I haven't gone for a long walk with my laptop yet, but I am at full strength in my yard rather than 50% strength.

    3. Re:Still needs something... by Phrogz · · Score: 2
      I am surprised that they did not apply the 802.11a standard that some other base station makers have recently announced for increased bandwidth over the wireless portion of the LAN.

      As someone else noted, this requires new RF design in the product. However, further, there is no backward compatibility for 802.11b in 802.11a. Want your wireless network to go from 11Mbps to 54 Mbps? You gotta upgrade all your cards, not just the base station.

  15. Re:significant price difference= about half by sgifford · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Having both is very cool for portability. I have one of the original Apple Airports, and I use it at home and at work on an Ethernet-based Internet connection, and at my girlfriend's apartment and during presentations with a modem-based Internet connection.

    My only complaint is that it's awkward shape makes it hard to fit into my bag.

  16. Hmm an airport run by Apple... by Unknown+Bovine+Group · · Score: 2, Funny

    I doubt that an airport run by Apple would go over very big, especially with that BOMB icon every time something crashes....

    --
    m00.
  17. Re:Runway Length? by spongman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I imagine he has interference in the form of walls. it depends what your house is made of, of course, but walls and floors can seriously diminish the range of the signal.

  18. 50-client limit? by spongman · · Score: 2

    i was under the impression that 802.11b had no theoretical limit on the number of clients that can be connected simultaneously. the only limits being shared bandwidth and IP addresses.

    can anyone clarify?

    1. Re:50-client limit? by spongman · · Score: 4, Funny
      my guess is that it would be impossible to fit that many (2^48) PCMCIA cards into a 150ft radius sphere, let alone the computers and users you'd need to make them useful.

      ;-)

  19. Incredible bargain... by supabeast! · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For $300 the new airport base gets you:

    -A 50 user wireless node.
    -Built-in modem that even supports AOL access.
    -Connects to Cable/DSL "modems" to act as a router.
    -Built-in firewall for simple security setup.
    -Works with loads of different operating systems.
    -Looks really, really cool. Definately beats those ugly blue boxes with flashing LEDs and antennae.

    Is it just me, or should Apple marketing be pushing these to non-Apple users? This thing is incredible, especially for the cost. Steve Jobs should tell them to send review samples to the editors of all the PC magazines and web sites.

    1. Re:Incredible bargain... by hashashin · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, I was wondering that too, but in the tech specs it states that you still need at least one Mac around to set up the base station. So without software to set it up from a PC, I'd say they're not really marketing to the PC-only crowd just yet.

      (from http://www.apple.com/airport/specs.html)
      System Requirements
      For PC users
      • At least one AirPort-enabled Apple computer (to set up the base station)
      • A PC with a Wi-Fi-certified IEEE 802.11b wireless card
    2. Re:Incredible bargain... by scumdamn · · Score: 3, Informative

      Intel and Dell are both offering a router that is easily configurable via http and doesn't require proprietary software to be installed. It also has a "firewall", two RJ45 ports, etc.

      And it's only $289 from Dell.

    3. Re:Incredible bargain... by squaretorus · · Score: 2

      should Apple marketing be pushing these to non-Apple users?

      Yes. They should. They are pretty. PC users don't often get to have a bit of pretty hardware on their desks. This is VERY pretty. Then all their other stuff will look cruddy and they'll feel the itch to buy an apple machine just to have it look pretty.

      Its also pretty good technically... but hey - pretty wins every time huh?

    4. Re:Incredible bargain... by supabeast! · · Score: 2

      Pretty much. I bet Apple would have done a lot better if they hadn't kept trying to sell those Macs with black and white screens for years....

  20. Here it is... by FrankieBoy · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here is a great site with all the info on modifying your base station for extended range.

  21. Apple's Supplier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Just so everyone knows, Apple gets their wireless LAN stuff from Agere Systems (ORiNOCO). Oh, and here is a little press release too.

  22. Firmware Updates? by uslinux.net · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Does anyone know if Apple intends to offer firmware updates to current Airport owners (or if this is even possible), or if those who previous shelled out $299 for an Airport will be out in the cold?

    1. Re:Firmware Updates? by BWJones · · Score: 3, Informative

      From Apples website: AirPort 2.0 software
      Compatible with all versions of AirPort Cards and Base Stations, AirPort 2.0 software brings enhanced features to AirPort wireless networks. AirPort 2.0 software can upgrade original AirPort Cards to support 128-bit encryption (encryption for original AirPort Base Stations will remain 40-bit). Software Update will auto install AirPort 2.0.

      Basically, as I remember from a briefing, I think you get all the new features except the 128 bit encryption. Which makes sense, but should also be relatively easy to get around with an Orinocco gold card transplant.

      http://www.apple.com/airport/

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    2. Re:Firmware Updates? by Arkham · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The new AirPort software showed up on my OSX 10.1 Software Update panel today. I installed it, and when I ran the admin utility it offered to upgrade my base station. I did, and now I am running the newest software on it.

      Apple really did it right with OSX's networking. Plug in Ethernet, and the Mac uses it. Unplug it, and it automatically switches to wireless, within a second or two. It's very smooth.

      --
      - Vincit qui patitur.
  23. Airport 2.0 Software Update Too by digithead · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I didn't see it mentioned, but according to Apple's web site the 2.0 version of the Airport s/w that's included with the new base station and available for download will upgrade any customers existing Airport card to 128-bits. Even if 128 bit isn't as secure as everybody would like it's nice to see that Apple isn't soaking everybody for a new Airport card to go with the 128-bit base station!

    --
    Once you lick the lollipop of mediocrity, you'll suck forever!
  24. Better WEP? by Scoria · · Score: 2

    Cool, fifteen seconds as opposed to five. :)

    --
    Do you like German cars?
  25. Re:Runway Length? by spongman · · Score: 2

    try rotating the access-point (and the arial, if it's not fixed position) through various axes. i found that just flipping mine around gave me an extra couple of feet.

  26. Good range out-of-the-box? by SilentChris · · Score: 2
    One of the problems with the original Airport was its lack of out-of-the-box range. For those of us who don't want to play with mounting antennae, the Airport had below average range of around 100 feet (although, to be fair, my experiences with 3Com's expensive AirConnect hub were even worse). My best experiences, so far, have been with the relatively inexpensive Orinoco access point which, while it didn't include a built-in hub or firewall, had range close to 450 feet.

    I've heard that the relatively quiet company SMC produces some good 802.11 range products. Any thoughts or experiences -- on any product -- with good range out-of-the-box

    1. Re:Good range out-of-the-box? by TWR · · Score: 3, Informative
      I bought the SMC 4-port wireless router for my home network (an iMac, an iBook, and an ancient PowerBook 1400 with an Orinoco Silver card) recently. It's excellent.

      Configuration is done via a built-in web server. NAT, firewall that you can punch holes in as needed, DMZ, MAC filtering, 128-bit WEP, 3 10/100 downlink, one 10/100 uplink, printer server, and a port to plug in a modem (I don't know what protocols it supports over the modem, though). It can route AppleTalk, and you can install firmware upgrades from any computer (you just upload a file via your web browser).

      It cost $199, about $100 less than the Airport Base Station. The new base station has some excellent features (AOL, better network config stuff), but I'm not regreting my choice at all.

      -jon

      --

      Remember Amalek.

    2. Re:Good range out-of-the-box? by seanadams.com · · Score: 2
      I believe this is due to the orientation of the wavelan card. It sits horizontally, so the antenna is pointing straight up.


      The base station comes with a bracket for wall-mounting. For the best range, I think you're supposed to put it on the wall, pointing in the general direction of the clients.


      I, too, have found the range of my Airport to be about 100'. That's with the base station indoors and my powerbook outdoors, and the base station sitting horizontally, on it's feet.


      One thing that's nice about the Airport is that unlike the cheaper base stations, it uses a an Orinoco Wavelan card which can support an external antenna. So if you want to add a higher gain patch antenna or a parabolic dish for long distance links, all you have to do is drill a hole in the cover to get to the connector.

  27. the stupid shape by timothy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sgifford wrote: "Having both is very cool for portability. I have one of the original Apple Airports, and I use it at home and at work on an Ethernet-based Internet connection, and at my girlfriend's apartment and during presentations with a modem-based Internet connection.

    My only complaint is that it's awkward shape makes it hard to fit into my bag."

    hear hear! I went with the linksys (the one with the 4-port switch, too) in part because it seemed more stable sitting on the top of a PC case than the Airport does, and in part because I had immediate need of the additional ethernet connections.

    If apple would make a nice g4-translucent case but at least vaguely rectangular, with sturdy and stable rubber feet, and all the features of the current (new) AP, I would have bought that instead, and an additional little tiny linksys 10/100 switch in addition.

    Oh well -- sometimes Apple makes aesthetically pleasing decisions, and sometimes they make aesthetically pleasing *and* practical decision. The shape of the adapter on my iBook unfortunately falls only under the first of these.

    timothy

    --
    jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
  28. Re:All I am wondering...... by bstrahm · · Score: 2

    What do you think the 128 bit W.E.P. is... It is the security equivelent of the National Guard... If you want real security you send in the Marines or Rangers (I mean 802.3x, or IPsec with AES CTR Mode)

  29. AirPort & AOL by green+pizza · · Score: 4, Informative

    It seems a lot of folks are misunderstanding the new AOL support. You see, the AirPort also has an internal modem for those without broadband. Previously, the modem could only be used to dial into a PPP account. With version 2.0 of the AirPort software, it can dial into an AOL account for Internet access (i.e., it now has a version of AOL's proprietary software in its firmware). This is not a feature that most geeks will notice, as we'll be using the AirPort's ethernet interface with our broadband connections and *maybe* the modem for PPP backup. But for those that get their Internet access via an AOL dialup, and would like to share it with their 802.11 equiped machines via NAT/DHCP, this is godsend.

  30. Re:All I am wondering...... by bstrahm · · Score: 2

    Uhm... No, all he has to do is download any of the common W.E.P. exploitation hacks, then they have full access to snoop my connection... Of course when doing e-Commerce I only use encrypted links, but that is above layer 4 not at layer 2

  31. Why not VPN? by obtuse · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The AirPort basestation is a x86 single board computer. I've been trying to find out about rolling a Linux distribution to get VPN running on the device. That would solve the 802.11b security problems and make it _much_ more useful. The RADIUS server is nice, though.

    Enjoy life, eat out more often.
    SE Rykoff

    --
    Assembly is the reverse of disassembly.
  32. Re:almost there.. but not quite by hearingaid · · Score: 2

    Two reasons.

    • Marketing. Apple wants you to buy a Mac. Hell, you can get a cheap iMac with AirPort for not much now, especially if you're a network admin.
    • Support. Apple would prefer to just support the Mac OS.

    That said, it's only a Matter of Time before somebody hacks the AP controller protocol and produces something like netatalk to run it.

    That's assuming that all the geeks don't just sell out and run OS X, anyway. :)

    --

    my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore

  33. MacOS X 10.1.1 Update Also Out! by BoarderPhreak · · Score: 3, Informative
    Hey, don't forget that Apple also released a MacOS X 10.1.1 update today, too! The explanation from Apple reads:

    "Delivers improvements for many USB and FireWire devices, including support for additional digital cameras, and overall improvements to CD and DVD burning. Enhancements have been made to AFP, SMB, and WebDAV networking, as well as improved support for printing. This update also delivers better application compatibility, including updates to the Finder and Mail application. In addition, hardware accelerated video mirroring has been enabled for the new PowerBook G4."

    You can automatically get and install it through the "Software Update" control panel.

  34. count on slashdot by feldsteins · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You can always count on slashdot to find just the right angle on an Apple-related post - negative. It might have easily been pointed out that Apple was the first to integrate 802.11 into laptops and desktops. But no, the salient issue it seems is that Linksys makes a cheaper access point. Not that it isn't true! I freakin' OWN a Linksys. It's just that slashdot can be positively COUNTED on to knock Apple, no matter what the story is.

    --
    You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
  35. Re:almost there.. but not quite by TheInternet · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I would say the #1 blunder in Apple's release of this product is lack of support for configuring it from an x86 PC (running Windows or Linux or your BSD of choice).

    Apple's goal with devices like this and the iPod is not to have everyone (including wintel users) buy them, but to provide more value and a better experience to the Mac platform. From what I can tell, Apple doesn't make much money on the base stations themselves. But as part of the total Mac equation, it makes a lot of sense, espeically in the long term.

    They may not explicitly prevent wintel machines from using these devices, but there's no point in making it easy seeing as their main goal is to sell computers.

    - Scott

    --
    Scott Stevenson
    Tree House Ideas
  36. Which begs the question... by TheInternet · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is it just me, or should Apple marketing be pushing these to non-Apple users?

    The question is, do you think they would stand to gain more or less money/marketshare by doing such a thing? I suspect the answer is less. It also means less differentiation between Mac and wintel.

    I know the instinct is "I want this on my PC," but Apple has more to consider than that -- like do they really want to make a business out of selling cross-platform gadgets, possibly at the partial expense of their computer business?

    - Scott

    --
    Scott Stevenson
    Tree House Ideas
  37. Re:PPPoE by ScooterComputer · · Score: 2, Informative
    Yup...I talked to the Apple Store this morning (well, yesterday morning) right after the new Airport base station was announced. It will support PPPoE and/or a DHCP Client Identifier on the broadband port. Of course, I will wait until I actually configure one to believe it.

    The tech at the Apple Store was surprised to learn that that nugget of info had been omitted from the website.

    --
    Scott
    "Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
  38. Re:RADIUS support == sweet, but... by PatJensen · · Score: 2
    Just thought I'd let you know, I upgraded my original station this evening and my OS 10.1.1 box, no go on the RADIUS/LEAP on the server side, or the firewall/access list functionality. LEAP is supported on the AirPort client software, however.

    I'm guessing that only the dual Ethernet version gets the access list support. However, I am purplexed by the lack of RADIUS support. Maybe the CPU is not powerful enough, or there is not enough RAM to handle the queries? The only visible new feature is AOL support as a Network Type for connectivity. Hope this helps. Nothing to be too excited over!

    Airport is still a solid product for PC or Mac users and gives a good bang for the buck. I enjoy using mine with the new software (and the new iTunes and 10.1.1 upgrade). I feel like a kid in a candy store!

    -Pat

  39. Re:PPPoE by PatJensen · · Score: 2
    Scooter,

    I checked my Airport Configurator on 10.1 and it supports PPPoE as well as the DHCP identifier, modem dial and AOL. Hopefully that'll make you happy!

    -Pat

  40. knocking apple? by timothy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    perhaps I'm responding to a troll, but --

    I'm not knocking Apple -- I've liked Apple's hardware for a long time. I own and use an Apple computer, and have had a string of 'em before the current iBook (IIfx, SE/30,* Classic II, Performa 636*, powerbook 140, powerbook 240 duo, and maybe a few others in there, too). For the past several years, I've been a lot more interested in software-with-source-code-available, a category that Mac OS (excepting the Darwin part of OS X) does not fall into. OK; that doesn't mean that Apple become a bad company making bad computers, it just means that people have different preferences and interests. OK, no problem. (Several of the Slashdot authors and coders use / enjoy Macs, btw.)

    For reasons outlined in some other comments, I actually prefer the Linksys AP+4-port switch to the Apple Airport, but lighten up, alright? :) I may have certain objections to Apple, but I also have a lot of praise for them. Apple has a remarkably good user interface (less bad than most alternatives in most aspects), good industrial design for their hardware (the G3/G4 case is genius, better by far than the pricey Antec cases on my PCs), and intelligent focus on the user experience in general.

    Apple has done more to open up home wireless networking than most of the other companies involved in it combined. The airport is functionally brilliant (wish my Linksys had a modem, I do) and for a while was the best deal in home wireless by a long shot. Right now though, Linksys and SMC (and others) are making products which for many people can bring the benefits they'd get from an Airport for much less money. So? Apple isn't dumb :) They'll either add features (like they've just done), drop prices (like the not-bad pricing on current Apple laptops), or otherwise try to make people find it worthwhile to buy their version. Or maybe they won't, and that aspect of their business will falter. OK -- no problem, at least long term.

    If you still think my post was hard on Apple, or negative, I don't know what else to tell you. I generally like Apple, though like a lot of other armchair critics, there are a lot of things I wish they did differently. No crime in that, eh?

    Cheers,

    timothy

    *The only real dog of the bunch, but still a useful machine.

    --
    jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
  41. Re:All I am wondering...... by bstrahm · · Score: 2

    The problem with script kiddies is that there is no perceptible difference between a stupid joyrider and a professional chop shop...

    The scripting of exploits gives the rank amature the ability to hack into any system with any identified vulnerability...

    There were some interesting logs posted by someone with a honeypot, where two kids were trying to figure out how to configure an ehternet interface (or something simple like that) after they had fully compromised a Solaris box, deleted their footprints in the logs, installed a couple of back doors, etc...

    Very scary stuff