The Software Router As MiFi Killer

An anonymous reader writes "The MiFi Mobile Router has been getting a lot of positive reviews these days, for combining a cellular modem, WiFi radio and battery pack in a portable device. But playing with a beta release of a software based wireless router for Windows 7 has me wondering if there's any future to these dedicated, multi-radio routers. Is the future that every PC should be a router? Or is that a job best left to a cell phone?" I just drove across the country and back with a MiFi (using Verizon's service, which was not zippy but very reliable); it strikes me that being nicely cross-platform and not requiring a laptop with its own cell-network connection is a serious advantage for the MiFi or any similar device.

Comments

NAT is a good thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Is the future that every PC should be a router?

No. Just no.

The reason we want dedicated routers has nothing to do with computers being incapable of serving the same function. It's because we want to isolate functionality to minimize the risk of getting hacked. It's well known that connecting a Windows computer directly to the internet will result in it getting P0wned in almost no time. And *nix computers, while better, can still be vulnerable. And both platforms can become vulnerable when the wrong software is running (anything that listens on a port can be vulnerable).

Basically, NAT routers are the only thing limiting the hordes of zombie WinXP boxes to a reasonable size. We don't want to give people who don't know better the idea that they don't need them.

Re:NAT is a good thing

[im_thatoneguy]

Also electricity. I don't need a full blown computer running 24/7 just to provide wifi for my laptop.

Re:NAT is a good thing

[Anonymous Coward]

No, NAT is not a good thing, it breaks end-to-end connectivity. Many protocols do not work with NAT. And the superficial security NAT might appear to have is easily defeated through various techniques.

Security is a good thing, this is provided by true stateful firewalls, which is orthogonal to NAT.

In any case, these aren't the reasons people utilize routers.

Windows has had Internet Connection sharing for a long time, but we don't see broadband users utilizing ICS.

The more obvious reason is: convenience. Followed by energy efficiency.

Convenience meaning you don't have to keep your computer awake all the time to route traffic. It spares you the inconvenience of powering it up to make your other networked PCs work.

Also, a dedicated routing device is more reliable than a PC, generally won't blue screen or get viruses.

And it consumes less electricity, which is cheaper than leaving a PC on all the time for the convenience of other users.

Re:NAT is a good thing

[Artraze]

There are also lots of other reasons beyond security (as dedicated routers can be hacked too, of course):
*) Stability: I don't want my whole network going down because I installed some updates or have bad software, poorly cooled hardware, etc.
*) Power consumption: I don't want a 100+W system on 24/7 just to maintain my network.
*) Hardware suitability: I don't want to need to have all my network stuff (wires, modem, etc) sitting under/near my desk when I can have my hub tucked away in a closet. Also, I don't want to have a bunch of NICs in my computer, using up slots and causing potential power problems.

Those are just what I can think of, but that's more than enough for me. It's not as if this situation is anything new anyway... I used Internet Connection Sharing about a decade ago so I could have more than one computer using the dial up. Once I got high speed I was glad to get a dedicated router box so that my computer was free from being the gateway. I cannot foresee this changing; while merging devices is good, modularity is often better.

Re:NAT is a good thing

[tlhIngan]

Also electricity. I don't need a full blown computer running 24/7 just to provide wifi for my laptop.

Noise too. While modern PCs can be quiet, it's still something that hums away with its fans and hard drives spinning. Some people are disturbed greatly by the hum, others need it. But a router makes very little noise (usually a high-pitched squeal from the DC-DC converters).

Also, if your PC breaks/gets infected/whatever, it'll take down your whole network. Now you gotta go and rig up your other computer so you can get on the 'net and download the necessary tools to fix it. A router? No changes, just go over and get the files while you fix.

Windows 7? More like XP. And OS X. And Linux. And

[ZackSchil]

I like how this is suddenly news because Windows 7 has a GUI for this and touts it as a feature.

Pretty much every modern OS can act as a router, even previous versions of Windows, without additional software. We don't use PCs as routers because it's wasteful and inconvenient. Think about it for 5 seconds: Why do people use dedicated router rather than using this feature that's been in the OS forever? It's because using a PC as a router is annoying and wasteful, even at home. One machine always needs to be on for the others to get a connection. If that one machine breaks, the whole network goes down. Apply this to the road where power and space are more scarce. Even less convenient.

Re:I've never really understood this device

[corychristison]

though yes, this device would make it dead simple

I think that's the point. It is dead simple. It's virtually no configuration and it "just works." No fiddling about with drivers. It works with anything that has a usable 802.11 b/g/n wireless card in it.

So, you can use an iPod Touch/iPhone, Nintendo DS, Sony PSP, or any other hand held device that supports Wifi and doesn't have the ability to do bluetooth or usb tethering.

I think they need to start bundling these mini hotspots into cars for long trips. Then I can check my e-mail from my laptop (not while driving, mind you -- the wife can check it while I drive, or vice versa) the kids in the back can play on the net via ipod touch, or play their video games online with their DS/PSP, etc. etc.

Lots of applications for portable wifi hotspots via the cell towers.

If I Recall Correctly...

[93 Escort Wagon]

The Intel laptop wireless chipsets have implemented this router "feature" for some time now, haven't they? And wasn't there a brouhaha because the router functionality was enabled by default at first?

I find it funny that I'm starting to read and hear about all these Windows 7 innovations - well, they're apparently new to the Windows community anyway. The latest Network World Twisted Pair podcast discussed a great new feature of Windows 7... it's Leopard's "web clip"! Start your copiers, indeed...

It's a dead parrrot. This device is obsolete

[Colin Smith]

Joiku Hotspot.

Every wifi capable (S60 3rd Ed phone models) mobile phone can be a wireless hotspot.

 

Re:I've never really understood this device

[tom17]

Just play 'I Spy' and *interact* with your kids.

Tom...

Work or solve puzzles

[Kohath]

Why use a simple device that works with an existing configuration when you can spend your time performing complex hacks on all your computers to find a way to patch them together into a vague approximation of the simple device? Because you want internet access to get work done, not a puzzle to solve to inflate your self-regard.

Re:Windows 7? More like XP. And OS X. And Linux. A

[Andy Dodd]

madwifi had that same capability 3-4 years ago. I think that capability has been migrated to most Linux wireless drivers with the new mac80211-based wireless stack.

Droid Does

[Anonymous Coward]

Android supports tethering no problem (wifi & bluetooth). I'm using it right now. 1.3mbit/s over T-mobile.

Now if a service provider wishes to ship an Android phone with root disabled... well, that's not Android's fault is it?

Anyways... Symbian & Winmo are dead.