Slashdot Mirror
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.
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.
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.
I've been to numerous client sites where our consulting team either:
a) Could not get internet access onsite. Period.
b) Had to wait literally weeks before the internet access we requested finally appeared.
It's amazing the rube-goldberg-esque tethering solutions we've been forced to implement.
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
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.
I see exactly one use for the device.
Assume for a moment that we have a family - a mother, a father, two and a half kids, and the dog. We're on a vacation (as opposed to staycation), and we're driving to [popular tourist destination] because it's cheaper than flying, even if it takes 19 hours of non-stop driving to get there.
This family has a netbook for the children in the backseat to play their little saved games (perhaps you stuck an emulator on there and are letting them get acquainted with the golden age of gaming). The father has a mobile broadband card that is plugged into his laptop so that he can get at email.
The kids get bored eventually of playing whatever game it is (Earthbound, perhaps), and want to log on to neopets to check on their zafara and their shoyru. You're at hour 8 of the drive.
Decision time!
Do you:
* Hand dad's much more expensive laptop to the kids in the back seat and hope they don't screw it up?
* Drop the mobile broadband card into a device designed to share the connection, and connect the kids this way over their netbook?
* Powder your hands and recite the Pimp's Prayer, then reach back and smack a bottom or two, telling them to settle down and keep playing those emulated games you got them, even though they [barely understand how to play them|are bored by your choice of games]?
I'd not hand the kids dad's laptop. That's just a no-go. That's why they got the netbook, so they can stay off the big computer.
It's a little hard to reach back and slap that kid on his ass when you're doing 70.
It's easiest to tell the wifey to drop the card into the mobile router and share the connection. Maybe she'll stop paying as much attention to Facebook and actually, y'know... talk to you while you're driving.
(there are other scenarios that are similar to this, as well.)
One of these days, I am going to flip out. When I flip out, I'll be back in five minutes.
I used to run FreeSCO on an old P-133 box. Then one day I realized I was using about $50/yr in electricity just so I could have a "free" replacement for a $59.99 router.
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
There are actually changes in Windows 7 that help with this. WiFi virtualization was added to the Windows 7 kernel allowing you to run two WiFi connections from the same hardware adapter. So you could put a PC in range of a normal access point and then share the connection by creating an access point on the second virtual adapater. With previous versions of Windows, you would need two hardware adapters, or you would be limited to sharing a LAN connection.
I tether my laptop to my Android phone via wifi. The advantage is that I don't need to carry a cellular modem for my laptop, have a separate data plan, or swap sim cards (on GSM networks). The fact that someone else can use the connection is an additional bonus. I used to have a separate data plan and 3G modem, and I'd even share this connection via iptables/NAT from my Linux laptop. It worked, yes, but it is much better to just let my phone handle this now.
As for a MiFi, this is different in that you're using a special device, losing the advantage of leveraging your phone hardware, and ultimately pay more. The advantage being that you're not breaking your service agreement, have a carrier-supported solution, and you don't need to root your phone. With all of the limitations of the MiFi, it is not significantly better than using a cellular modem.
Personally, I hope that carriers start to loosen up and allow (wifi) tethering, because this really provides the best of all worlds.
Just play 'I Spy' and *interact* with your kids.
Tom...
So basically it's asking this: "Does being able to create a WiFi hot spot FROM your laptop replace a method of getting a WiFi hot spot FOR your laptop?"
Seriously? The MiFi (for those that don't know) is a little credit-card sized WiFi router, offered by Verizon and Sprint, that gets its internet connection from the cellular network. So if you want internet and you're not near a network or hot spot, two options are:
Yes, if your primary concern is "how do I share my mobile internet connection with others," there is overlap between "computer as router" and the MiFi. But if you don't have an internet connection yet, the software router doesn't help much, does it?
"The water jug as faucet killer."
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.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?