Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google To Introduce Google Wifi, Google Home and 4K Chromecast Ultra Devices On October 4th (androidpolice.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the connected-appliances dept.

Android Police has learned of a new Google device that will launch alongside the Google Pixel smartphones, Google Home, and 4K 'Chromecast Ultra' dongle on October 4th. Called Google Wifi, the Wi-Fi router will cost $129 and contain several "smart" features. Android Police reports: [The] source additionally claims that Google will advertise the router as having "smart" features -- probably similar to OnHub in some respects -- and that Google will claim it provides enhanced range over typical Wi-Fi routers (a claim we see basically every router make, to be fair). But the one thing that will make it an insta-buy for many over OnHub? Our source claims multiple Google Wifi access points (two or more) can be linked together to create one large wireless network. We don't have any details on how this works, unfortunately. But one source claims that Google Wifi device will essentially be like a little white Amazon Echo Dot. So, relatively small and inconspicuous. In a separate report, Android Police details Google's upcoming smart speaker called Google Home, along with their upcoming 4K 'Chromecast Ultra' devices. Specifically, they will be priced at $129 and $69 respectively: Google Home was announced at Google I/O in May. Our sources also confirmed that the personalized base covers Google showed at I/O will be a feature of the final device. $129 also undercuts Amazon's Echo by a full $40, and though matches the price of the portable Amazon Tap, it's clear Google has Amazon's flagship smart home product in its sights with Home. Chromecast Ultra, which we are now all but certain is the name of Google's upcoming 4K version of Chromecast, will come in at $69 retail. As for what it brings beyond 4K, one of our sources claims that HDR is indeed on the list of bullet points.

51 comments

  1. MEH!!!!!111!!!!!!1!!!11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    MEH!!!!!111!!!!!!1!!!11

  2. That's all fine by ADRA · · Score: 1

    But why is Slashdot getting articles about rumors? There's nothing yet officially disclosed...

    --
    Bye!
    1. Re:That's all fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because Slashdot wants to be the tech version TMZ. ... and maybe they are.

    2. Re:That's all fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People still visit TMZ. Not sure much here, anymore.

    3. Re:That's all fine by Luthair · · Score: 1

      Its had rumours for years, go look at all the iphone shit.

  3. Google: The new AOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Pretty soon you'll have to connect using your Google broadband over your Google wifi with your Google account to use your Google Home, watch your Google 4K TV, and talk to your Google friends with your Google email. It'll be AOL all over again, just faster. Welcome to the post-Internet era: The return of the Walled Gardens. Want to go out to the old-fashioned 'internet'? Oh, you shouldn't do that, it's DANGEROUS out there, you could see ANYTHING, or get HACKED, or BULLIED! You don't want to get TRIGGERED do you? Stay inside the Google Walled Garden, where it's nice and pleasant and CONTROLLED for your protection! Besides, we'll charge you TEN TIMES what we charge you now if you really want to do that! Just be a good little customer, and stay inside.

    1. Re:Google: The new AOL by Zalbik · · Score: 1

      WOW that's a LOT of FUD you are SPOUTING there! Do YOU have any EVIDENCE that GOOGLE would be CREATING a CONTROLLED and WALLED garden for the INTERNET, other than the DERANGED SIGNALS bouncing INSIDE your TIN FOIL HAT?

    2. Re:Google: The new AOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks, Zippy. Speak truth!

    3. Re: Google: The new AOL by kurt555gs · · Score: 1

      Is IRC still around?

      --
      * Carthago Delenda Est *
    4. Re: Google: The new AOL by darkain · · Score: 2

      Actually, YES, surprisingly. It is still the quickest and easiest way to report and get fixed bugs for countless open-source projects. Said projects have GitHub, JIRA, and other systems in place, but it is usually still significantly faster to just hop onto the dev channel for the project, ping a key developer directly, and get things resolved right on the spot.

    5. Re: Google: The new AOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. Not only does it exist but there are quite a few people still using it. Mostly for special interest groups (programming help, currency mining, animation, file sharing, etc).

  4. The price is wrong... by Torp · · Score: 3, Informative

    ... since they'll use it to spy on me, they should pay me instead.

    --
    I apologize for the lack of a signature.
    1. Re:The price is wrong... by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      ... since they'll use it to spy on me, they should pay me instead.

      All that effort to create the Alphabet name with the publicly stated purpose of being able to sell hardware while disassociating it from the Panopticon and every single upcoming product has Google in the name.

      Is the Google brand really that strong, despite the Panopticon? Or is calling a company Alphabet really that dumb? Or has Google's attention span gotten so incredibly poor they can't remember why they created Alphabet? Or all of the above? Or should they have called it Cowboy Neal's Chips and Bits?

      Slashdot poll!

  5. then can create a single wifi network? by redback · · Score: 1

    you mean like every wifi ap ever?

    1. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by richy+freeway · · Score: 1

      But this one is on the internet.

    2. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by Stephenmg · · Score: 1

      with two or more wifi AP? I haven't seen consumer level do that. Enterprise does this but not a router that you picked up at your local Best Buy.

    3. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by dugancent · · Score: 1

      Apple routers have been able to do that for years.

      --
      SJWs are the new boogeyman. -Me
    4. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I believe apple airports do this.

      I assume all mid range consumer Wi-Fi will within the next year.

      I purchased a ubiquity access point to do this, it's actually pretty cheap of you already have a router, and the long range was enough that I don't need a second one anyway.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    5. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DD-WRT on any compatible router can do this. I did it ages ago with a couple Linksys WRT54G's. And as others have noted, Apple routers could do it, too (I found a pair in the trash at work and used them like this for a while).

    6. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by swb · · Score: 1

      I'm struggling to understand what "one large wifi network" actually is.

      In enterprise gear this roughly translates into broadcasting the same SSID and some back channel communication of interference, channel selection, etc, to avoid stepping on each AP too much in addition to some of the newer "roaming" extensions that speed up the process of moving between radios.

      You usually can fake this by just using the same SSID on multiple standalone APs and if their channel selection process is any good you generally end up with mostly the same thing.

    7. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by bheerssen · · Score: 1

      Theoretically, I can create a single network for home WiFi with more than one AP by giving all of them the same SSID but using different channels for the ones nearest each other (to prevent interference). Clients should then automatically connect to whichever AP signal is strongest and then, as the client roams the network area, re-connect to stronger APs. In practice, clients do not do that. They stay associated with whichever AP it connected to first until it loses the signal altogether. Only then will it re-connect to a closer AP. This results in a less than optimal experience.

      What I do instead is create a separate SSID for each AP and the user can select and re-select the ones that suits their needs at any given time. In practice, people don't roam all over the house all that much.

      --
      (Score: -1, Stupid)
    8. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by darkain · · Score: 1

      Buy Wifi "router" - disable WAN interface. disable DHCP. assign static LAN IP. *BAM*, instant extra Wifi access point for a house.

    9. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by markus · · Score: 2

      Yes, this is exactly how WiFi was designed to work. In big cities, the noise floor is so high that frequently, you need one access point per room or two. So, the ability for a client to roam seamlessly is pretty important.

      And generally things worked fine that way, back in the day when you could buy WiFi "access points" instead of WiFi "routers". These days, the router function usually gets into the way, though. For many consumer models, you are supposed to be able to selectively disable routing; but in my experience this never works properly. It might seem to work for a day, but then all of a sudden connections keep dropping and become unresponsive. It's just a mode that isn't tested much. And consumer WiFi devices tend to be poorly tested to begin with. Manufacturers care more about rolling out the next cool thing, rather than debugging and fine-tuning existing hardware.

      The solution, of course, is to refrain from buying consumer-grade hardware. Instead, you should get semi-professional hardware. I have had amazingly great luck with Ubiquiti's Unifi series of access points. They are not even more expensive than normal consumer-grade hardware. But they simply just work. Put a couple of their access points across the house, and never worry about poor WiFi performance. You can walk all over the house, and you'll never lose connectivity.

      The downside is that you'll need a router to plug all these devices into. And ideally, this router should be POE enabled (although, you could use the included POE injectors).

      But if you ever wondered how large office buildings make sure their WiFi works correctly, or why some hotels have working WiFi and others never seem to manage; well, now you know. If you spot Unifi access points in the hallways, chances are that WiFi is going to work correctly.

    10. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by markus · · Score: 1

      I have tried that many times. And it even almost works. But in the long run, there always are problems. Connections stop letting data go through. Clients fail to roam when they should. Bandwidth drops inexplicably.

      It's just not a mode that is well supported by most consumer-level hardware. You are much better off buying hardware that was designed as an access point rather than a router.

    11. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      you mean like every wifi ap ever?

      WDS doesn't work at all with a lot of APs, and doesn't work properly with even more (e.g. won't interoperate with other AP software than itself.) Tomato and OpenWRT are both good platforms for actually making WDS work, though.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    12. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      I believe apple airports do this.

      Apple's Airport routers have done this for a decade or more. It works pretty well and is darn handy. I've got one Extreme and a couple Expresses set up this way.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    13. Re: then can create a single wifi network? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't "WDS" (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_distribution_system) quite common in most routers today?

      I've used it with a bunch of old tp-link adsl-modems/Wi-Fi routers to extend a Wi-Fi network. It worked fine.

    14. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want to second the above post. I have the exact same experience at my home. I went with two (so far) "UniFi AC Lite AP" https://www.ubnt.com/unifi/uni... for my rather elongated apartment. They just work. Highly recommended.

      They sit behind a SG-2220 pfSense appliance https://store.pfsense.org/SG-2... which also just works.

      This combo costs a bit more than typical consumer grade would, but as a reward it is absolutely rock solid, with great coverage and equally great performance.

    15. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That "mode" really isn't anything special at all. You're just using the Wifi-LAN bridge exactly like it would be used if you were connecting through your single router to other devices on the LAN instead of the internet. The only thing you need to do in order for this to work is to prevent the DHCP from getting in the way. Every router I have encountered so far has an option to disable the DHCP on the LAN (and Wifi, which is the same interface 'cause it's bridged), and that does actually turn off the DHCP. You can help with the roaming by lowering the output power of the Wifi access point. This makes clients leave for greener pastures while the access point can still receive the frames. Actively managing associations is nicer, but not necessary on a small uncrowded network.

    16. Re: then can create a single wifi network? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agree on this. I Have a unifi ac pro access point and have a netgear r7000. I turned off the wifi on the R7000 to test. range and performace is better on the unifi.

      Even with the older unifi ap 2.4 ghz we have in the office. Range is amazing and that is just $50.

      Dont fall for these new devices like ac3200 or higher and the mesh like devices like luna or eero because all you need is one good acces point like the Unifi and you ate all set.

      You may need help from a friend who knows about networking if you are not tech savy but it's not rocket science

    17. Re: then can create a single wifi network? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2 unifi ac lites is $160 and a 3200ac or higher router is $300.

      You will be happy with unifi's Performance for $160

    18. Re: then can create a single wifi network? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fanboy who probably thinks Apple invented technology.

    19. Re: then can create a single wifi network? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI Ubiquiti has been doing this longer than apple. Its didnt just come out just now. Ther even a feature called zero handoff which a lot of enterprise level APs have.

      Don't be a smart A$$ and say Apple has done for years becaue they haven't. Apple did not invent technology

    20. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      with two or more wifi AP? I haven't seen consumer level do that. Enterprise does this but not a router that you picked up at your local Best Buy.

      Yes, Every AP does that. It's integral to the protocol. Two APs with the same SSID on the same ethernet form an ESSID.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    21. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      Yes, this is right.

      One reason for people buying Unifi APs rather than router/wifi combo boxes from any other vendor is that there don't seem to be many other vendors who sell straight up APs other that overpriced vendors like Cisco.

      It was not like this in the past. The first APs were all APs.

      >The downside is that you'll need a router to plug all these devices into.
      Well a PoE ethernet switch. The router can be elsewhere.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    22. Re: then can create a single wifi network? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      Isn't "WDS" (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_distribution_system) quite common in most routers today?

      I've used it with a bunch of old tp-link adsl-modems/Wi-Fi routers to extend a Wi-Fi network. It worked fine.

      WDS and ESSID are two different things.
      ESSID is multiple APs on the same LAN allowing STAs to roam freely between them.
      WDS is 4-address frames (normal frames have 3) to allow AP-AP communication.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    23. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      you mean like every wifi ap ever?

      WDS doesn't work at all with a lot of APs, and doesn't work properly with even more (e.g. won't interoperate with other AP software than itself.) Tomato and OpenWRT are both good platforms for actually making WDS work, though.

      Same comment as the one I made above. WDS and ESSID are different things.

      ESSID is the one that's worked from day one. WDS (4 address frames) took a bit longer to be properly comprehended by P802.11 and it is not something you want to use unless you need it. I remember an 802.1/11 summit in a plenary meeting where competing views of how to comprehend WDS in the 802.1 architecture were put forth.

       

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    24. Re:then can create a single wifi network? by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Good to know.

      I was pretty sure they did, but wasn't certain.

      I ended up only needing one access point once I got my ubuquiti anyway (I get excellent coverage in my small house now, and the front and back yards).

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    25. Re: then can create a single wifi network? by Jake+Griffin · · Score: 1

      He never said they invented it, just that they "have done this for a decade or more". And they have. One example which did this is the AirPort Express, released in 2004: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      No, this doesn't prove that Apple invented it (and I'm not claiming they did). But it does prove that it is not really newsworthy for someone to be doing this at least 12 years later than its original release.

      --
      SIG FAULT: Post index out of bounds.
  6. No thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My router is just fine. I do enjoy the Chrinecast though.

  7. Google to introduce by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Buttcast. Emissions from my ass.

  8. But does it 'phone home'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, what's the betting line on whether this Google WiFi router sends info to Google itself?
    I'd say it's a sure thing.

    1. Re:But does it 'phone home'? by darkain · · Score: 2

      Most likely pre-configured for 8.8.8.8 / 8.8.4.4, so most likely at a bare minimum, yes for DNS.

    2. Re:But does it 'phone home'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I meant more than just using their services like DNS.
      I meant sending some level of usage data, if not outright activity data.

  9. Loud and clear by pellik · · Score: 1

    10-4 Google

  10. Moca / Fios / Cable Modem support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it doesn't replace the many times limited / proprietary head units that many users have to have I cant see it taking the market by storm.

    We really need FCC to push on interoperability. .

  11. Avoid Google WIFI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If its like the wifi in google fiber devices. Unless flaky and non-functional is okay with you.

  12. So will it... by ipb · · Score: 2

    run OpenWRT?

    1. Re:So will it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      can chromecast 4K UHD be controlled by Windows XP? The original chromecast "google cast" could run on Windows XP until they removed the ability to download the configuration app should one change the in home router or want to change chromecast assigned name. So I have a device thats currently unuseable. VLAN was supposed to get the interface to chromecast API's but so far this feature hasn't been added to have VLAN stream to chromecast. I doubt if chromecast 4k will provide them either.

      So whats an equivalent streaming router (hopefully with 802.11ac builtin) that I can use to stream to using windows XP (or VLAN on windows xp) too?

  13. Alphabet vs Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will all this crap be released under the Google name? Didn't they create Alphabet to separate Google the search engine from all the other things thqt won't make any money which they'll eventually give up on?

  14. What could possibly go wr by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    An advertising agency wants to sell me a router? And a set of voice-activated assistants? I can't see any possible downside at all. Especially since the EULA will be in microprint.