• sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    1·
    19 days ago

    Having at least one more port makes debugging a lot easier, and it also opens the door to port-based VLANs. If they had three ports, it would be infinitely more useful to me, and any more ports than that is just icing on the cake.

    But only two ports means you have to get a separate switch unless you’ll only ever have the one ethernet device.

    In terms of tradeoffs, drop the Wi-Fi capability entirely and add more physical ports. I doubt the Wi-Fi module is any good (doesn’t even do 6GHz), and it doesn’t seem to be replaceable either. If you’re going for a home-lab setup, you’re going to want more ports. If you’re going for a regular home user use-case, you’d prefer a better Wi-Fi card. Maybe sell two models, one w/ better Wi-Fi (full 6E standard) and one w/ more ports and no Wi-Fi.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      2·
      19 days ago

      Fair points.

      I’d say they could make three versions:

      • a “clean” single-port WiFi-only model but with actually good WiFi hardware (so, 7 if possible; 6e at least)
      • the current model, but with 2x2.5
      • one with no WiFi and at least 4 ports, including at least 2x2.5
      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        1·
        19 days ago

        Yeah, I’d be down with that, and I’d go for the last one. I only need 1 2.5G port, though 2x is always nice to have. The extra gigabit lines would be nice for separated VLANs, like running my camera network (don’t want that touching the net).