Network setup after Christmas

[Xairbusdriver]

Despite all the whining and teeth gnashing from a lot of people around here. I'm about to order an Airport Extreme ( the only model being made ) for my wife. That's all she'll tell me she wants for Christmas!

So, here's the way I suppose I'll connect it to the current network of my iMac, her iBook ( with and old AP card ), a networked printer and two shared inkjets and the cable modem. Let me know if this is impossible or there might be a simpler way. My iMac doesn't have an AP card, nor am I interested in getting one. She'll be getting the next new computer later next year, probably a new MacBook or maybe a MBPro, so she'll soon have an extreme card, no use getting an older Airport, even if I could find a new one.



BTW, will the RF keep the cat warm?

[gunug]

To really please the cat you need either a CRT type monitor or a very warm laser printer (one that doesn't save energy so much by cycling down).  You don't say (and I don't remember) what kind of iMAC or printers you have so you'll have to judge for yourself the "catworthiness" (is that a word?) of your peripherals.  Perhaps we should start a service at TS to work out the BTU output of various computers and other equipment!  

Maybe you could use one of these:



Cupwarmer/catwarmer whats the difference?

[tacit]

You will actually save money, and some hassle, if you simply disconnect your router, throw it away, and buy an 802.11g router from Linksys or D-Link to put in its place. This will give you AirPort capability in a way that is much cheaper than buying an Apple AirPort, and your network will be easier to manage.

If you buy an AirPort and connect it to your current router, you will partition your network into two sections. The wireless computer(s) will have a 10.100 IP address, and your other computers will have 192.168 IP addresses. Because all these IP addresses are non-routeable, it can sometimes be a bit tricky to get the wireless computer talking to the wired computers (and vice versa), and can make it a bit troublesome to do things like set up port forwarding on the wireless computer if you want to use, say, iChat AV in video mode.

If you replace your current router with an 802.11g wireless router, the network will be easier to configure. Wireless and wired computers will all have 192.168 IP addresses, making communication and port forwarding much easier. And you'll have fewer gadgets and fewer cables sitting on your desk.

[Xairbusdriver]

Thanks, tacit, that's the kind of info I'm looking for. I have already assigned permanent IP numbers to both Macs ( used to have three ) to cut down on access delays to automatically assigned numbers, will they not be recognized because of the Airports expecting/forcing the 10.100... numbers? Can the Airport be assigned a number? Although I imagine that even if it could, the machine attached to it would basically be a sub-net and possibly make contacting/sharing with it more difficult.

I'm leaning toward the Airport because of its reputation of ease of use and 'support'. But its lack of extra ports really defies the use of 'router' to it. And when my wife gets a new laptop, we'll be closer to 'windows' capabilities ( which may make router updating easier ).

Granted, there is a small rats nest of cables behind/under/around the desk, fortunately, the cat has stopped 'investigating' them!

[Paddy]

Stop! Whatever you do, do NOT do what you're proposing!

Like Tacit says - toss your current router. But I'd buy an Airport and an ethernet HUB.

Connect the Airport to the modem, connect the ethernet hub to the Airport (adding however many ports you need - I've got a very nice little D-Link 4 port hub) and you're good to go. I have a two wired Macs and a print server running off the hub and the remaining 4 Macs are wireless. Works like a charm.

Caveat: Airport Extreme base stations are more expensive than similar 802.11g routers. However, I had two previous wireless routers (a D-Link and a Linksys) and neither were satisfactory - dropped connections left and right and one problem after another. The Airport has been FLAWLESS and worth every penny, IMHO.

[chriskleeman]

Hi Paddy,

Doesn't one lose significant speed using a hub, slower with each computer connected? Or is this old technology that I'm thinking about...   and I agree, I had a Netgear, which imploded, and now I'm trying to get a Lynksis to work properly (which it won't), the old Snow Airport is still working fine, with acceptable wireless speed to the laptops.

Chris K

[Paddy]

Oops, silly me - didn't even look at the thing. Not only is it a NETGEAR, not a D-Link, it's a 4-port switch, not a hub, so no loss of speed. BTW - switches are now just about as cheap as hubs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_switch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_hub

This is the one I have - currently $22 after rebate at Amazon

Or even cheaper - this 5-port one for $10.99 from NewEgg

[Xairbusdriver]

OK, I think I understand. I'm assuming the AP has one ethernet port. That will be expanded by the switch. I'm also assuming that the switch will either pass along the packets to the ethernet printer ( or they may have to go all the way to the AP and back through the switch - mox nix! ). The 'trick is getting the two ( or more ) machines to see each other. That is critical and the main reason I do not use DHCP, I have them assigned an IP address and it never changes. That allows me to access the each machine with a double-click of its alias on the others desktop - never use the "Go..." menu, period. If I can't keep doing that, I might just stick the airports ethernet cable into the slot now used by the laptop! But I'm more concerned about absolutely, positively, automatic double-click connectivity and I suspect that it will not be possible unless the AP can also be assigned a static IP number. DHCP is simply not acceptable, the IP addresses change every time a machine is turned ON/OFF which destroys the alias' address, thus no more double-click access; back to the "Go..." menu...too much like Windows!

I may visit the Apple Store tomorrow to try to determine if the AP can be assigned a fixed IP number...

I've already accepted the fact that Apple's gear is more costly, in this case. Actually, refurbed Extremes are easily available for $145, with full warranty, but I'd rather get her the real banana!

[krissel]

More info on Airport networks:

http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/mac911/200...witch/index.php

Apple manual:

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=52002


General network info site for others who may wish to read up:

http://www.homenethelp.com/web/explain/index.asp

[Paddy]

Jim, I use DHCP and I've never had any problem with one of my Macs seeing the other with the Airport base station. However, it's completely ok to set things manually too - the MacWorld article has the instructions at the end. Any router (which the Airport is) should be able to do this.

[tacit]

You can use an AirPort with a switch and assign static IP addresses to your computers, though they will be 10.100 addresses instead of 192.168 addresses.

Personally, I feel that this is expensive and unwarranted. I don't really know why people argue against 802.11g routers; I have a D-Link here in my office as I type this, a Linksys at home, and I've been using D-Link and Linksys gear for years with no problems, difficulties, or dropped signals. (Of course, performance with any wireless device does vary with the environment. Put your wireless router near any large metal object, or behind a wall which has metal in it, and you'll drop connections.)

The Linksys wireless routers are particularly nice because in addition to being cheaper than Apple wireless gear, they support DynDNS; that means you can go to DynDNS.org, get a free username and password, and create a free DynDNS URL. The Linksys router will monitor your network connection from your ISP and notify DynDNS any time its IP address changes. This allows you to access your server from anywhere else, such as from your place of work or from some other city, without memorizing your external IP address--just type in your DynDNS URL and you're there.

[Xairbusdriver]

QUOTE

You can use an AirPort with a switch and assign static IP addresses to your computers, though they will be 10.100 addresses instead of 192.168 addresses.

Correct, I just got through browsing through "Airport Network Designs" from the Apple manuals area and noticed that. As the cable company never sees what's connected except the 'router' I don't think it will make any difference what our Macs use for their address, as long as the 'router' knows what they are. Making them static is purely on my side of the connection and simply maintains the addresses if one of them is ever turned OFF/ON. If that ever happens ( including a Restart, AFAIK ), they will usually come up with a new/different address, that will break any alias/icon of the machine on any other computer, forcing the use of the "Go" menu. Why bother, Apple invented 'drag-n-drop' so why not use it? It sure makes it simple for my wife to put stuff on my machine! She still likes to close windows instead of quitting programs. And she never used Windows!

DynDNS sounds very useful for people who travel a lot and need to access their other machine(s). Sounds somewhat similar to the tinyURL service?

I also talked to an Apple Genius this morning and they confirmed that you 'guys' know your stuff! Looking at an Airport in the store, I saw only one ethernet port and didn't see how it would work for the 'router' part. However, there is also a WAN ethernet port that accepts the cable from the internet cable/DSL box. The second ethernet port is for a hub/switch/router/single computer.

Thanks, again for the help, info and opinions!

BTW, even though one must make a reservation to speak with a Genius by entering ones name and email address, they apparently don't have access to email so they could actually use that address! At least not in the Germantown store and the Mac the Genius was using. She had to actually write down the URL for the manual I downloaded. ( of course, the URL I got was for Genius/Store use, but I just searched for 'Designing Airport Network' and found the manual, anyway. So much for 'cutting-edge' technology at that Apple Store! Also around 11:50 I asked when the 11:45 appointment would be. There being two other people in front of me and no one at the counter was him ( I suspect that 'he' was as confused as I was when he registered; there were two identical entries with the same name! ). Amazingly, after my enquiry, a 'Genius' appeared from behind a locked door! I shoulda asked earlier!

[Gregg]

Jim, you should be right at home with an Airport network.

[Xairbusdriver]

gregg;

I don't know, I'm still up in the air about it...fortunately, I have plenty of extra fuel.

[Mayo]

Jim, I think that you are making this harder than it has to be. So what if Airport uses different numbers when it assigns IP addresses?  Your Macs will not know the difference nor will they care... It works the same as LANs that use 198.xxx.xxx addresses.

Using the Network icon to connect is my preference over the "Go" menu and once it is set-up it is nearly as fast as using the aliases, without cluttering-up the desktop.  We aren't trying to split the atom here and I would bet that even your computer-challenged wife could master it in under three minutes.

QUOTE

I don't really know why people argue against 802.11g routers

The Apple Extreme Base Station is an 802.11g router that is also compatible with 802.11b wireless cards.

QUOTE

The Linksys wireless routers are particularly nice because in addition to being cheaper than Apple wireless gear...

Yes, Linksys routers are cheap(er) Yadda Yadda Yadda...  But try using a Linksys router on a Mac LAN with Macs using Airport cards of different vintages... Good Luck!  Or if you want to secure your LAN using the strongest encryption... Good Luck Again! Sometimes it is a bear to even enable WEP encryption on a Mac/Linksys LAN.  

And when Apple releases an Airport upgrade that offers the latest and greatest security protocol (not an uncommon occurrence...) or other improvement via the ultra-easy Software Update, your Linksys may not like it one bit.  Depending on the router model Linksys can take 6-12 months to release a new firmware upgrade, or the company may not even bother, apparently expecting Mac owners to just buy a new router. (But Hey, Linksys routers are cheaper!)

I've used Linksys and I've used Apple.  I wasted far too much time trying to get a Linksys router to accept passwords. And more time locating, downloading and installing firmware that  likely won't fix the problem even if it doesn't trash the router...  Then there are the dropped connections, etc.  And don't waste even more time contacting Linksys tech support because what you will hear after waiting 30+ minutes is "We don't support Macs!" Click.

We all know that Macs seem to be a little more expensive than PCs (although that is debatable when comparing comparably-equipped Macs and PCs) but we bite the bullet because we know from experience that Macs offer benefits worthy of the extra scratch.  The same goes for the Apple base station... it may appear to be over-priced but it is optimized to work with Mac networks, it is sooo easy to set-up and It Just Works, period.  So which router is really cheaper in the long run?