Jerel
Active Member
Technically GHL does give you an option.. It's not a part of the current design scheme, but it's a robust controller and somewhat future proof.
Profilux 4 wifi specifications
- Thread starter Jeremy Luke
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)
Technically GHL does give you an option.. It's not a part of the current design scheme, but it's a robust controller and somewhat future proof.
Reefer525XL
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2017
- Messages
- 834
- Reaction score
- 604
If the LAN card isn't compatible I don't see how that's giving you an option between wifi or wired.
Jerel
Active Member
The ProfiLux 3 is still in production, which has built-in LAN. What lead you to your decision to acquire the ProfiLux 4 instead of the previous gen ProfiLux 3?
Reefer525XL
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2017
- Messages
- 834
- Reaction score
- 604
Regardless if the P3 is still in production I don't see why they couldn't make the P4 compatible with the LAN expansion card. I no longer have the P4 so my decision of why I picked one over the other one is not important but it was the ability to monitor alk and calcium in the near future. That was the main reason. However we all know how the KH Director thread has been ignored when it was said new information would be release soon (back in February).
Jerel
Active Member
Possibly support will happen if enough people inquire to GHL regarding the LAN card.
Your responces to the KH Director thread shows that you are aware that the ProfiLux 4 is currently a priority over the KH Director..
Both versions of the ProfiLux will support Calcium and Alkalinity.
Reefer525XL
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2017
- Messages
- 834
- Reaction score
- 604
Yes but Im aware the P4 has priority as of now but the thread and questions were ignored for a while after the initial post. That's what I was referring too.
So both the P3 & P4 will support something that is not even released but yet the P4 can't support a LAN card? Hows does that make any sense? At least not to me.
The P4 has new design and changes the way updates happen. Letting firmware happen over wifi is new before you had to use USB only. Thus requiring a firmware upgrade to involve updating the whole software stack. They separated the internet connection form the firmware for the wifi stack.
Jeremy Luke
Well-Known Member
I am in the process of doing just that. Based on the discussions above and realizing that I would need to still support a 2.4ghz channel I picked up Google Wifi last night. I chose this solution initially because it can leverage an Ethernet (wired) backhaul while some others cannot. My fiber connection utilizes a VLAN tag. Google Wifi cannot support VLAN tagging so I picked up a smart switch to put in between the ONT and the primary point to handle the VLAN tagging. I was unsuccessful in getting the primary point to connect to the internet. I'll try again tonight and if I fail.. it will go back and I'll pick up another solution that can use a wired backhaul and support VLAN tagging without the need for the switch upstream.
I'm hoping to get as much of my gigabit connection as I can wirelessly while also supporting efficient roaming within my house. That's why I'd like a mesh solution rather than wireless APs which do not steer clients to points with better reception.
Jeremy Luke
Well-Known Member
Overall I'm very happy with my P4 but....
Why would one not want to purchase the most recent version of technology when spending a considerable amount of money?
I would expect the newest version of the technology to support all relevant functionality of it's predecessor while at the same time adding new functionality. While a little surprising that GHL chose to remove the Ethernet port, it's practically unbelievable that they removed the ability to add one when as well. If they expect us to connect via wifi, they should have delivered the functionality with support for a technology that began wide deployment 5 years ago, 802.11ac. I cannot think of any device that I have purchased in recent years(and I love tech so that's a lot) that does not support 5 ghz and 802.11ac. In fact, I have no other connective device in my home that does not. I'll stop my WiFi rant with this, handing me a device with a 2.4 ghz only radio and telling me there's absolutely no work around is a really big bummer, one that would have certainly made me rethink my purchase had I known. My house is in a fairly densely populated area in the city. There are so many 2.4 ghz networks that my current 2.4 band is constantly switching channels and dropping out altogether. It's quite undependable. I consistently have failed attempts connecting to my P4.
Jerel
Active Member
People do it all the time, (Examples) fear of being an early adopter, previous gen of product is more stable, has legacy connections/peripherals, pervious hardware is more user friendly for servicing/modifications.
But, hey.. I'm not here to distract from the obvious that the LAN card is not supported by the ProfiLux 4. I understand the importance of LAN capability, but it's logical that a number of people who owns(Myself included) or have owned a previous gen ProfiLux wanted built-in WiFi. Have you tried to email or call GHL in regards to future support of the LAN card?
Jeremy Luke
Well-Known Member
I have not tried to contact. I just learned of this issue through this thread. I just recently acquired the P4. There was no documentation to be found on the wifi specifications and the setup is extremely rudimentary. So, I am only now learning why I can't get it to connect to my 5ghz band and that I can change that.
I was hoping that posting in the GHL forum here was my contact
I have definitely suffered from being an early adopter in many instances. I knew that there were several items that were still in the works for the P4. Hopefully, LAN card support can be one of those items.
Jeremy Luke
Well-Known Member
@reefwiser I got the Google WiFi going Friday night. If anyone wants to know how to get one working when they've got a fiber connection let me know. It's a pain in the butt to figure out and Google nor my service provider could help.
Anyway, my results are fantastic. Before I connected the other to WiFi spots with Ethernet i had good results. My internet Ethernet and LAN drops are located on the lower level at one send of my house. On the upper level at the opposite end I could prevously only get 12-20Mbps of my internet service. With the mesh points that shot up to 95Mbps at the toughest locations. When I connected the mesh points to the LAN the toughest spots now can achieve 385Mbps of download speed. I'm pretty happy with that.
Anyway, my results are fantastic. Before I connected the other to WiFi spots with Ethernet i had good results. My internet Ethernet and LAN drops are located on the lower level at one send of my house. On the upper level at the opposite end I could prevously only get 12-20Mbps of my internet service. With the mesh points that shot up to 95Mbps at the toughest locations. When I connected the mesh points to the LAN the toughest spots now can achieve 385Mbps of download speed. I'm pretty happy with that.
Jeremy Luke
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately, there is no standalone mesh product that's going to provide VPN capabilities.
Jeremy Luke
Well-Known Member
Got it... Yeah, that's weekend I had so much trouble with the vlan stuff.. Try Velop.. That's good stuff
Jeremy Luke
Well-Known Member
Swype
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2016
- Messages
- 614
- Reaction score
- 418
I certainly understand everyone's desire to have the latest and greatest, but when it comes to 2.4GHz vs. 5GHz, most seem to miss the fact that 5GHz can barely penetrate through simple walls.
There are obvious benefits of 5GHz, more channels, higher throughput, however this comes at a significant price point, both in monetary and technological cost. 5GHz has no punch. 5GHz is wonderful, especially in crowded environments, as your neighbor's 5GHz most likely won't penetrate the walls and will come into your home or office, less interference than the crowded 2.4GHz band & channels, however you also need a significant number of AP's for the same coverage that you'd previously be able to cover with a single AP. Now let's add water filled containers around the 5GHz client, and you won't see the device online.
There are obvious benefits of 5GHz, more channels, higher throughput, however this comes at a significant price point, both in monetary and technological cost. 5GHz has no punch. 5GHz is wonderful, especially in crowded environments, as your neighbor's 5GHz most likely won't penetrate the walls and will come into your home or office, less interference than the crowded 2.4GHz band & channels, however you also need a significant number of AP's for the same coverage that you'd previously be able to cover with a single AP. Now let's add water filled containers around the 5GHz client, and you won't see the device online.
Jeremy Luke
Well-Known Member
I absolutely agree that 5ghz doesn't travel well. That's why I just upgraded my home to a mesh WiFi system. Most modern world clients are capable of operating on either band.
I really like my Profilux. My WiFi issues are a set back. Thanks for your feedback Marco. I sent you a note about my WiFi because currently I cannot connect my Profilux to the network at all.
I really like my Profilux. My WiFi issues are a set back. Thanks for your feedback Marco. I sent you a note about my WiFi because currently I cannot connect my Profilux to the network at all.
Similar threads
