Thread Info
  • State Not Answered
  • Replies 6 replies
  • Subscribers 14 subscribers
  • Views 655 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Suggested

Inferior physical design of new AP6 420 vs our older APX 320

Rafael Telles

We recently moved to a new office and decided to upgrade our two APX 320s to two AP6 420s. The specs on the new APs look great in paper but once we tested them in real life the increase in performance wasn't as much as we expected. Anyways at least in performance we improved a little, however in terms of physical design it went downhill!

I really dislike the new AP6s, the unit is larger and uglier, but the biggest complaint I have is with the positioning of the ETH, USB, Reset and power input on the side instead of in the back of the unit. Our APX 320s looked very nice installed in the dropped ceiling, the AP6 420 show the Cat6 cable connecting to it from the side (not a clean look), plus all the other ports/holes.

This post is meant as feedback for the design team, maybe for the next APs they will go back to a more compact unit and putting the Eth jack in the back again,



Added TAGs
[edited by: Erick Jan at 12:35 AM (GMT -7) on 11 Oct 2024]
Parents
  • 0

    I have to admit that I had a similar thought when I upgraded to the AP6 420E. The APX 320's no-ventilation is probably not the best design -- especially for Wifi 6E -- but the ability to run the ethernet straight into the wall/celiing OR to run out out of the side was quite nice. In the future, a hybrid design would probably be best.

    On the other hand, Wifi 6E is VERY nice. The whole 5GHz band is so screwed up and fragmented in multiple ways and 6GHz -- with Wifi 6 enhancements -- is the way to go. (The APX 320 also had its quirky two-radio solution, but that's another matter.)

    I notice that your device has a barrel power connector, which mine doesn't -- so mine has a slightly cleaner look. Not sure if it's the region or the 420E, but mine seems to be PoE-only.

Reply
  • 0

    I have to admit that I had a similar thought when I upgraded to the AP6 420E. The APX 320's no-ventilation is probably not the best design -- especially for Wifi 6E -- but the ability to run the ethernet straight into the wall/celiing OR to run out out of the side was quite nice. In the future, a hybrid design would probably be best.

    On the other hand, Wifi 6E is VERY nice. The whole 5GHz band is so screwed up and fragmented in multiple ways and 6GHz -- with Wifi 6 enhancements -- is the way to go. (The APX 320 also had its quirky two-radio solution, but that's another matter.)

    I notice that your device has a barrel power connector, which mine doesn't -- so mine has a slightly cleaner look. Not sure if it's the region or the 420E, but mine seems to be PoE-only.

Children
  • 0 in reply to Wayne Folta

    Mine are AP6 420 (without the E) for the Americas. You mentioned a good point about ventilation so that might be ok. I still don't understand the logic of why the unit needs to be larger and why the ports (ETH, Console, Reset and Power) cannot be on the back of the unit? I haven't even enable 6GHz at this point since I wanted to make sure the WiFi works fine plus the majority of smartphones and laptops in the office are not even 6 GHz compatible. I might enable that frequency in the future.

Unfiltered HTML