If you were deploying all new APs today, N or AC?
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
I'd get gigabit switches. No reason not too. But in most applications if your phone limits your desktop connection to 100mbps the user will see no difference. It depends on what kind of data/how big the data is that your company is using.
The reason is cost.
How much can you save? $20?
Frankly I haven't found a 48 port POE+ 1 Gb vs 100 Mb switch yet to compare prices.. but for anything less than 30% I wouldn't care about the price savings.
When I bought my POE switches 8 years ago, the Gb ones were 100% more expensive than the 100 Mb ones, so I bailed on the idea of Gb for endpoints. In 8 years, really hasn't been an issue.
You'll only find 100mb POE+ switches at 16 ports or so. Anything bigger will be gigabit. No one is buying POE+ with 100mb. It just doesn't make sense. If you want 100mb you'll have to get older non-poe/or POE 802.3af only. not 802.3at
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@Dashrender said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@Dashrender said:
What POE+ high density switches are people using these days?
Needs to support VLANs.
Have you looked at the HP 2920-48G
I did, it didn't look like the 48G had POE+ from the spec sheet on HP.com
The POE+ Model does I believe it's MSRP is about $1,800 there is a 2620-48G POE+ for about $1,000. Both are L3 Switches
http://www8.hp.com/us/en/products/networking-switches/product-detail.html?oid=5408921
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B005SGMHVQ/ref=psdc_281414_t2_B00BJ42JQY
Thanks, I found the 2920-48G, but the POE version wasn't coming up for some reason!
Now to read the differences between the 2620 vs the 2920 to see if the $800 price difference is warranted.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Remember, investing today in technology for tomorrow means you pay a premium for that technology.
I will agree with you on this point, for sure.
You are just continuously losing money doing that. You need a tangible benefit to your investments, especially when they are large (in percentage, normally.) AC is not cheap compared to N, it's not like a couple extra dollars. It's real money that you lose, money that could have been banked and used to buy even better stuff when the right time came and a need existed.
That depends on the brand names you are talking about... and at what scale. If you are going to buy 100 Wireless N for a total of $230k, an additional $50,000 is quite a chunk to go from N to AC. However, I think we are starting to get close to the end of life of Wireless N (we're not quite there yet) -- in the sense that most new laptops and devices sold this year come with systems that work with AC, and N (and even G, in dual rado setups).
Since the newer AC Units are backwards compatible with N on the 2.4 gHz band, it makes sense to me, to upgrade to get the extra processing power of the AC access points since they are both firmly planted in that future looking, yet backwards compatible limbo, if you will.
Check the cost, though. How much money do you lose going to AC now? How much money is "being ready" going to cost? Keep in mind that likely, in about two years, you can buy AC for probably half the price that they are today. And you can upgrade one at a time as appropriate. The flexibility, time value of money, unknown future principle and other things make investing in technology you can't use or justify yet generally pretty bad. Especially stuff like this that has a pretty predictable cost dropping curve.
This, this right here is the whole reason for my post. Scott's written this time and time again, and I'm definitely trying to take it to heart (and application). This is why I mentioned that our newest laptops all purchased Summer 2014 don't have AC and everything else older won't be replaced until it fails (I don't expect to replace most for at least 2 more year, but really probably 4).
With that in mind I don't see the value even in my small install base (23 APs @ $50/ea to upgrade to AC = $1150) to purchase AC at this time.
Now Scott's other point that AC will be half the price in 1-2 years that it is now.. I frankly don't see that being the case either considering the current cost of the AP-Pro, at best the AC will probably be $50 less than it is now in 1-2 years so this does not play into my decision much either.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Remember, investing today in technology for tomorrow means you pay a premium for that technology.
I will agree with you on this point, for sure.
You are just continuously losing money doing that. You need a tangible benefit to your investments, especially when they are large (in percentage, normally.) AC is not cheap compared to N, it's not like a couple extra dollars. It's real money that you lose, money that could have been banked and used to buy even better stuff when the right time came and a need existed.
That depends on the brand names you are talking about... and at what scale. If you are going to buy 100 Wireless N for a total of $230k, an additional $50,000 is quite a chunk to go from N to AC. However, I think we are starting to get close to the end of life of Wireless N (we're not quite there yet) -- in the sense that most new laptops and devices sold this year come with systems that work with AC, and N (and even G, in dual rado setups).
Since the newer AC Units are backwards compatible with N on the 2.4 gHz band, it makes sense to me, to upgrade to get the extra processing power of the AC access points since they are both firmly planted in that future looking, yet backwards compatible limbo, if you will.
Check the cost, though. How much money do you lose going to AC now? How much money is "being ready" going to cost? Keep in mind that likely, in about two years, you can buy AC for probably half the price that they are today. And you can upgrade one at a time as appropriate. The flexibility, time value of money, unknown future principle and other things make investing in technology you can't use or justify yet generally pretty bad. Especially stuff like this that has a pretty predictable cost dropping curve.
This, this right here is the whole reason for my post. Scott's written this time and time again, and I'm definitely trying to take it to heart (and application). This is why I mentioned that our newest laptops all purchased Summer 2014 don't have AC and everything else older won't be replaced until it fails (I don't expect to replace most for at least 2 more year, but really probably 4).
With that in mind I don't see the value even in my small install base (23 APs @ $50/ea to upgrade to AC = $1150) to purchase AC at this time.
Now Scott's other point that AC will be half the price in 1-2 years that it is now.. I frankly don't see that being the case either considering the current cost of the AP-Pro, at best the AC will probably be $50 less than it is now in 1-2 years so this does not play into my decision much either.
Invest the money you would have in AC APs in new switches to get you on gigabit. That's what a would recommend. It doesn't sound like you will see any benefit from AC APs.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Remember, investing today in technology for tomorrow means you pay a premium for that technology.
I will agree with you on this point, for sure.
You are just continuously losing money doing that. You need a tangible benefit to your investments, especially when they are large (in percentage, normally.) AC is not cheap compared to N, it's not like a couple extra dollars. It's real money that you lose, money that could have been banked and used to buy even better stuff when the right time came and a need existed.
That depends on the brand names you are talking about... and at what scale. If you are going to buy 100 Wireless N for a total of $230k, an additional $50,000 is quite a chunk to go from N to AC. However, I think we are starting to get close to the end of life of Wireless N (we're not quite there yet) -- in the sense that most new laptops and devices sold this year come with systems that work with AC, and N (and even G, in dual rado setups).
Since the newer AC Units are backwards compatible with N on the 2.4 gHz band, it makes sense to me, to upgrade to get the extra processing power of the AC access points since they are both firmly planted in that future looking, yet backwards compatible limbo, if you will.
Check the cost, though. How much money do you lose going to AC now? How much money is "being ready" going to cost? Keep in mind that likely, in about two years, you can buy AC for probably half the price that they are today. And you can upgrade one at a time as appropriate. The flexibility, time value of money, unknown future principle and other things make investing in technology you can't use or justify yet generally pretty bad. Especially stuff like this that has a pretty predictable cost dropping curve.
This, this right here is the whole reason for my post. Scott's written this time and time again, and I'm definitely trying to take it to heart (and application). This is why I mentioned that our newest laptops all purchased Summer 2014 don't have AC and everything else older won't be replaced until it fails (I don't expect to replace most for at least 2 more year, but really probably 4).
With that in mind I don't see the value even in my small install base (23 APs @ $50/ea to upgrade to AC = $1150) to purchase AC at this time.
Now Scott's other point that AC will be half the price in 1-2 years that it is now.. I frankly don't see that being the case either considering the current cost of the AP-Pro, at best the AC will probably be $50 less than it is now in 1-2 years so this does not play into my decision much either.
Invest the money you would have in AC APs in new switches to get you on gigabit. That's what a would recommend. It doesn't sound like you will see any benefit from AC APs.
You need GigE to leverage N, let along AC.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Remember, investing today in technology for tomorrow means you pay a premium for that technology.
I will agree with you on this point, for sure.
You are just continuously losing money doing that. You need a tangible benefit to your investments, especially when they are large (in percentage, normally.) AC is not cheap compared to N, it's not like a couple extra dollars. It's real money that you lose, money that could have been banked and used to buy even better stuff when the right time came and a need existed.
That depends on the brand names you are talking about... and at what scale. If you are going to buy 100 Wireless N for a total of $230k, an additional $50,000 is quite a chunk to go from N to AC. However, I think we are starting to get close to the end of life of Wireless N (we're not quite there yet) -- in the sense that most new laptops and devices sold this year come with systems that work with AC, and N (and even G, in dual rado setups).
Since the newer AC Units are backwards compatible with N on the 2.4 gHz band, it makes sense to me, to upgrade to get the extra processing power of the AC access points since they are both firmly planted in that future looking, yet backwards compatible limbo, if you will.
Check the cost, though. How much money do you lose going to AC now? How much money is "being ready" going to cost? Keep in mind that likely, in about two years, you can buy AC for probably half the price that they are today. And you can upgrade one at a time as appropriate. The flexibility, time value of money, unknown future principle and other things make investing in technology you can't use or justify yet generally pretty bad. Especially stuff like this that has a pretty predictable cost dropping curve.
This, this right here is the whole reason for my post. Scott's written this time and time again, and I'm definitely trying to take it to heart (and application). This is why I mentioned that our newest laptops all purchased Summer 2014 don't have AC and everything else older won't be replaced until it fails (I don't expect to replace most for at least 2 more year, but really probably 4).
With that in mind I don't see the value even in my small install base (23 APs @ $50/ea to upgrade to AC = $1150) to purchase AC at this time.
Now Scott's other point that AC will be half the price in 1-2 years that it is now.. I frankly don't see that being the case either considering the current cost of the AP-Pro, at best the AC will probably be $50 less than it is now in 1-2 years so this does not play into my decision much either.
Invest the money you would have in AC APs in new switches to get you on gigabit. That's what a would recommend. It doesn't sound like you will see any benefit from AC APs.
You need GigE to leverage N, let along AC.
Damn, you're absolutely right. Not that it matters, it all gets crushed to a 10 Mb connection for the internet, where our users spend 90% of their day anyhow.
-
@Dashrender said:
You need GigE to leverage N, let along AC.
Damn, you're absolutely right. Not that it matters, it all gets crushed to a 10 Mb connection for the internet, where our users spend 90% of their day anyhow.
Well, in theory, you might have something like storage that is not on the Internet. Do you have no internal services at all? No servers of any kind?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
You need GigE to leverage N, let along AC.
Damn, you're absolutely right. Not that it matters, it all gets crushed to a 10 Mb connection for the internet, where our users spend 90% of their day anyhow.
Well, in theory, you might have something like storage that is not on the Internet. Do you have no internal services at all? No servers of any kind?
Yes, we do, email is still in house (yeah don't say it
) and we have windows servers (file/print and application), but 90% of our users don't touch an internal server except for authentication and email.Currently we have Cisco AIR-LAP1131AG APs on a 4401 controller (EOL'ed in 2013) with HP 2910 100Mb switches (core server switch is Gb) with little to no internal network issues.
-
@Dashrender said:
Yes we do, email is still in house (yeah don't say it
) and we have windows servers, but 90% of our users don't touch an internal server except for authentication and email.Well at least those two functions would not be squeezed into your 10Mb/s pipe. Add DNS cacheing, a proxy server, etc. and there are ways to leverage a faster network. Might not be worth it, but you can look for ways.
No internal storage at all? That's got to be painful over 10Mb/s!
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
You need GigE to leverage N, let along AC.
Damn, you're absolutely right. Not that it matters, it all gets crushed to a 10 Mb connection for the internet, where our users spend 90% of their day anyhow.
Well, in theory, you might have something like storage that is not on the Internet. Do you have no internal services at all? No servers of any kind?
Yes we do, email is still in house (yeah don't say it
) and we have windows servers, but 90% of our users don't touch an internal server except for authentication and email.Currently we have Cisco AIR-LAP1131AG APs on a 4401 controller (EOL'ed in 2013) with HP 2910 100Mb switches (core server switch is Gb) with little to no internal network issues.
We use the Aironet 1250's at church and they are fine. We only have four of them and saturate them with 400+ users so they to get a bit of latency sometimes but still work. Ours are autonomous firmware so no controller.
Also take in to count things like broadcast packets and the fast processing of the switches that will help speed up the network.
-
While upgrading from my current 100 Mb switches to Gb switches will obviously provide some performance/speed improvements, the chances are that it would not lead (currently) to any additional efficiencies in the office that would relate to additional billing, etc.
I'm wondering if replacing the POE switches I have with something different (even though they are 8 years old, but have HP's lifetime warranty) will really gain me much and be beneficial to the companies bottom line?
Of course, in the locations where I currently only have non-POE switches, those will need to be replaced to support VOIP phones and APs, and assuming the price differences between POE Gb and POE 100 Mb is less than 30% (number i just pulled from the air), then I'll pay the difference... but if it's more like 50% difference - I just don't see the gain.
And this brings another point. If i go with Gb switches, I pretty much to go to with Gb VOIP phones, otherwise I find myself in another wasteful setup.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Check the cost, though. How much money do you lose going to AC now? How much money is "being ready" going to cost? Keep in mind that likely, in about two years, you can buy AC for probably half the price that they are today. And you can upgrade one at a time as appropriate. The flexibility, time value of money, unknown future principle and other things make investing in technology you can't use or justify yet generally pretty bad. Especially stuff like this that has a pretty predictable cost dropping curve.
I do see you point... but then comes the question of how do you justify using Wireless N now? Won't wireless G still work? At what point does the technology become "cheap enough" to upgrade? [I realize that answer is usually "it depends"]
I usually find that if I have the money to buy $device now, I will buy the latest and greatest thing I can afford. Yes, I know it will be obsolete the next $interval, but what I buy should last mey well beyond the time it took for me to purchase it. For instance, I was allowed to build my own office computer at my last employer. That was 10 years ago. With a refresh cycle of every 3 years for most faculty and staff at ~$800 per year (for a single computer), my $3,000 computer is still trucking along, and still being used by the new network admin, and it will likely be good for another 3 or 4 years.
So yeah, there's a big premium for buying the latest and greatest, but if you keep it long enough, then you can see some ROI on it. It doesn't make sense to do that with everything though... I think it is one of those things that when you can, you should.
-
@Dashrender said:
And this brings another point. If i go with Gb switches, I pretty much to go to with Gb VOIP phones, otherwise I find myself in another wasteful setup.
Yes, so the biggest question would be why are you looking to replace working switches. Do they not do something that you need today?
-
@dafyre said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Check the cost, though. How much money do you lose going to AC now? How much money is "being ready" going to cost? Keep in mind that likely, in about two years, you can buy AC for probably half the price that they are today. And you can upgrade one at a time as appropriate. The flexibility, time value of money, unknown future principle and other things make investing in technology you can't use or justify yet generally pretty bad. Especially stuff like this that has a pretty predictable cost dropping curve.
I do see you point... but then comes the question of how do you justify using Wireless N now? Won't wireless G still work? At what point does the technology become "cheap enough" to upgrade? [I realize that answer is usually "it depends"]
I usually find that if I have the money to buy $device now, I will buy the latest and greatest thing I can afford. Yes, I know it will be obsolete the next $interval, but what I buy should last mey well beyond the time it took for me to purchase it. For instance, I was allowed to build my own office computer at my last employer. That was 10 years ago. With a refresh cycle of every 3 years for most faculty and staff at ~$800 per year (for a single computer), my $3,000 computer is still trucking along, and still being used by the new network admin, and it will likely be good for another 3 or 4 years.
So yeah, there's a big premium for buying the latest and greatest, but if you keep it long enough, then you can see some ROI on it. It doesn't make sense to do that with everything though... I think it is one of those things that when you can, you should.
If I would have done that 8 years ago, and purchased N-Draft APs, my bill instead of being $25K would have been $40K+. Here I am 8 years later, and sure I could use N, but it wouldn't matter because the Wireless Switch and APs are EOLed from Cisco (primary reason to get rid of them) and I'm still running along mostly fine on G, and with my 100 Mb switches, N wouldn't really give me any real advantage. so I would have wasted $15K+.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
And this brings another point. If i go with Gb switches, I pretty much to go to with Gb VOIP phones, otherwise I find myself in another wasteful setup.
Yes, so the biggest question would be why are you looking to replace working switches. Do they not do something that you need today?
Because I want to deploy VOIP handsets and not install power injectors. Though I suppose I could install rack based power injectors, but considering the age of my switches, the fact that newer switches even at 100 Mb have doubled their packet switching speeds - that money seems wasteful.
-
@dafyre said:
For instance, I was allowed to build my own office computer at my last employer. That was 10 years ago. With a refresh cycle of every 3 years for most faculty and staff at ~$800 per year (for a single computer), my $3,000 computer is still trucking along, and still being used by the new network admin, and it will likely be good for another 3 or 4 years.
So yeah, there's a big premium for buying the latest and greatest, but if you keep it long enough, then you can see some ROI on it.
Maybe, but you have to look at more than just these limited pieces. $3,000 is a huge investment. You spent the equivalent of more than a decade of the normal machines. Nine years would be $2,400. You spent somewhere between 11 and 12 years of budget on that one machine. How many cycles went by before the ones that were buying purchased cheaply were better (faster, more reliable better features) than the one that cost nearly a dozen years to buy?
Then comes the risk. What if that machine died at eight years, no warranty on the system or the parts. What about the time/value of money? Spending $800 up front and investing $2,200 would have potentially gained you quite a bit by the next buying cycle. And more still by the next. You might have gotten quite a lot of financial value out of that money elsewhere. You have to consider the cost of lost investment opportunity (investment in the market, investment in other business needs, whatever - $3,000 doesn't tell the whole picture, the total price in "then money" was likely more like $4,200!)
Then comes the unknowns. Do you still need that system in ten years? You need to keep using it to get value from it. You are potentially throwing good money after bad (sunk cost fallacy.) What if a job role was eliminated? In your scenario the money is already spent, there is no way to mitigate the send. If you buy cheaper as you go you could stop upgrading if the machine was no longer needed. And what if you went to VDI or hosted or to a different architecture? You are betting that you know what the future holds, a risky move.
While I don't have all of your specific details, the details that you've given suggest to me that the $3,000 machine was probably a bad investment (lost money) and a risky one that didn't turn out too badly, but didn't turn out well. You've lost money and carried unnecessary risk.
It's extremely difficult to make these kinds of investments pay off. I've spent a lot of my career showing the financial people in businesses how this doesn't pay off. Spend less, more often, costs less and gets you more (in nearly all cases.)
-
@Dashrender said:
If I would have done that 8 years ago, and purchased N-Draft APs, my bill instead of being $25K would have been $40K+. Here I am 8 years later, and sure I could use N, but it wouldn't matter because the Wireless Switch and APs are EOLed from Cisco (primary reason to get rid of them) and I'm still running along mostly fine on G, and with my 100 Mb switches, N wouldn't really give me any real advantage. so I would have wasted $15K+.
IMO, EOL of hardware like this is no reason to replace.
If the hardware works and is not causing the business any other problems then there is no reason to change it just because it is EOL.
Do research, in order to be prepared to buy something in case of failure, but do not buy anything now.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
And this brings another point. If i go with Gb switches, I pretty much to go to with Gb VOIP phones, otherwise I find myself in another wasteful setup.
Yes, so the biggest question would be why are you looking to replace working switches. Do they not do something that you need today?
Because I want to deploy VOIP handsets and not install power injectors. Though I suppose I could install rack based power injectors, but considering the age of my switches, the fact that newer switches even at 100 Mb have doubled their packet switching speeds - that money seems wasteful.
Why does it need to be an all or none? you can upgrade in stages. Get the POE access switches you need now, with gigabit as there's no disadvantage to it (very minor possible cost savings aside). and get your desktop VoIP phones. Worry about Wireless later or when it becomes a need to upgrade. If the current switches have POE and are meeting the need just keep using them.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@Dashrender said:
If I would have done that 8 years ago, and purchased N-Draft APs, my bill instead of being $25K would have been $40K+. Here I am 8 years later, and sure I could use N, but it wouldn't matter because the Wireless Switch and APs are EOLed from Cisco (primary reason to get rid of them) and I'm still running along mostly fine on G, and with my 100 Mb switches, N wouldn't really give me any real advantage. so I would have wasted $15K+.
IMO, EOL of hardware like this is no reason to replace.
If the hardware works and is not causing the business any other problems then there is no reason to change it just because it is EOL.
Do research, in order to be prepared to buy something in case of failure, but do not buy anything now.
I agree. It's time to prepare to spend, not time to spend.
-
@Dashrender said:
Because I want to deploy VOIP handsets and not install power injectors. Though I suppose I could install rack based power injectors, but considering the age of my switches, the fact that newer switches even at 100 Mb have doubled their packet switching speeds - that money seems wasteful.
Ignore the AP stuff at this point then, unless you are going to upgrade it also for other reasons.
Buy PoE switches to suit your SIP phone needs not your maybe sometime later AP needs.
