Cradlepoint vs. wifi ranger

Bill:

As I see it, the issues have to be with either with how the router implements WiFi over WAN or how the device (MiFi or phone hotspot) "behave" when used in this mode with the particular router. As far as the cellular network is concerned, I can't imagine that the MiFi and the phone are perceived as being all that different. Sure it's possible that the MiFi is in some way a poor device, but I have no reason to believe that.

I happen to use a phone's hotspot, but a lot of the issues reported by MiFi users with respect to network "pauses" are virtually identical to what I experience and I'm pretty certain what I am seeing are network, not phone, issues.

Joel

docj,
You say phone but he posted problems with a MiFi. MiFi users report lots of issues if connected wirelessly.
Which are you using?

wintersun wrote:
Cradlepoint offers Wifi as WAN on their 95 and 1400 model routers but they do not support this function. It may work or it may not work but Cradlepoint's tech support position is that it is an unsupported feature. With our Novatel 4620L mifi from Verizon the WiFi as WAN is very eratic and we will need to reboot the 4620L or the 1400 frequently during the day to re-establish the link between the two devices.

I can honestly say that my WiFi Ranger doesn't have that problem with my phone's hotspot.

Cradlepoint offers Wifi as WAN on their 95 and 1400 model routers but they do not support this function. It may work or it may not work but Cradlepoint's tech support position is that it is an unsupported feature. With our Novatel 4620L mifi from Verizon the WiFi as WAN is very eratic and we will need to reboot the 4620L or the 1400 frequently during the day to re-establish the link between the two devices.

Bill.Satellite wrote:
I also preferred to run the WiFi Ranger without any form of automatic fail-over. I prefer to have control over the connections especially if I think I am using campground wifi and find that in the middle of a large download the router switched over to my air card. Yikes! It's easy enough to switch between the 2 using a browser interface.

I'm with Bill on this one. I honestly don't think that failover is that important unless you have multiple internet sources and are protecting yourself from total failure of your primary connection. In most of the situations I have been in as an RVer, I'm lucky if I have two possible internet connections and usually what happens to my primary is that there are occasional slowdowns that last a few minutes. IMHO initiating a failover for that sort of thing is more trouble than it is worth.

To provide a specific example, last winter I had a DSL line and used the CG's wifi as a backup. My WiFi Ranger was quite capable of transferring from the DSL to the wifi if the DSL had an occasional hiccup, but quite often the DSL issue would correct itself almost as quickly as the failover could process. Then I would either have to let the Ranger "think" about reversing the failover or simply do it myself. I was constantly fiddling with the settings of how often should it monitor the internet connection and how low a data rate should I accept before failover commenced. Eventually, I just turned it off and did as Bill suggests by manually switching when I needed to.

It's possible that Cradlepoint products offer more failover options than does the Ranger, but the bottom line is that you're still going to have to make roughly the same choices, what at what speed do you initiate failover and how often should the system check. Given that no internet source have an absolutely constant speed vs time profile, the more often you sample the more likely it is that you will sample during a "slow" spot and will initiate an unnecessary failover or you will sample during an atypical "fast" period and not do a failover even though one was needed. I prefer to make my own judgments as to whether or not my internet connection is performing acceptably; as Bill has noted, there are times when you don't want failover to occur even if it should, such as when you're streaming a video and sure don't want to throw that on the CG's wifi.

Well, I guess that's part my "issues" with WFR. They have all these great supposed features, but unless the unit is in full manual-only mode, they don't work as advertised. My Cradlepoint worked from day one, with no more than 15min of setup time required. I really wanted the WFR to work as it offers soooo much. I may enjoy tweaking and toying with my electronics, but DW does not. I would get constant calls while at work because there was no internet in the RV.

Not any more!!! ;-0

Bill.Satellite wrote:
I also preferred to run the WiFi Ranger without any form of automatic fail-over. I prefer to have control over the connections especially if I think I am using campground wifi and find that in the middle of a large download the router switched over to my air card. Yikes! It's easy enough to switch between the 2 using a browser interface.

I also preferred to run the WiFi Ranger without any form of automatic fail-over. I prefer to have control over the connections especially if I think I am using campground wifi and find that in the middle of a large download the router switched over to my air card. Yikes! It's easy enough to switch between the 2 using a browser interface.

paulcardoza wrote:
Hi Doc ---

Quick question.... Do you have your WFR on full manual or are any automatic features, such as failover set up???

docj wrote:

paulcardoza wrote:
I have followed essentially the same path that Bill has. Had the original Wifi Ranger, tried the Sky and finally the GO. While the concept is fantastic and the CS folks at WFR are terrific to deal with, the product is just not ready for primetime, IMO. I found myself having to continually futz with the units to keep my connection in place. They would lock up, reboot on their own, lose connectivity requiruing a restart. At one point they would not work with iOS devices, certain modems, blah, blah, blah....

I bought my first WiFi Ranger router three years ago and I will agree with Paul that there were many nights when I went to sleep frustrated because I couldn't get it to work no matter what I tried. However, I will argue that those nights were fairly far in the past and that Paul's summary compresses three years of product development experiences without differentiating between the past and present.

Some WFR customers, like Bill and Paul, chose to "get off the train" during that process and I can't fault them for that. However, I know from my own personal experience that WFR products today are much different and far better than those that were marketed several years ago.

To avoid having this post deleted because the moderators consider it marketing, I will simply note that the control panel on my WiFi Ranger is currently showing that it has been operational for 18 days since its last reboot. It has been connected to my Verizon phone's hotspot for that entire period, except when the phone has needed to be rebooted. The Ranger was connected to the hotspot when I went to bed last night and it was connected and ready for use this morning. I can't ask a router to do any more than that.

Paul:

I don't use failover unless there is an alternative internet connection I can use. Most of the time that's not the case. If my internet connection is unstable (like an erratic wifi) I make the "check internet" interval large so there is less chance that the WFR will check the connection and find it off. If the WFR finds that your internet connection doesn't have internet connectivity it will tend to drop it even if it doesn't have an alternative.

Joe;

My AT&T Mifi is tethered and the VZW Mifi is wirelessly connected.

gscudder wrote:
quote I have followed essentially the same path that Bill has. Had the original Wifi Ranger, tried the Sky and finally the GO. While the concept is fantastic and the CS folks at WFR are terrific to deal with, the product is just not ready for primetime, IMO. I found myself having to continually futz with the units to keep my connection in place. They would lock up, reboot on their own, lose connectivity requiruing a restart. At one point they would not work with iOS devices, certain modems, blah, blah, blah....

My wife would call me almost daily with problems in the RV while I was away at work. Rarely did a day go by where I didn't have to play with the WFR to keep connectivity going.

So, I too now have a Cradlepoint, but I chose the MBR1400 model. More expensive that Bill's MBR95, but offers load balancing which I use all the time because I have 2 Mifi units (one verizon and one AT&T). The MBR1400 does a terrific job of balancing usage between the two!

I have my WFR GO in a box in the closet and continue to monitor their progress. Maybe if they ever offer a firmware release that makes the product ready for every day use, I'll put it back in service and give it a go, but for now, I'm so much happier with the Cradlepoint!!!! end quote


I was under the impression that cradlepoint would not connect to MiFi units, in fact that's what they told me when I called them. Are they connecting wirelessly or are your MiFi's tethered? Which MiFi units are you using? Also are you able to use park internet with your cradlepoint?

Hi Doc ---

Quick question.... Do you have your WFR on full manual or are any automatic features, such as failover set up???

docj wrote:

paulcardoza wrote:
I have followed essentially the same path that Bill has. Had the original Wifi Ranger, tried the Sky and finally the GO. While the concept is fantastic and the CS folks at WFR are terrific to deal with, the product is just not ready for primetime, IMO. I found myself having to continually futz with the units to keep my connection in place. They would lock up, reboot on their own, lose connectivity requiruing a restart. At one point they would not work with iOS devices, certain modems, blah, blah, blah....

I bought my first WiFi Ranger router three years ago and I will agree with Paul that there were many nights when I went to sleep frustrated because I couldn't get it to work no matter what I tried. However, I will argue that those nights were fairly far in the past and that Paul's summary compresses three years of product development experiences without differentiating between the past and present.

Some WFR customers, like Bill and Paul, chose to "get off the train" during that process and I can't fault them for that. However, I know from my own personal experience that WFR products today are much different and far better than those that were marketed several years ago.

To avoid having this post deleted because the moderators consider it marketing, I will simply note that the control panel on my WiFi Ranger is currently showing that it has been operational for 18 days since its last reboot. It has been connected to my Verizon phone's hotspot for that entire period, except when the phone has needed to be rebooted. The Ranger was connected to the hotspot when I went to bed last night and it was connected and ready for use this morning. I can't ask a router to do any more than that.