Wireless access point versus wireless router?

[mcad64]

Hi again,
Stupid question number 2!! I promise they will
decrease in the future as I learn and read more. I don't quite understand the difference between a wireless router and a wireless access point. I currently own a DLINK 604 that I use for wired access. I would like to go wireless now that we have a brand spanking new T42. Am I looking for a new wireless router(which will replace the 604 hooked up to two desktop computers), or do I get a wireless access point which connects to the 604 and communicates wirelessly with the Thinkpad from there? Thanks for any and all suggestions!!
Mike

[dr.b]

in your case take a wireless router, it will cost almost the same and you have one device to configure.

In more professional cases, you take aps, cause they do their job with many clients better. The router-part of these device is as bad as in the dlink 604...nice for home, but not for more.

[Kenn]

Hi again,
Stupid question number 2!! I promise they will
decrease in the future as I learn and read more. I don't quite understand the difference between a wireless router and a wireless access point. I currently own a DLINK 604 that I use for wired access. I would like to go wireless now that we have a brand spanking new T42. Am I looking for a new wireless router(which will replace the 604 hooked up to two desktop computers), or do I get a wireless access point which connects to the 604 and communicates wirelessly with the Thinkpad from there? Thanks for any and all suggestions!!
Mike

An access point is just like adding a wireless node on your existing network so wireless computers can access the existing network. A wireless router does that as well, but also adds functionality to manage your internet connection, including dial-in, logon, provide additional firewall/NAT security services, restrict access, etc.

Routers are so cheap now that you might as well get one even if you only need an access point, since the router will do that job and also give you more flexibility if you decide to use it for its router function later.

[XCoalMiner]

I have a separate Wireless Access Point and Router. (I have it this way because I had the router before WiFi became popular.)

I agree that the cost of a wireless and WiFi Router are te same. But, there's a benefit in having separates in that you can configure the Access Point separately from the router, and if you are just learning things (how to setup wireless security, for example) you can do so by trail and error, isolate problems, etc. without interrupting your hardwired connectivity.

Also, the brand I've been using (Linksys) seems to come out with a regular stream of firmware updates for their routers (both hard and wireless) and their access point(s). And, in my experince, having a router and an SP separate were invaluable in identifying problems I've had. There;s good information at http://www.dslreports.com/forums/all , look under the equipment support forums.

[boardmonger]

For the standard setup I prefer the AP separate from my router. (I wish to add that I have a server and 3 desktops in my home network, so I am not exactly the normal home user.) A great example from my network was when I got my thinkpad. I had a wireless B and I then bought a wireless G AP. When I installed the new AP I didn't have to reconfigure my router and all the port forwarding on my router/firewall.

I know in the end it costs more, but if you want the most flexibility go with a separate AP and router. (Although I have admit the new AP + Router combos are getting better features especially with third party firmwares) If you just want a cheap easy solution that will meet 80 – 90% of all needs or uses go with them built together.

Some features I have used on my AP that I don’t think I can do on a Router AP that might make a difference in your purchase:
- Turn my AP into a repeater
- Use my AP as a wireless client
- Filter only my wireless connections by mac address while not filtering the wired connections. (I know this is pointless if someone wants to hack your network)

<ramble off>

[Kenn]

But if we concede that the prices are the same, you could always buy a wireless router and use it solely for its AP functionality, right? That would give you the simplicity of configuring only the AP aspect if you use it that way,while preserving the extra capabilities in case you need something in a pinch.

Also, I may be wrong here, but isn't there no official repeater protocol for wifi? So any implementations are vendor-specific, and they could easily add that to the routers as they do the APs?

[lfeagan]

Actually, no, an router can not do many of the more advanced things that an AP can do.