Hey guys.
I bought my XdaIIs almost a year ago, but have had no need to use the WiFi until quite recently. I'm with O2 on the 200 Plan (light user) and everything works fine with the phone, including the GRPS: apart from the WiFi. When the phone was sold to me I was told very clearly, and on multiple occasions, that if I can pick up a WiFi signal, and that it's free, then I can connect and browse for free. I don't have a WiFi connection at home, so it's only when out and about that I need to connect. However, when I tried this at a Coffee House that had free access I could only connect via one of two of O2's "Gateway Partners" and they wanted to charge me for this, which I find outrageous! Can someone confirm to me whether this is correct, as O2 told me that I have to be a "Business User" on a Business Plan to get free WiFi, and that the fact that the phone has WiFi doees not mean that they support it!
If the above is the case, is there anyway around this, such as unlocking the phone, or connecting via a completely different network? I just find it galling that O2 can mis-sell me the phone on the basis that I can connect via WiFi "anywhere and anytime for free" and then to be told that this isn't the case.
Thanks in advance.
Tron
Tron,
WiFi isn't free. It's usually provided by some operator (e.g. BT, The Cloud, T-Mobile, etc), and these guys want money for providing a service.
Generally you can create an account with them whilst you are in a WiFi Hotspot - and their charges vary. It's nowhere near as prevalent as GSM, so you'll find that not all of these operators have agreements between themselves; basically this means that you can use an operators account only with it's partners.
As for if "if you can see a wifi signal it's free" - it's not true. Not wishing to condone anything illegal, you can generally get away with it if there's no encryption on the access point; but it is illegal to use a signal that is not meant for you. The idea of unlocking your phone doesn't really apply in this case either - it's nothing to do with the network lock but the way the people who run the equipment choose to charge; remember the equipment for WiFi is completely separate from the Mobile GSM network you use when you call someone on your mobile.
As for the O2 WiFi network/partners, I've no idea about the pricing. But it does make sense that they would have a different tariff for those subscribing to their wifi service, like their Business Plan.
No doubt the salesperson over-played this a bit when selling it to you!
Hey Bal, thanks for the reply.
So, if I'm sitting in a Library, for arguements sake, and they have a completely free and open WiFi connection, how am I meant to connect? Surely O2 via "The Cloud" cannot charge me to use someone's network who are letting me use it for free: can they? Likewise, if I pop around your house and you let me use your connection, do I have to connect via one of O2's partners? That's what I'm trying to get at, I guess.
Thanks once again.
wifi is just like a normal network between computers you set up at home
you can let people from the outside hop on if you want
but you are to blame if they abuse your network connection though i guess
some places offer free wifi too some plane companys offer it in their planes
some trains offer it
7-11 offer it and so does mcdonals i believe
Rudegar is right of course, if it's free and you open your wireless lan manager you should see the network and be able to connect without a password.
This has nothing to do with the mobile operator you have a contract with.
It's the same as you bringing your laptop over to my place and plugging it into the wired lan - only difference being that there are no wires involved.
If you think of your wifi as just a way of "plugging into" a network rather than as part of your mobile it makes more sense.
I would suggest that you find somewhere with wifi access and have a play - you'll learn much more that way
well if the mobile operators wanted to they could offer it
and charge people for it of cause it would require them
to set up MANY hotspots and repeaters to service all their customers
Okay, cool. Thanks for all of the help guys. I guess I'll have to wander around an find a free WiFi spot (there are none that I know of anywhere near me).
Ross
or you could just get a wifi router for your internet connection for your normal computers should you have a such
and make your own hotspot
How can i check if there is a Wireless Network in my area? I mean networks like Universitys have and coffee shops?
I know that at my house it connects automatically because i have no security whatsoever on my network, but it doesn't semm to work at commercial places or my university.
http://www.aspecto-software.com/rw/applications/wififofum/
kramerica2 said:
How can i check if there is a Wireless Network in my area? I mean networks like Universitys have and coffee shops?
I know that at my house it connects automatically because i have no security whatsoever on my network, but it doesn't semm to work at commercial places or my university.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Take a tip and protect your wireless network at home. Up until recently mine was unprotected as I didnt think anyone lived close enough to me who was into computers. Was down late one night and just happened to see the wifi light on my router blinking. I knew no one else was up on the laptop or psp and I wasnt using my phone so I started to wonder what the hell was going on.
On investigating I found a computer as part of my workgroup called mikey_234234 or something similar. Seems there was someone close enough and they were kindly using my broadband and probably sharing my files ( although it was only a small folder with ppc stuff in it ).
I protected it straight away and the light stopped blinking and now the mikey computer has gone. Someone somewhere has lost their free ride.
Seriously protect your network my friend.
I always protect my Wireless Network(s).
Or via TKIP (password authentication), or simple MAC Adress Filtering.
Although I don't have a datalimit, it's fun to see unprotected networks and fun to use them.
Buying a wireless router is just like buying a car, it works plug-and-play, but you gotta lock it, otherwise people will get in
Hi,
I lose my wifi connection on my android phone and tablet when I move from one part of a building to the other. My connection is perfectly fine if I don't move.
My phone and tablet eventually say, "connecting to wifi" and hangs there until I turn off my wifi and then turn it back on.
Here is the detailed story:
I work in a large building with multiple floors. I assume there are multiple routers per floor. My office is on the top floor and my lab is on the first floor. I make multiple trips between floors per hour, and it gets annoying to constantly reset the wifi receiver in my phone. Since this problem happens on my phone and my tablet, I'm sure it's not phone specific. I'm also guessing that no one else notices because they all pay outrageous prices for 4G and don't use wifi on their phones. They don't see problems on their laptops because their laptops are asleep when moving between floors.
After a little research, I think the cause might be when I move from one router in my building to another, my phone wants to keep the DHCP IP, but the new router won't accept my phone, because my phone is already connected to the old router. When I reset the wifi receiver on my phone, I reset the DHCP IP. Is this correct?
Is there an android app that says, "if connecting to wifi network takes longer than 20 seconds, reset the wifi receiver?"
Thanks,
Daniel
Are the SSID's of all the routers the same?
wifi administrator is not familiar with WDS function i assume.. best user friendly system would be Ubiquity Unifi or Mikrotik WDS Mesh.
I work in an office with three old Cisco Aironet 1130 access points and have no problem moving between them with my Sensation.
They're all on the same SSID and on the same subnet.
If I leave the building at one end, go outside and lose Wifi connection, then come in at the other end of the building, my phone just re-connects.
When your phone connects to a network it should always go through the process of requesting an IP address even if the lease hasn't expired.
Potentially what could happen is your office is serviced by one SSID, while your lab is serviced by another, and your phone is just able to talk to the other wifi network so doesn't release itself and renew with a new IP address.
Every day I go to my local coffee shop. When I want to connect to the net, my Nexus shows wifi points available and I choose the appropriate one for the cafe. It doesn't need a password, but it does show a webpage where you have to agree to the terms by click the Ok button.
Is there anyway to automate this, or get around this? Its such a pain in the ass! I have Tasker if that makes any difference.
Thanks,
Jon
That is called a captive portal and no.
Or called a splash page. I worked for a hotel wifi company and we used devices called "nomadix." When you connect, the device gives you an IP, then sticks you in a pending stage until you click OK or Accept on the portal page. Until then, it won't let any IP based traffic through. Usually there's a timeout that they can modify. But being in a cafe, I highly doubt it. They're probably using a walmart bought wifi router with ddwrt firmware. I know starbucks has a splash page for their wifi.
Well, there is *sort* of a way around it, but not very convenient for cafes/etc. I am currently staying at a hotel that has said portal to access the WiFi network. What I have done is connected to said WiFi network with my laptop, then utilized "connectify" to re-transmit that authorized WiFi to me and my wife's devices. Basically turning my laptop into a wireless router. Another plus is that I can set my own WEP/WPA/etc protection to the retransmitted signal. So while this may not be a solution for cafes, etc - it certainly is a fantastic one for hotels!
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4
I believe there are a few apps in the market which can automate this for some portals, but it's basically just scraping the page and trying to guess some information to put in, etc, so it won't work 100% of the time.
I haven't used any, so no specific suggestions, but here's a few from search:
https://play.google.com/store/search?q=wifi login
i have this exact problem with the wifi in the pub i chef in. our broadband is provided by HEINEKEN beer. we also must connect then load browser window to accept terms.
the pub owner would also like it removed to allow people to auto-connect in the normal way because obviously when a customer steps outside for a ciggerette as it is illegal to smoke inside a public place in the uk now,. they would then need to keep re-connecting theyre phones/tablets...
ive managed to switch a total of 8 staff and about 25 customers to ditching ios for android there normaly at least 3 nexus 7's at any one time in my pub now :victory::victory: and our bar now also has nfc tags.
The app Wi-fi web login seems to be working for me.
Please Share your feedback to help current and future owners of the router
The setup was super easy. Wifi range is much better than the Asus RT-AC66U it replaced. The standard Ethernet cable doesn't fit if you want to keep the outer cover on. The included cables are too short and the power cable is also too short. Otherwise it works well.
I don't like how some "unnamed devices" show up with no IP address in the list of connected devices... how is that even possible? I get if those devices are connected with a set static IP on the device, but if they are assigned via DHCP the IP address *should* show up (I have a LinksysPAP VoIP device set to DHCP that would not show the IP and just shows up as an unnamed device).
Other than that... great device so far, easy to set up. Love the app and the LED light on the top.
lexcyn said:
I don't like how some "unnamed devices" show up with no IP address in the list of connected devices... how is that even possible? I get if those devices are connected with a set static IP on the device, but if they are assigned via DHCP the IP address *should* show up (I have a LinksysPAP VoIP device set to DHCP that would not show the IP and just shows up as an unnamed device).
Other than that... great device so far, easy to set up. Love the app and the LED light on the top.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm still waiting for mine to arrive tomorrow. Do the "unnamed devices" at least show the mac address, so you can identify what they are? I've been curious about how much control I'd have over settings, ip, etc... I'm currently running a Buffalo router with DD-WRT.
adrman said:
I'm still waiting for mine to arrive tomorrow. Do the "unnamed devices" at least show the mac address, so you can identify what they are? I've been curious about how much control I'd have over settings, ip, etc... I'm currently running a Buffalo router with DD-WRT.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes they all at least show the MAC - but that's about it. You can set a static IP and forward ports... but not much else. It's a very simple interface, but I'm assuming it was built that way. I have a feeling as their app evolves they will add more control.
Can you guys post some screenshots ?
Here's a screenshot of the "unnamed device" I was talking about.
Not great here. I'm getting 1/3 of my speed on wifi and 1/10th hard wired compared to my linksys wrt-ac1900. Tech support was pretty responsive and are looking into it. I'm running gigabit fiber. The range seems decent and setup was easy.
Anyone to from a time capsule to this? Wondering if it would be worth the switch.
Unboxing and set up
http://youtu.be/MW8VeWdCo0I
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No way to add devices that use WPS (not a huge deal).
Security is not configurable (not a deal breaker, just interesting)
No web-based interface
No DDNS client (not a huge deal)
No way to view uPnP mappings
The single ethernet port in the back is kind of a drag, but it wasn't an issue for me. Also standard cables will not fit with the cover on.
The "unnamed device" thing is kind of annoying (makes setting up static DHCP entries a hassle) but it's not a huge deal. It would be cool to be able to name these explicitly from within the app.
Setup was easy and quick. Seems to work well, no drop-outs so far. :good:
With the mixed reviews out there, I wasn't expecting much in terms of coverage or perf, but I was pleasantly surprised. Since I live in a fairly large multi story house, I've always had to have range extenders to get upstairs (even with a high-end WAP downstairs). Now, for the first time ever in my house, I have only one WAP (OnHub) and I'm getting 25MB in the farthest reaches of the house. I get 80MB via wifi close to the router (in the same room), but that is similar to what I got before. I get 170MB via wired, so no problem keeping up with a high bandwidth connection, it seems to have plenty of processing power. I suppose putting the OnHub up on a shelf does help with range and perf compared to the old WAP being lower (beneath the TV), but I can't believe placement is making that big of a difference, it seems the range and perf of the OnHub is actually really good. So before where I had 4 wifi networks to deal with (wifi2G, wifi5G, wifi2GExt, wifi5GExt), it's all now just consolidated into one wifi network, which is great. I agree it is kind of a bummer that guest networking is not yet implemented, but I never used it, so not a big issue for me.
I really like being able to do the admin from the mobile app, the simplicity actually takes some getting used to. True, you can't configure security or frequencies (2G, 5G, channels, etc) that I know of, but I'm actually kind of starting to appreciate the simplicity, it is definitely a whole new take on a high-end router/WAP.
Only one LAN port on the OnHub is not really an issue for me because I had more than 4 wired devices (7 to be exact), so I already had an 8 port switch in use, which now (obviously) runs into the one LAN port on the OnHub.
So really my only (minor) issue with it is the standard cables are too short, and I wasn't sure if they were Cat 6, so I just swapped them for 10ft Cat 6 cables I already had; problem solved. I had no problem getting the cover to lock on with normal cables, which sounds different from what others are posting, not sure why, works fine for me.
So far no drops from interference, which was a problem on all my old routers/WAPs since I live in a neighborhood with lots of WAPs in range of my house.
Overall, I'm very happy with it, it has solved most (if not all) my home networking challenges, especially on the wifi side.
llarch said:
With the mixed reviews out there, I wasn't expecting much in terms of coverage or perf, but I was pleasantly surprised. Since I live in a fairly large multi story house, I've always had to have range extenders to get upstairs (even with a high-end WAP downstairs). Now, for the first time ever in my house, I have only one WAP (OnHub) and I'm getting 25MB in the farthest reaches of the house. I get 80MB via wifi close to the router (in the same room), but that is similar to what I got before. I get 170MB via wired, so no problem keeping up with a high bandwidth connection, it seems to have plenty of processing power. I suppose putting the OnHub up on a shelf does help with range and perf compared to the old WAP being lower (beneath the TV), but I can't believe placement is making that big of a difference, it seems the range and perf of the OnHub is actually really good. So before where I had 4 wifi networks to deal with (wifi2G, wifi5G, wifi2GExt, wifi5GExt), it's all now just consolidated into one wifi network, which is great. I agree it is kind of a bummer that guest networking is not yet implemented, but I never used it, so not a big issue for me.
I really like being able to do the admin from the mobile app, the simplicity actually takes some getting used to. True, you can't configure security or frequencies (2G, 5G, channels, etc) that I know of, but I'm actually kind of starting to appreciate the simplicity, it is definitely a whole new take on a high-end router/WAP.
Only one LAN port on the OnHub is not really an issue for me because I had more than 4 wired devices (7 to be exact), so I already had an 8 port switch in use, which now (obviously) runs into the one LAN port on the OnHub.
So really my only (minor) issue with it is the standard cables are too short, and I wasn't sure if they were Cat 6, so I just swapped them for 10ft Cat 6 cables I already had; problem solved. I had no problem getting the cover to lock on with normal cables, which sounds different from what others are posting, not sure why, works fine for me.
So far no drops from interference, which was a problem on all my old routers/WAPs since I live in a neighborhood with lots of WAPs in range of my house.
Overall, I'm very happy with it, it has solved most (if not all) my home networking challenges, especially on the wifi side.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exact experience I'm having with the Onhub.
Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk
The range is awesome. OnHub replaced a RT-66U and Amped AP300 with external powered antenna. My whole house is covered now.
I struggled through the unknown devices issues to get all my static IPs and port fwds setup.
The big issue for me is the OnHub does not support NAT Loopback. So you cannot access your cameras and static devices while at home without using their IP addresses. So my IP Camera app will not be able to find my cameras at home with "xxxx.duckdns.org:1025" but this works when connected to another network or Mobile data. This is a big pain in the a$$ for those of us that like to access things on our networks remotely and while at home.
I contacted support and they have added NAT Loopback to the requests...
A tip if replacing a FiOS router; power down the Verizon ONT for half an hour. Before powering back up, connect the ethernet from the ONT to the OnHub. The power cycle will force a renewed IP and allow the OnHub to register on the network without the need to go through the VZW router.
av8rdude said:
The range is awesome. OnHub replaced a RT-66U and Amped AP300 with external powered antenna. My whole house is covered now.
I struggled through the unknown devices issues to get all my static IPs and port fwds setup.
The big issue for me is the OnHub does not support NAT Loopback. So you cannot access your cameras and static devices while at home without using their IP addresses. So my IP Camera app will not be able to find my cameras at home with "xxxx.duckdns.org:1025" but this works when connected to another network or Mobile data. This is a big pain in the a$$ for those of us that like to access things on our networks remotely and while at home.
I contacted support and they have added NAT Loopback to the requests...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What camera app? If you're using TinyCam you can have internal (wifi) and external (LTE) settings for each camera.
I got mine today. I was using a borrowed modem and router so I needed to purchase something, and was either going to get a Ubiquiti access point (and keep using the borrowed router) or the onhub. So far it's been a great experience. Solid connections. I set a static address for my NAS.
It seems to be working well for me also. My biggest gripe is the "unnamed" devices. With 17 devices and only 3 or 4 that provide a recognizable name to OnHub, perhaps I could give them names?
The unnamed devices thing is very annoying.
Also, when assigning static ip, they need to list the mac address... Otherwise it makes it basically impossible to assign a static ip to one of those unnamed devices... Because which unnamed device are you assigning the ip to? Can't tell...
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
JasonJoel said:
The unnamed devices thing is very annoying.
Also, when assigning static ip, they need to list the mac address... Otherwise it makes it basically impossible to assign a static ip to one of those unnamed devices... Because which unnamed device are you assigning the ip to? Can't tell...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had a 30 minute conversation with support over just that issue. The general response was "well, that's a power user issue and this isn't a power user device" Even so, I'm surprised there hasn't been an update of some kind pushed yet because viewing the mac address to set a static ip isn't exactly "power user" functionality, it's basic.