polhallen wrote

After long test "seems" that software wireless controller (EAP) is better than hardware controller: AC50/500

Example: schedule radio on/off, change radio wireless by ssid, better graphics, etc.

Are you agree with me?

I don't see them in a "better/worser" way, but in their intended scope of application:

- EAP Controller is ideal as a centralized controller for several commercial sites which use business EAPs (intuitive, but simpler web UI/controller with limited functionality compared to CAPs). It's well suited even for non-IT people.

- CAP hardware controller is ideal for an enterprise-class company with own IT department (feature-rich webUI/controller similar to Pharos OS with functions such as Dynamic Channel Switching, Airtime Fairness*, WiFi signal strength thresholds, WiFi roaming, Formal User, Link Backup etc.). It's best choice for power users requiring this features.

*Airtime Fairness is available for some EAPs, too, but not for all models.