@sl3uth , I think if you're reading between the lines with the Omada controller releases, you probably have picked up that the real end-game is they're releasing their own paid, cloud hosted version of the Omada controller and we're along for the software update ride.

Once the fee based Omada Cloud-Based Controller releases, and they're being paid a per device license fee by a chunk of end users to use their cloud management (because it'll be easier for the average pro-sumer or small business to just pay versus installing and maintaining their own controller), things will smooth out.

What you're seeing at the moment feels like the mad dash to that fee-based product release. 

What we should instead be asking is: What is TP-Link's commitment to keeping feature and release parity between the self-installed Windows/Linux versions and the fee-paid cloud version.? 

CLT-Geek wrote

@sl3uth , I think if you're reading between the lines with the Omada controller releases, you probably have picked up that the real end-game is they're releasing their own paid, cloud hosted version of the Omada controller and we're along for the software update ride.

 

@CLT-Geek ,

That makes sense, but I'm left wondering if I'm just fooling myself.  My main reason for TP-Link's APs, Controller, and Switches (maybe Router too eventually, though I haven't adopted that yet) was that I felt like I got better value (feature/price) than a more established and integrated small business line (e.g., Ubiquiti's Unifi). 

TP-Link's decisions about what versions of their APs and Switches they will support with the integrated SDN solution forces me to replace everything I have (except my OC200s) to utilize Omada SDN...and probably see any real feature/fix updates in the future for any of my devices.  Since I would need to replace everything anyway...I'm evaluating my options and examining TP-Link's pattern of commitment (or lack thereof) to current customer hardware support as I try to figure out what vendor(s) to select for my next bulk purchase. 

Is my key decision for this space basically:

1. Cheaper up-front hardware costs that will require replacement before functional EOL because the vendor decides to no longer support their future integration (or)
2. Higher up-front hardware costs that will endure longer and require fewer replacements because of the vendors commitment to retain integration support

...anyone else either wrestling with this?  ...or have other key decision factors for their integrated network solutions?

Thanks!

Sam

@sl3uth Keep in mind, that cheaper upfront cost, without an ongoing revenue stream from that product, provides little money or incentive for long term support. Expecting the same long term support from a unit with a much lower upfront cost doesn't ring to me as a sustainable operation.

In my world as an MSP/solution provider, we have our clients' WiFi gear on a 3 year replacement schedule and budget/price accordingly. TP-Link seems to be hitting that sweet spot for us. If you need released products to have 5-6 years of active support, you might need a different ecosystem.

@CLT-Geek 

This makes sense...but I wish they would provide some sort of end of support date for each product version.  

I'm trying to figure out which APs to purchase to get a reasonable lifespan of support?  Though I have no need or infrastructure to support the 660HD and the 620HD isn't available...I'm wondering if I'm just throwing good money after bad to purchase a single hardware version higher in the same hardware family I currently have (replacing EAP-225v2 APs with EAP-225v3 or 245v3)?

Sam