TL;DR: This wireless router is phenomenal, particularly for densely-packed urban environments. It doesn't work miracles, but no technology does. As long as you understand why this router is special (primarily, but not exclusively that it avoids interference from other nearby WiFi networks.) then it might very well be the best router you can buy for your particular RF environment.
"Slightly" longer version:
First off, since it's applicable here: I'm a systems administrator by trade and have designed, deployed, and maintained a wireless network consisting of several hundred wireless access points ("routers",) supporting thousands of end-user devices in a very densely packed "1-to-1" school environment. Because of that, while there's always more to learn and it's not my goal to toot my own horn here, I think it's probably safe to say I know more than average bear on this particular subject. This is the router I chose for my own, personal use, and I'll try to explain (as simply as possible) why it might also be an excellent choice for you.
So, why should you pick this router over the rest? The answer is: maybe you shouldn't! This router solves a particular type of problem and solves it very well, but wireless is black, black magic and there are many factors that go into reliability and performance. Understanding what is holding you back in your particular use case is the key to picking the right device.
At its heart, reliable and fast WiFi comes down to one primary idea: the stuff you and your router are transmitting needs to be "louder" than the noise surrounding you. In reality it's slightly more complicated than that, but for a home network that's your key metric. This is known as your signal-to-noise ratio, or SNR. The better your SNR the faster and more reliable your connection will be. We all understand the signal part of this pretty well, since it's represented as the bars you see on your devices. Generally we think more bars = more better, and that's partially true, but ultimately it's only half the picture.
What isn't represented on most devices is the amount of noise you're fighting. This noise could come from a whole bunch of different sources, but as WiFi has gotten faster and more popular a major source of noise is often other wireless networks. There are a limited number of channels available for WiFi to use, so once you pack more networks in an area than there are channels to use you start to get overlap.
There's all sorts of fancy stuff that prevents somebody else's bits from going to your device even when you share a channel, but at a fundamental radio-frequency level this overlap is not great. Any time you and someone else on your channel are trying to transmit at the same time there's a chance your radio waves will walk all over each other and then you've got nothing but a garbled mess. Both devices will then have to re-transmit, which then may lead to more mess, maybe dropping back to using a less efficient type of encoding, and so on. In this case you are the noise for your neighbor, and they are noise to you. This is called co-channel interference, and is where Portal comes in.
Since the problem we just described has to do with not having enough channels, why not just add more channels? The answer is we can! Sort of. The radio spectrum is a busy place, and there's only so much room just due to pesky physics. There's a big chunk of spectrum right in the middle of the range we use for 5GHz WiFi that normally isn't used for wireless devices. Why? Well, that's because there's a bunch of radar stuff that uses the same space —particularly the radar that planes use when landing in bad weather. Turns out if WiFi uses this spectrum it confuses the radar on planes, and I think we can all agree that safely landing a multi-ton aircraft full of explosive fluid and people is more important than that Netflix episode. BUT, what if we could have both?
Since planes (hopefully) only need to land in certain places and at certain times, they really only need the spectrum reserved for their radar during those places and times. What if we make WiFi use this spectrum, but simultaneously listen for radar? If it hears some it could jump out of the way! That's exactly what Portal and other wireless devices that support Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS) channels do. Thing is it's complicated, more expensive, and has to go though special testing and licensing to make absolutely sure the WiFi clears out for the more important radar traffic. Because of this, and a few other reasons, most device manufacturers don't bother. Portal does.
SO! Assuming you've been paying attention, you should have a decent idea of why you should or shouldn't pick Portal. If your problem is that you're trying to use your phone in your lead-lined closet on the other side of the house from your router, Portal probably won't do more than what you already have. Portal has pretty solid transmission strength, but physics are physics, and massive transmit power isn't Portal's calling card. Even if it were, it would only get you so far because your device would have to transmit just as loud to talk back to the router. If your problem is a lack of signal (low bars) then you probably need to rethink the position of your router, and/or add more wireless access points connected back to your router (which is a whole 'nother discussion, particularly "mesh" WiFi which has a bunch of caveats.) Portal's specialty isn't solving that problem (though, side-note, it does support mesh if you buy more than one. Again, different discussion and a boat load of caveats.)
If, however, you have a good number of bars on your device but your WiFi is still crappy, chances are you're fighting interference. If you're in a city or other urban environment this is doubly likely. Portal will very likely fix that, and I *strongly* recommend it in those cases. It's very likely the best solution. There are just a few last caveats to consider before you pull the trigger:
1. Are you near an airport, and in the flight path for landing planes?
Remember how I said the channels Portal uses are ALSO used by plane radar and it has to jump out of the way if it hears some? Well, when it does there's necessarily a period of connection interruption as the router reconfigures itself, and your device reconnects on the new channel. If you're in a location where that happens all the time you're going to have problems. That said, just being near an airport shouldn't discourage you. I live within a few miles of the biggest airport in my state and I never have any issues, because I'm outside of the flight path for landing planes. If you think you're too close to an airport, pop open Google Maps and look at how the landing strips are oriented in relation to you. If you're smack in the middle of the landing path and only a few miles away, then yeah, Portal will probably not net you any reliability enhancements. If you're off to the side you're probably golden! You're probably also fine if you're in the lower floors of a multi-story building, since radar is designed to mostly bounce off solid surfaces.
2. Do you have cheap or old Windows, Android, or Chromebook devices?
Since DFS channels are in a range where WiFi doesn't always exist, some manufacturers of end-user device radio chips skip adding support for these channels all together. Typically these are in inexpensive devices, though occasionally they pop up in fancier ones too. There's a chance that your device might not be able to see the Portal network in these cases. This has become less common as time has gone on, and not all inexpensive devices cut this corner, so it's worth trying a Portal regardless. Just don't chuck the box before you finish testing all your equipment.
And yes, Apple devices are specifically excluded from this concern, at least everything manufactured in the past five or six years at least (and many Macs older than that.)
And that's it! Hopefully this gave you a deeper understanding of why you should or shouldn't buy a Portal. I'm happy with my purchase, and if you read all the above and believe it will solve your wireless problems then I think you will be too.
| Wireless Type | 802.11ac |
|---|---|
| Number of USB 2.0 Ports | 2 |
