# Using an Airport Express as an AP



## Salvo (Jun 11, 2004)

I currently have a NetComm NB3300 ADSL Router/Switch, and an extensive Network of Cat5 throughout the house, I use my AirPort Extreme Basestation as a Print-Server and basic Access Point for my iBook (I don't have Cat5 _everywhere_).
What I'm wondering is could an Airport Express replace my Airport Extreme? I know it can be used as a Wireless Print Server, but can it be used as a Stand-Alone (non-WDS) Access Point? Will LAN computers still have access to a printer connected to an AirPort Express?


----------



## Natobasso (Jun 13, 2004)

I read some of the Airport Express features and benefits and it looks like it's a signal booster for the Airport Extreme base station as well as enabling the user to extend their iTunes to other rooms of the house. It has an audio out as well as an ethernet port which makes it very versitile. 

I think you still need your Airport Extreme card in your computer to utilize your network, so I think the answer to your question is "No".

Here's the apple info page on Airport Express for more info: http://www.apple.com/airportexpress/


----------



## bobw (Jun 13, 2004)

Airport Express is a Wireless Router.


----------



## Natobasso (Jun 13, 2004)

Bob

But it doesn't function without the Airport Base Station (or some other wireless transmitter), correct?


----------



## bobw (Jun 13, 2004)

Not true. Airport Express is a Router, doesn't need a base station, just a connection to a modem.


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Jun 13, 2004)

... using ethernet connection.


----------



## Salvo (Jun 13, 2004)

Thanks Bob and Sam,
I'll have to wait until they're available in Australia, and then see if my Financier will give me a discount if I Downgrade my AirPort Extreme Basestation to an AirPort Express.

I don't use the NAT features, and It's only to accommodate my iBook, so a full AirPort Extreme Basestation is overkill.


----------



## Natobasso (Jun 13, 2004)

Bob, if the airport express is a router, why would anyone bother with the airport base station?


----------



## Gnomo (Jun 13, 2004)

Natobasso said:
			
		

> Bob, if the airport express is a router, why would anyone bother with the airport base station?


Because the Airport Base station has more features.

The Airport Express is clearly designed to function as a low end access point for those that want to have the wireless stereo option, but do not need or want a full fledged wireless network.

While the Airport express can be configured to work as a remote base station, it cannot work as a main base station or a relay station.  Also it can only have up to 10 clients.

Sure it fits the needs of home networks, but don't forget Apple is trying to market the Airport Base Stations to schools that would need networks larger than 10 clients.


----------



## Natobasso (Jun 13, 2004)

This is exactly my point: The Express is not a transmitter, it's a receiver. It just picks up whatever transmitter signal is available (namely an airport base station or some other wireless transmitter) and thus the Express cannot be used on it's own, as a previous poster stated.

The F&B specs apple provides are a bit confusing, but it seems clear that a small device like Express can only relay a signal, not be used as an originating transmission point.


----------



## Gnomo (Jun 14, 2004)

Natobasso said:
			
		

> The Express is not a transmitter, it's a receiver. It just picks up whatever transmitter signal is available (namely an airport base station or some other wireless transmitter) and thus the Express cannot be used on it's own, as a previous poster stated.
> 
> The F&B specs apple provides are a bit confusing, but it seems clear that a small device like Express can only relay a signal, not be used as an originating transmission point.


I think you need to re-read the airport express pages (specifically things like "Airport on the Go").  It is an access point.  However, when it comes to WDS it has reduced functionality and can only act as a remote base station.  It also has a reduced functionality when it comes to clients and willl only allow 10 connections.


----------



## lurk (Jun 14, 2004)

Natobasso said:
			
		

> This is exactly my point: The Express is not a transmitter, it's a receiver. It just picks up whatever transmitter signal is available (namely an airport base station or some other wireless transmitter) and thus the Express cannot be used on it's own, as a previous poster stated.



It is both a transmitter and a receiver - wireless ethernet is by its very nature a two way protocol. It works fine as a base station it is you who are a bit confused.



			
				Natobasso said:
			
		

> The F&B specs apple provides are a bit confusing, but it seems clear that a small device like Express can only relay a signal, not be used as an originating transmission point.



Have you ever looked at the Airport Extreme cards that are going into laptops, they are tiny.  The added functionality here would fit on a single chip and is not a problem.  The truth of the matter is that the Airport Express will eat into the Extreme base station sales  but that may not be a big deal.  If they are cheeper to manufacture Apple may even make more profit on them.

The "deficiencies" of the Express are   

Only supports 10 clients (not 50)
Only one ethernet port, old version has 2 one for DSL/Cable and another for local lan.
Can only be a slave in multi base station relay configurations.

For may users like me these devices are interchangeable.  I will be getting one and replacing my base station with it with Zero loss of functionality.  (The stereo streaming will be a plus and I will give the old one to grandma and grandpa to stop never ending calls to support their flaky linksys.)

-Eric


----------



## OrganLeroy (Jun 19, 2004)

lurk said:
			
		

> The "deficiencies" of the Express are
> 
> Only supports 10 clients (not 50)
> Only one ethernet port, old version has 2 one for DSL/Cable and another for local lan.
> Can only be a slave in multi base station relay configurations.


Can you expand on what you mean by (3)?

I want to use one Airport Express to extend the range of another Airport Express. The Apple site says:

"Want to extend the range of your current AirPort network? You can do so easily with AirPort Express...just place AirPort Express within the range of your primary base station (either an AirPort Extreme Base Station or another AirPort Express Base Station) and near the area where you want your wireless connection."

This seems to mean that having an Airport Extreme Base Station isn't necessary, and that one Airport Express can bridge to another Airport Express. Am I right about this?


----------



## bobw (Jun 19, 2004)

> This seems to mean that having an Airport Extreme Base Station isn't necessary, and that one Airport Express can bridge to another Airport Express. Am I right about this?



Correct you are.


----------



## Natobasso (Jun 19, 2004)

bobw--don't you love all the confusion that Airport Express has caused?!


----------



## Natobasso (Jun 19, 2004)

Lurk

By your logic, an Airport Card is also a transmitter.


----------



## bobw (Jun 19, 2004)

No confusion if folks would read the info from Apple on it. Seems pretty clear to me, and I'm no rocket scientist


----------



## Randman (Jun 19, 2004)

iPod= full-featured mp3 player with lots of extras and good amount of space.
iPod Mini= smaller version of iPod, a few less features, smaller size.

AirPort Extreme Station= full-featured wireless hub with lots of extras.
AirPort Extreme Express= smaller version of the AirPort Station, a few less features, smaller size.

::angel::


----------



## Natobasso (Jun 19, 2004)

What's confusing to me is that they are offering a product that seems to directly conflict with an existing one. Or, they should differentiate it more effectively as they did with the iPod and iPod mini, from a marketing standpoint. 

Right now the Express makes me wonder why you would buy an Airport Base Station at all? :0


----------



## Natobasso (Jun 19, 2004)

Great minds think alike!


----------



## Randman (Jun 19, 2004)

> Right now the Express makes me wonder why you would buy an Airport Base Station at all? :0


 http://www.apple.com/airportexpress/

It's pretty clear on the site. For some, the Express will suffice, for others a Base Station. For some, both. 

Same as the Mini/iPod discussions.


----------



## Natobasso (Jun 19, 2004)

I don't know anyone, except maybe business users (of which there are few, though I don't have exact figures) who would really need the Airport Base Station at this point, now that Express is available.


----------



## Randman (Jun 19, 2004)

The Stations offer signal encryption. That is one thing I haven't heard about the Express. Perhaps for future buyers (or those struggling along without a Base Station already), the Express will be enough.
  Many of us who already have a Base Station will still get an Express or two, partly for the AirTunes option, partly to extend the network range and partly for taking it when having to travel.
  Some people could say you don't need a desktop Mac with a good laptop available. Others would rather have the desktop with more punch. Same goes for the iPod, same goes for the AirPort.
  And now, you have your choices.


----------



## Natobasso (Jun 19, 2004)

Randman

Your explanation makes complete sense.


----------



## Randman (Jun 19, 2004)

You'll get my bill in the mail.


----------



## Kinniken (Jun 20, 2004)

bobw said:
			
		

> Correct you are.



That's what I thought - still, before I buy one, can you confirm that an Airport Express would work to relay a wireless network between an iMac G3 using Airport (not extreme) and acting as a software base station and an other iMac also using regular Airport, and this without needing any wired connection to anything?

TIA.


----------



## Randman (Jun 21, 2004)

Kinniken said:
			
		

> can you confirm that an Airport Express would work to relay a wireless network between an iMac G3 using Airport (not extreme) and acting as a software base station and an other iMac also using regular Airport, and this without needing any wired connection to anything?


Can't buy one yet, well you can buy one but not take delivery yet. The link I posted to Apple explains it all.


----------



## OrganLeroy (Jun 27, 2004)

Here's yet another Airport Express configuration question.

In my current setup, my cable modem is connected via ethernet to a Linksys 5-port wireless router. That router in turn is connected via ethernet to a Linksys wireless access point downstairs. I use a wired connection between the two because the signal degrades quickly between floors. The setup works nicely, and gives me good wireless coverage on both floors.

Here's my question: will I be able to replace the wireless access point downstairs with an Airport Express (still connecting it to the router via ethernet), and then wirelessly extend the range of that first Airport Express with a second Airport express? 

The issue, as I see it, is whether the first Airport Express can be configured as an ethernet-connected access point to a non-Apple router, but still extend its range to a second Airport Express. And if not, would the same configuration work if the Linksys router was replaced with an Airport Extreme Base Station?


----------



## Natobasso (Jun 28, 2004)

You should read more of this forum before your post. Randman has some good, concise observations. I still think, though, that the marketing for the Airport Express has been a bit sub-par and murky at best.


----------



## OrganLeroy (Jun 28, 2004)

Natobasso said:
			
		

> You should read more of this forum before your post. Randman has some good, concise observations. I still think, though, that the marketing for the Airport Express has been a bit sub-par and murky at best.



Hmmm. Spectacularly unhelpful. Can anyone be constructive?


----------

