POST A COMMENT

26 Comments

Back to Article

  • Zok - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Is this for real? Those things look HUGE! Reply
  • Spoony - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    It is smaller than it looks. The prior model (A1408) has a footprint of around 40in2, and is 1.3in tall. The prior model Time Capsule (A1409) has a footprint of around 58in2, and is 1.4in tall. The power transformer for the Airport Extreme was external, whereas the Time Capsule transformer was internal. (Note: in favour of simplicity, I did the area calculations and then subtracted a small but arbitrary amount for the edge chamfers, it won't be accurate, but should be ballpark).

    It seems that the new Airport Extreme and Time Capsule have identical measurements to each other, with the Time Capsule weighing more. Both devices now have the transformer inboard and right at the base of the device. The upper antenna area should be mostly empty, so neither unit should be especially prone to tipping (bottom weighted). I'm not sure how high mounted the Time Capsule's HDD is, but that could change the stability dynamics a bit if it is high-middle mounted.

    The big difference here is that the footprint is down to 14in2, and the height is now 6.6in. So the new Extreme/Time Capsule are now exactly the same footprint as the current Airport Express (A1392). The new models have somewhat more volume than any of the previous units, so they are a bit larger. They aren't, as appearances would first imply, simply a 6.5x6.5in Airport Extreme extruded up to be taller.
    Reply
  • tipoo - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    It looks like a photoshopped concept spoof. Reply
  • HilbertSpace - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Typo: $199 for Airport EXTREME not Express. Reply
  • Brian Klug - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Derp, fixed! Reply
  • twistedgamez - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    i am also curious to find out if there is empty space in the express, if not what is in the hdd's place? Reply
  • Brian Klug - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    I seriously hope there's a slot, but until I get an FCC ID(s) with internal shots or a look at the boxes it seems hard to tell.

    -Brian
    Reply
  • twistedgamez - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/AirPort+Extreme+A15... Reply
  • nerdstalker - Saturday, June 15, 2013 - link

    Brian, looking forward to your detailed review. Your review of the previous gen was simply awesome: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4577/airport-extreme... Reply
  • SignalPST - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Darn...
    I was hoping they would've included built-in video AirPlay via HDMI, much like how the current AirPort Express has built-in audio AirPlay.

    It would be so awesome to carry only my Macbook Pro and an AirPort Extreme to do Powerpoint presentations wherever I end up traveling to, instead of having to lug AirPort+AppleTV+Macbook.
    Reply
  • fteoath64 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Disappointed that Apple did not widen this product to include a range of offerings that is very much wanted by home users and small businesses. What I meant was a 8-port GigE model with 4 USB ports for shared disks. Another with a 3-disk bay unit like a small NAS/TM box that does RAID0 and jobd configs. The present use of single drive USB disk to backup the TM and provide online sharing is getting very messy and restrictive. Few would want to plonk $600 for a 4Bay NAS so sticking with 3-4 two teradrives for cycling backups.
    Yes, a small media audio airplay would be useful, plus iCloud cache. That will do tablet users a lot of good in places where the broadband is not real high bandwidth or people using the occasional Mifi device. Such areas are "sure wins" with rather high margins. These things are simple to make as well, so waiting for a new TM seems like Apple roll-out planning is not good at all!.
    Reply
  • SIRKGM14vg - Tuesday, July 02, 2013 - link

    SignalPST - You describe the AppleTV, which does that exactly, play video over HDMI. If really what you are doing in your second statement is using it for presentation, you can simply connect the two together using ad-hoc networking; or even just a network cable. Simply create a network on your Macbook and then connect your AppleTV to it. Reply
  • Bkord123 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    I have a general question. Will this upgrade make my wireless home Internet any faster or will it only speed up data transfers like Time Machine backups? Reply
  • DanNeely - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    802.11ac will speed up networking to any devices that support it. Your older hardware with 802.11n/g won't see any significant performance change. Reply
  • SIRKGM14vg - Tuesday, July 02, 2013 - link

    Couple of things to clarify on "speed up". I'm not a huge fan of wireless, simply because of how it's used, and how many issues it creates. If Ethernet is not possible you need to consider three things for home. Coverage, number of devices and content.

    To answer your question, yes. You will see a significant increase and data transfer speeds for network traffic to and from the Airport Extreme. Your AE then becomes the gateway to the internet. However, your internet speeds will not change.

    To describe it in detail, your Internet connection from your ISP, will transfer (Tx) traffic at whichever speed you currently pay for. Your internet speed will always be limited in that factor. But if you have coverage issues, too many devices or using heavy bandwidth content (streaming, gaming, etc.), you may experience degraded wireless throughput or speed.
    Reply
  • ngautam - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    I have a 2 year old macbook pro and mac air and a 5 year old AEBS.
    Just switched to Uverse.
    Will i see significant improvement over 802.11n compared to my 5 year old AEBS?
    I have been waiting for this upgrade for a long time? please say YES, you techies.
    Reply
  • DanNeely - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Your 2 year old MBP only supports 802.11n, sorry.

    If you replace it with a new one that does ac your internal network will be much faster. But unless your wifi signal is extremely poor now it's still faster than Uverse; so you won't see any speedup over the internet.
    Reply
  • scbond - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Worth pointing out that the MBP and MBA support 802.11n?! To experience the 802.11ac speeds you're hoping for you'd need 802.11ac communicating with other 802.11ac devices, which won't happen for another year at the soonest. Until then, these AirPort Extreme Base Stations will just be like over-priced 802.11n devices...which was already the case before anyway. Reply
  • heffeque - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Just wanted to say that the new MBA and MP already have wifi-ac on them. Reply
  • name99 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    What strikes me as disappointing here is the USB2 port.
    The USB performance on these devices has ALWAYS been so crappy, and Apple seems determined to maintain that tradition. I was hoping to upgrade from my four year or so old Extreme, but with lousy USB it seems to make more sense to wait for the next rev which, finally maybe, will have USB3.
    Reply
  • androticus - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    VERY disappointed only includes USB 2.0 -- those frankly suck for external hard drives, especially with all the gee whiz wireless speed and 1G ethernet! Reply
  • Tegeril - Friday, June 14, 2013 - link

    Well considering that only under ideal 802.11ac circumstances will you eclipse the bandwidth of USB 2, I don't see the biggest pressing need… Real throughput will be hard-pressed to top ~500Mbps… http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wi-fi-802.11ac... and gigabit doesn't exactly clamor for USB3 class performance. If only there were something in between to help Apple get nudged in the right direction. Reply
  • name99 - Wednesday, June 19, 2013 - link

    You do realize that gigE can sustain 3x USB2 disk performance? You may think a factor of 3x is trivial, but most people do not.
    It also pretty much matches current HD performance --- which is still relevant for the kinds of large storage pools one wants to share.
    Reply
  • Wolfpup - Thursday, June 13, 2013 - link

    I still wish Time Capsule supported NTFS, allowed 2+ drives in (some sort of) RAID-ish setup that was automatic, and the drives were user replaceable.

    I really like my Airport Extreme (two gens old now), but I don't want a dinky, overheating notebook hard drive in a sealed case with those Time Machines...
    Reply
  • Oh Blah Dee Blah Dah - Sunday, June 16, 2013 - link

    RE: “…I don't want a dinky, overheating notebook hard drive in a sealed case with those Time Machines…

    REPLY: Neither do I. Because of that, a few minutes ago, I just replaced my 5th generation Airport Extreme with this 6th? generation model. The new Airport Extreme has extended the Wi-Fi signal to all parts of my home, upstairs, downstairs, and across the main floor.

    As for Time Machine, I am, at this moment, initializing a LaCie Rugged 250 GB SSD to be used with my MacBook Pro Retina via a Thunderbolt cable. It’s waaaaay faster than Wi-Fi for a Time Machine backup. The LaCie Rugged SSD draws power from the Thunderbolt port, and it’s portable! The Rugged SSD is little larger than a deck of cards. It can be carried in a briefcase or a backpack.

    When the LaCie 250 GB SSD is filled, I will just let it drop earlier backups or I will do a completely new Time Machine backup. It’s that fast.
    Reply
  • name99 - Wednesday, June 19, 2013 - link

    If you're such a tech stud that you want all this, why not build it yourself?
    - Buy two HDs, connect them to a Mac,
    - RAID them using Apple RAID,
    - run NTFS on top using whatever solution you choose (you'll get one for free if you buy Seagate drives),
    - mount them using AFP on the machine you want to backup
    - point Time Machine at it.

    But I have to suspect that you are all (incoherent) talk, complaining for the sake of complaining.
    In particular, WTF do you want to run Time Machine network backups to an NTFS drive? The remote backup will use an HFS+ disk image anyway.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now