Dissapointed by network capabilities

aluijten

New member
Dear Forum,

I am working on an upgrade from NavNet3D-BB to TZT2BB. Overall I'm please with the functionality. The double display feature is actually brilliant! So is the backwards compatibility with the AIS Transceiver, Radar Dome and other stuff.

But after messing with the TZT2BB for a while before actual installing the device I must admit I'm quite underwhelmed with some of the network facilities specifically in the WiFi part.

I really like the setup where the fixed cable network uses its own subnet to keep traffic non-Furuno traffic off this part of the network and using the WiFi as a separate subnet to communicate with non-essential devices (i.e. Fusion stereo, iPad, Internet, etc.).

But using the Furuno to create a WiFi network is downright silly in current day and age. More so because the implemented WiFi security is WEP. That was already considered badly insecure more then 10 years ago.

Having the Furuno joining an existing network is the only sensible option especially if you want internet connectivity. So far so good. But why does it only notice the 2.4 Ghz networks and not the 5 Ghz networks? The build in WiFi adapter does see the 5 Ghz networks as you can see in the service program (Menu => Settings => Initial Settings => Service).
Next are the two apps available for the system, one remote control and one screen-copy app. Both are quite poorly designed as they will not allow you to enter the IP address of your TZT2BB system, it must find them by itself.
But it fails miserably at this task if the IP address in not at some interval pre-programmed into the app (is my assumption). Again, why is that. Why does Furuno force me to re-setup my existing router (in my case one with an extensive configuration) to use specific IP ranges? It feels Furuno learned a few things from the NavNet3D horrific network logic but still needs to learn a lot about modern network management.

Rant over...

Regards,
Arno Luijten
SV Luna
 
Rants and public axe grinding isn't encouraged on this forum. There are many forums out there for that type of thing. As far as rants go, yours wasn't so much. We appreciate suggestions to current design under the product ideas topic area, which we regularly pass to product development for consideration. I have moved your post to that topic area. We try to keep the bulk forum focused on questions/problems and finding solutions. I will say that many times decisions are made about products that might not be fully obvious to the end user. Units are sold all over the world and not all countries allow some frequencies that which other do. Although 2.4 Ghz is not as fast, it's range travels much further and more established. The bandwidth used is minimal so the need isn't really there for 5 Ghz but understand your view. I will pass your comments to development.
 
Back
Top