I'm finding it very difficult to find the old forum topics in here so please feel free to merge this with the old topic (I think Discord can do that).
Many a discussion has been had over the pros and cons of a (simpler) cloud controller with both support and resistance probably in equal numbers.
I work exclusively in the SOHO sphere and I've given up trying to implement Mikrotik - I just get far too much resistance Which is a shame and kind of upsets me because I'd love Mikrotik to thrive. The reasons are now getting consistent: a cloud based controller is easier to use AND RouterOS/Winbox is too complicated.
A perfect example yesterday helping set-up a mountain biking outdoor event. Although I could use Mikrotik, they refused (literally refused) and insisted on Unifi kit. We've gone with U6 Mesh connected to Starlink. We're currently using a small LTE Mikrotik for backup and I suggested a Mikrotik router in future so we can do seamless failover. First comment - it's too complicated if you're not around.
This is all very relatable - the mesh access points were pre-added to Unifi could, all I had to do was set-up their names and Wi-Fi network. The mesh was a matter of checking a box. It is VERY hard to defend Mikrotik against this level of simplicity.
The cloud controller is also very convenient for me. I've just checked the status from home which would be far more complex with Mikrotik.
IMO until something similar is available for Mikrotik, it will continue to loose out in the SOHO market. I know it's a not a simple project.
I tend to agree although I manage a pretty complex wedding barn infrastructure with a mixture of Mikrotik and Unifi. The former for routing and switching and the later for Wi-Fi. I look forward to the day when this forum isn't full of "Problems with Wi-Fi 6..." type posts.
I know I'm probably banging on too much but just upgraded a six CAP ac set-up with RB2011 router (ancient but works fine). Comparison of ease not comparable. I've never expected/trust a client to download the right NPK packages, unzip them and upload to the right folder to get CAPsMAN up date to work. Unfi? Click... click... click.
From my point of view, in the 2000s and even in the 2010s, most solutions on the market were similarly difficult to manage. But cloud controllers and provisioning have changed the ecosystem. Manufacturers who adapted to this trend were able to capture the SOHO market.
Although Mikrotik is technically not far behind in the SOHO market, in my opinion, their user experience is about two decades behind. Today, anyone can set up a perfectly working mesh Wi-Fi at home with just a few clicks and then easily monitor it with nice dashboards and so on.
With Mikrotik devices, this simple setup is not really possible. In some cases, it’s not possible at all, because except for the Audience AP, Mikrotik does not have mesh-capable access points. And the Audience AP itself is only easy to set up with the wireless driver.
Instead of developing Winbox 4, Mikrotik should have created a self-hosted cloud controller. Why rebuild a working software like Winbox 3.x from scratch with fewer features and worse usability? What is the purpose of all that effort?
A cloud controller would be platform-independent since it runs in a web browser, and at the same time, it would offer a modern and simple way to centrally manage Mikrotik devices. Winbox simply does not offer this.
MikroTik already have a self-hosted controller, it is CAPsMAN.
They don't have a cloud controller, that is the difference.
It would be possible to get a VPS, install CHR on it, and use that as a controller, but what SOHO user is going to do that when at other manufacturers you can just make an account on a shared cloud controller?
I will do, thanks. Building a web based controller and firing off RouterOS commands was always one of those projects that sounds fascinating until you start looking into the detail!
Which is pretty complex and still not cloud based. Setting CAPsMAN up still forces me to re-visit my instructions and follow them very carefully. For example, I updated a client site yesterday:
Open Mikrotik downloads page and remember which variant you need, e.g. Arm
Two separate downloads of main OS and the separate wireless package (CAP ac devices)
Unzip the one containing wireless
Launch WinBox locally which frightens even reasonably savvy users
Upload the exact right npk files to the right folder
Upload the router...
Or click logon to a web console from anywhere and click Update on each device. There is no way to say that the former is simpler and error free.
As I say in the title, I'm looking specifically at SOHO which may not have access to dedicated IT resources. If Mikrotik doesn't want this market then that's fine, their call. Except they keep putting out devices for that exactly market.
Another SOHO client switched from Mikrotik to UniFi because of lack of easy to use cloud controller and more complex deployment process Anyone want 8 second hand CAP ac?
Which is a shame and kind of upsets me because I'd love Mikrotik to thrive. The reasons are now getting consistent: a cloud based controller is easier to use AND RouterOS/Winbox is too complicated.
Anyone want 8 second hand CAP ac?