Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Networking Software Linux

Linksys WRT54G drops Linux 72

Posted by CowboyNeal
avorobiev writes "WiFi Planet is running a story on all the advantages of Linux-based firmware for the Linksys WRT54G router. Little do they know that as of v.5 of the router Linksys dropped Linux and switched to VxWorks. And yes, they crippled the hardware (halved the RAM) so that third-party firmware can not be installed anymore."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linksys WRT54G drops Linux More

Linksys WRT54G drops Linux

Comments Filter:

  • Repoll (Score:1, Funny)

    by ElNerdoJorge ( 923041 )
    Time to revote on the poll.

  • Understandable (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Kawahee ( 901497 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @03:36AM (#14005789) Homepage Journal
    Although it might not be too popular an idea, it's logical considering that Linksys doesn't want their $60 dollar router to be a $600 dollar one (Article: "The story of the Linksys Wireless-G Router (model WRT54G) and how you can turn a $60 router into a $600 router is a little bit CSI and a little bit Freaks & Geeks.") so that people are forced to buy their more expensive products.

    If I'm right, I don't know where the article got "It's also the story of how the open source movement can produce a win-win scenario for both consumers and commercial vendors", because I haven't seen too many commercial vendors 'win' from allowing people with enough expertise to convert their routers to the next level and lose them money.

    Just my two cents.

    • Re:Understandable (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Eivind ( 15695 ) <eivindorama@gmail.com> on Friday November 11, 2005 @03:43AM (#14005812) Homepage
      Depends -- Linksys could have gone the other direction and started delivering the more feature-rich OS-firmware by default (or as an option). This would allow them to sell what you call "a $600 router" for $60.

      They are not the only router-manufacturer. It is offcourse true that Linksys would rather you buy an expensive router from then than a cheap one. But on the other hand it's also true they would rather you buy a cheap router from then than an expensive one from their competition.

      • Re:Understandable (Score:3, Insightful)

        by alienw ( 585907 )
        I don't think it's purposefully crippled. Nobody is going to buy a Linksys instead of a Cisco router; the reliability difference is obvious even for a home user. It's probably more the case of saving money. If VxWorks can run with half the RAM and half the Flash, that's considerable savings.

        Not to mention, they don't have to deal with hacking Linux to work on their hardware, they can have an OS company deal with that. Sometimes, rolling your own just doesn't make much business sense.

        • Re:Understandable (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Eivind ( 15695 )
          Works both ways. Sure, you can have a company deal with the software. They won't do it for free though, and this is a very low-cost low-margin router.

          Besides, I'm not that surprised if the Linux-firmware is adopted to also run on the half-ram version over the next few months, they'll have to sacrifice some functionality, but it's certainly not impossible: I've made Linux-routers that boot and run of a single 1.4MB floppy.

          • The people that market VxWorks are not idiots, and they can figure out the price point that Linksys is willing to pay. It also gives Linksys more flexibility if they decide to switch to less expensive system-on-a-chip devices; finally, their other routers already use VxWorks or something similar, so it would make their code less fragmented.

        • Re:Understandable (Score:5, Informative)

          by DrSkwid ( 118965 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @06:20AM (#14006381) Journal
          You do know that Cisco bought out Linksys?
        • It's probably more the case of saving money. If VxWorks can run with half the RAM and half the Flash, that's considerable savings.

          Certainly makes sense to me. I wonder how much they save on the hardware to make up for the cost of redeveloping the firmware.

          Not to mention, they don't have to deal with hacking Linux to work on their hardware, they can have an OS company deal with that. Sometimes, rolling your own just doesn't make much business sense.

          I'm not sure replacing an existing, working, Linux firmware

      • There is a problem of support, a lot of people screwed up their routers and Linksys had been replacing. If they can halve their support costs, using a proprietery firmware could save them money.

        From the feature standpoint, the upgraded firmware is very nice, but the hardware isn't all that reliable, and thus not a total replacement for a commercial grade router or a PC with Linux.
        • I never said it was clear-cut. All I said is there are arguments both ways.

          I kinda doubt the alternative firmware as such would lead to more support-requests. It would when people go about installing it themselves (and occasionally messing it up in the process offcourse) but I doubt it would if it came preinstalled like the normal firmware.

          After all the normal firmware was linux too, up until recently. Changing one linux-firmware for another that is similar, except it has had bugs fixed and features add

      • Linksys is owned by Cisco, and people are starting to realize it. That means in business settings, where there used to be only Cisco wireless gear, there are lots of WRT54Gs sitting around now. I'd find it hard to believe that this change isn't at least slightly motivated by the high-end Cisco side of the business wanting that market share back.

        When you say:

        they would rather you buy a cheap router from then than an expensive one from their competition

        you've got to remember that their competition with the hi

      • I would be more inclined to buy their router if they made it an open platform that would also let me run programs I write (using an external cross platform development kit consisting entirely of free open source software such as gcc, etc). I think a lot of people would end up preferring such models of things (routers, switches, modems, radios, TV sets, DVD players, etc) if they could program on it, or run downloaded free open source programs that other people write and make available online. I'd even pay

    • Re:Understandable (Score:5, Insightful)

      by benjamindees ( 441808 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @03:55AM (#14005851) Homepage
      Of course Linux was a win for Linksys. It's just that they were bought out by Cisco.

      Linksys was in the hardware business, so Open Source was good for them. Cisco is in the "enterprise pixie dust" business, so Open Source is bad for them.

      Overall, though, Open Source is good for users, which is all that really matters.
      • More importantly, Linksys didn't sell a $600 router, so they didn't lose any money when you made your Linksys router more powerful. Cisco does sell expensive routers (probably none quite as cheap as $600), so a re-flashed Linksys potentially costs them a lot of money.
        • Maybe Cisco's marketing team is that dumb, who knows, but does anyone really believe that Cisco's target market is wavering on the edge between a high end Cisco router and an unwarranted, unsupported, WRT54G running custom open source software?

          If that market really existed they could just as well run an old PC with two network cards in it. It would be more flexible and probably faster.

          0 * ($600 - $70) = 0

          -- John.

    • Re:Understandable (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Tune ( 17738 )
      The story of [...] how you can turn a $60 router into a $600 router [...]

      Or rather: The story of how you can gain market share by freeloading on a movement that lifts your $60 dollar hardware to a $600 level.

      I mean: maybe the $600 hardware wouldn't be worth $600 in the first place if it weren't developed in a proprieatary world. I don't suppose they loose money on WRT54G items, its just that they've discovered a way to maximize company-wide profits by cashing more on hardware that supports GPL-licensed, thu

    • Sounds rather like the business model of consumer-level laser printers. A year ago, I bought a Konica Minolta printer for $500. The only major difference between it and the $800 model was that the more expensive one had a few more features. (Postscript, PDF, and a few other things.) Everything else was completely the same. That's $300 whole extra dollars for nothing more than some different bytes in the firmware.

  • So what? There is still a Linux flavoured product. (Score:4, Informative)

    by Narkov ( 576249 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @03:38AM (#14005800) Homepage
    Great article research. Linksys will/have [linksysinfo.org] released a Linux version and labled the packaging "Open Source". Here's [fcc.gov] the FCC information on the Linux device.

  • How do I tell on the retail box if it's v5? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by artifex2004 ( 766107 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @03:58AM (#14005860) Journal
    I'm going out to buy either a 54G or a 54GS this week, specifically so I can install something that is capable of bandwidth shaping certain IPs in my network, and so obviously I need to make sure I have the right firmware and hardware spec.

    • Re:How do I tell on the retail box if it's v5? (Score:4, Informative)

      by michaelredux ( 627547 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @10:33AM (#14007643)
      I'm going out to buy either a 54G or a 54GS this week, specifically so I can install something that is capable of bandwidth shaping certain IPs in my network, and so obviously I need to make sure I have the right firmware and hardware spec.

      The first 4 digits in the serial number (look on the box or the underside of the router) represent the hardware revision:
      CDF0 = WRT54G v1.0
      CDF1 = WRT54G v1.0
      CDF2 = WRT54G v1.1
      CDF3 = WRT54G v1.1
      CDF5 = WRT54G v2.0
      CDF7 = WRT54G v2.2
      CDF8 = WRT54G v3.0
      CDF9 = WRT54G v3.1
      CDFA = WRT54G v4.0
      CDFB = WRT54G v5.0

      CGN0 = WRT54GS v1.0
      CGN1 = WRT54GS v1.0
      CGN2 = WRT54GS v1.1
      CGN3 = WRT54GS v2.0
      CGN4 = WRT54GS v2.1
      CGN5 = WRT54GS v3.0
      CGN6 = WRT54GS v4.0

      (Source: http://wrt-wiki.bsr-clan.de/index.php?title=DD-WRT _Docu_(EN)) [bsr-clan.de]

      As far as I know, the GS version still runs Linux, although it is typically $20 more.

      I used the information above to find the last WRT54G v4.0 on the shelf, mixed in with the newer v.5's at my local Office Depot.
      • ...and if you're in Canada, Staples has a $25 in-store rebate and $15 on-line rebate for the WRT54GS model right now, ending Nov 15 I believe.
      • Thanks. That site has a lot of cool material on it. I think I'm going with DD-WRT, when I get the router.
        I'm pretty sure I'll get the GS, for the extra memory. From working with Ciscos, I know you never can have too much memory, especially not with such a low differential in price.
    • I'm also wondering, is the more expensive GS worth it? Are there any downsides to getting the GS version?
      • The best G model you can buy (2.0 rev. XH) has 4megs flash and might have 32megs of ram enabled, though some of them only enable 16. All GS models except the new 4.0 have 8megs flash and 32megs of ram.

        It looks like the 4.0 GS is "crippled" in the same way as the 5.0 G boxes. Half of each type of memory and it looks like it may use the new OS, too.

        Reference:
        http://wiki.openwrt.org/TableOfHardware [openwrt.org]
      • Looking around at different tables, I'm seeing that SpeedBooster is done entirely in software on the GS. In fact, according to this [linksysinfo.org] page, a couple of the firmwares you can get should do SpeedBooster on the G model, too. I'm going to go for the DD-WRT firmware.

  • WRT54GL (Score:4, Informative)

    by spiralscratch ( 634649 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @04:11AM (#14005907)
    Linksys is also coming out with the WRT54GL, which appears to simply be the WRT54G v4 hardware relabeled.

    The Italian Linksys site [linksys.it] shows it (bring babelfish), but the US site does not yet, except for their GPL Code Center [linksys.com].

    More in this forum thread [linksysinfo.org].

    • So we're going to see 2 pieces of hardware: One OSS, one propriary. It will be interesting to see what the marketplace reveals.

      I hope the OSS version outsells the VxWorks version. Or the profits for Linksys are higher. Money talks.

  • Competition (Score:3, Informative)

    by adderofaspyre ( 800203 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @04:32AM (#14005988) Homepage
    There are many [openwrt.org] manufacturers out there that sell linux enabled routers. Linksys might lose a lot of sales over this move.
    • 1) The home user who buys wireless for home doesn't care as long as it works. This is most of the market. This also includes many ISPs (cable companies, DSL providers) that sell a wireless addon for the internet connection.

      2) The geek buys one to hack at home. How big is this market?

      3) The ISP that uses modified firmware. How many units do they buy?

      2 & 3 will be able to buy the WRT54LG.

  • Crippled? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Urkki ( 668283 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @04:38AM (#14006003)
    "And yes, they crippled the hardware (halved the RAM) so that third-party firmware can not be installed anymore."

    Uh... Saving on components after replacing the OS with something that doesn't need as much memory is hardly "crippling". Hinting that they should have more RAM than they need is a bit... detached from harsh business reality.

    • Not only that, but back at v2 the RAM (and flash) was doubled.
      So all this means is they're back at v1.x RAM levels... which is what all of the externally available images (that I've seen) are made for anyways. They should still work fine, although they may have to find new tricks (bugs) to enable them to upload new firmware to the device.

    • Re:Crippled? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by mnmn ( 145599 )
      I agree. And bravo to Linksys if they replaced Linux just to have a more efficient router.

      I've seen people use Linux for crazy things, just because they wanted to use Linux. Plenty of small RTOSes require tiny amounts of ram and flash, less than what already comes on MCUs. For Linux, you need to add ram, flash, all the routes on the circuit board and the design and manufacturing costs.

      Linux is awesome, but for some things eCos fits better. For other things freeRTOS or micrium fits even better. Its crazy to

      • Re:Crippled? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by benjamindees ( 441808 )
        One thing to think about though is that, without a supported OS, most hardware is essentially disposable. The only reason you can use your "old machine" as a firewall is that it is OS-neutral. Devices which rely on specialized operating systems don't get reused. They get thrown away.

        Also, you didn't mention the difference in power requirements between small custom hardware and reused PCs. A couple of years of electric bills will pay for the entire box. And the power saved will pay for the difference in

    • It is stupid if it loses Linksys sales to competitors that have models with better specs for almost the same price or only marginally more expensive. It's not as if there's anyone 'in the know' that buy Linksys if they can buy an Asus wl-500g deluxe with USB 2.0 ports and the same flash/ram as the higher end linksys models (plus easier use and setup, even with OpenWRT.)

      It would only be a good move if they cut down on the price so much that they push other vendors out of the market or into the same cost (and

      • Agreed. Even marginally savvy consumers that buy wireless gear at Best Buy can tell when the packaging indicates that the $80 product has ports that can have a printer hookup and the $70 product does not. They simply say, "Cool!" and buy the $80 one.

        In the low end consumer market, it's all about profit margins and volume. If Changing to VxWorks and halving the RAM saves Linksys/Cisco a buck per router, then they won't even hesitate. I think the trick here is whether that buck will mean a drop in price to in

      • Re:Crippled? (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Urkki ( 668283 )
        It is stupid if it loses Linksys sales to competitors that have models with better specs for almost the same price or only marginally more expensive.

        Indeed. But the question is, how many of their customers actually even realize that their router has some RAM and an operating system inside the physical device? If they sell 5 million units at $5 profit margin per unit, it's $1000000 better than selling 6 million units at $4 profit margin.

        And in this specific case I do believe that the increased profit far o
    • > Hinting that they should have more RAM than they need is a bit... detached from harsh business reality.

      Not "they need". _I_ need more RAM.
  • :(
    http://wrt54g.net/articles.php?id=49 [wrt54g.net]. October 18th.

  • Bad news (Score:3, Informative)

    by dimss ( 457848 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @05:46AM (#14006274) Homepage
    My co-worker has bought new Linksys. He wanted to install OpenWRT... Bad luck. It was ver.5 running VxWorks.

    Linksys running OpenWRT is nearly-perfect (and very inexpensive) universal CPE equipment for medium-sized ISP. Some ISPs in Latvia use hundreds of them. Here is one: http://nx.mpe.lv/ [nx.mpe.lv]
  • I've been recommending people get the Linksys routers specifically for the Linux firmware. Guess I'll have to recommend another brand. Any suggestions?
  • When will software/hardware businesses learn that if they make products that support multiple platforms, without skimping on the features, that they'll increase their profitability.


  • OK, so they don't want a teeensy portion (.01%?) of their customer base upgrading their product without profiting from it, so instead they pay license fees for _every_ one they sell?

    Sounds like they have a problem with math... where I come from this is called "penny-wise, and pound-foolish" (no wait, that's from the UK, isn't it? ;) ).

    The main reason I bought this model (I have an old v2) is the fact that it runs Linux and is "hackable".
    If the new ones can't be, I won't be buying one, and I'm sure I'm not t
    • How do you know they are paying more for the firmware now? I would think they did this to save money. Maybe they license VxWorks for a flat fee that is less than what it costs to have a staff of engineers working on constantly porting the Linux kernel to different chips, and then doing QA on that firmware. That costs a lot of money, too. Not to mention, if a memory chip costs $5 and VxWorks costs $3 per unit, it makes sense to use VxWorks and eliminate one memory chip.
      • Tornado licenses (vxWorks IDE) are extremely expensive. vxWorks doesn't just come ready to run. It requires a fair amount of work to maintain and in fact everything does in the case of moving target hardware that you describe. Then there's the royalties.

        Here's why this likely makes sense for Linksys. The most certainly had a pre-existing relationship with WindRiver and likewise they would have the in-house knowledge for using their tech. As far as I'm aware you can always shoehorn vxWorks into a smalle

      • How do you know they are paying more for the firmware now?

        Because you can't get cheaper than "free", and anything else costs more.

        Maybe they license VxWorks for a flat fee that is less than what it costs to have a staff of engineers working on constantly porting the Linux kernel to different chips, and then doing QA on that firmware.
        • No need to port, it's already been ported. The microcontrollers in these devices are MIPS based, which has been supported for many years. This is why there are so many firmwares
        • Because you can't get cheaper than "free", and anything else costs more.

          Licensing fees are not the only cost. I would imagine the staff costs are greater than the licensing costs.

          No need to port, it's already been ported. The microcontrollers in these devices are MIPS based, which has been supported for many years.

          BS. Yeah, you don't have to port it to the architecture, but you do have to port it to each particular chip. These routers use ASICs for this stuff, they come out with new ones like every 6 mon
  • Why does this story not have a department?

  • Lots of alternatives! (Score:5, Informative)

    by PastaAnta ( 513349 ) on Friday November 11, 2005 @09:56AM (#14007387)

    There are lots of alternatives to the Linksys routers. A detailed list of routers compatible with the OpenWrt [openwrt.org] firmware can be found here [openwrt.org].

    I have just bought a cheap ASUS WL-500g Deluxe router with two USB 2.0 ports, which can be used with storage devices, printers, webcams etc. With USB ports the possibilities are endless! Linksys seem to have been a bit slow to realise this anyway.

    --
    • > There are lots of alternatives to the Linksys routers.

      I'd caution people, some of the WRT45Gs idea of "supported" may not be everyones idea of 'ease of use'.

      However I'm fairly sure my last try failed because I was a trying stuff a bit beyond what was officially supported, thanks to some random patches, and I hadn't any experience of the hardware except for breaking it with a firmware upload, and finding the support people had no idea what "the original firmware" might mean as a phrase (how can people w
    • I also have a WL-500g Asus router- it's fantastic. Very reliable, with full Linux and USB.

      I have disks and printers/scanners plugged in to mine.
  • What Linksys is doing is not sustaininable. Principle: You can't hold back technology (without a patent, and even then, not forever).

    Imagine that I found a way to make normal steel 10x stronger by doing something easy that anyone can do. It would effectively turn $60/unit steel into $600/unit steel. Now, the company is having trouble selling their $600 steel. So they modify their $60 steel so that the chemical no longer works.

    The company has won, right?

    No - another company will start selling the old $60
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • The difference is not between a $600 and a $60 router. Market for a higher end Cisco and a DIY GNU/Linux/Linksys are completely disjoint.

      If this was a marketing decision, rather than a cost reduction I'd say the differences is between a $60 router and a $90 router where the $30 is some software-only feature like router-to-router VPN. That $30 goes straight to contribution margin since it doesn't increase COGS at all. Of course the channel is going to take a chunk of that, but you get the picture. Elective s
  • I wasn't aware that this particular router had this ability. I just bought one of these last week, version 4. What is so special about this router?
    • It runs Linux so there are many programs that can extend its functionality, often to the point of that on a $500 router. I run the dd-wrt firmware, but there are many others available if you google.
  • It's possible that Linksys did this because their engineers found that they could cut the flash and RAM sizes in half by using VxWorks instead of Linux (yes, with the added advantage of not having to release the source under the GPL any more).

    With that said, I unknowingly bought a v5 from my local Fry's and I'm very frustrated. I had a chat with Linksys support last night that wasn't very helpful - see here: http://forum.bsr-clan.de/ftopic3550.html [bsr-clan.de]

    Unfortunately the latest WRT54GS has half the flash and RAM

  • *BSD (Score:2)

    by paugq ( 443696 )
    I just cannot understand why Linksys used Linux in WRT54G instead of BSD. Taking a BSD (NetBSD being the obvious choice here) would have been a lot better for them, as they wouldn't have had to release their (Linux firmware) code, so no open firmwares would exist, so they wouldn't have to move to VxWorks, so they wouldn't be paying VxWorks licenses now.
  • They were bought by Cisco. That one word alone sums up everything since the buyout and will sum up everything about Scientific Atlanta equipment when that finishes. Cisco is headed for irrellevance sooner or later. They know it. Their product line is overpriced and underperforming and overly headachy. They know it. They aren't the darlings of the Internet leading every trend in the physical sector. They *don't* know it.

    I still remember every single telecom magazine breathlessly reporting every supposed adva

Slashdot Top Deals

I tell them to turn to the study of mathematics, for it is only there that they might escape the lusts of the flesh. -- Thomas Mann, "The Magic Mountain"

Close