Lighting and electrical planning in new construction

Well, for example, a Fritz Repeater connected by cable to a LAN socket.

But then it is not used as a repeater but as an access point. That is the "linguistic precision" that was talking about. Specialized APs like Ubiquiti are much better in that regard.

Then it is not used as a repeater but as an access point. That is the "linguistic precision" that mentioned. Specialized APs like Ubiquiti are much better in that regard.

In what way? We are also in the planning phase, so the topic interests me.

I cannot confirm that. One centrally high-mounted wall access point per floor covers the entire large solid building including the garden

That may work for you, but in general, the design is like this. For example, I have a wall access point with the following radiation pattern: and a ceiling access point from the same series: As you can see, the coverage with the ceiling access point is more even in all directions. This applies especially to 5 GHz. Of course, this does not mean that wall APs are bad or that you can never cover a house with them. It’s just that they are usually not ideally designed for that.

And then connect a cable and a repeater there. That way you have the full bandwidth.

But only if it is an access point. A repeater, true to its name (and function), only distributes the existing network and shares the bandwidth with everyone else. An access point, on the other hand, sets up its own network and then provides the full bandwidth you are talking about. Ideally, the devices work as a mesh so that the end devices can switch between the access points without signal and quality loss.

No, the new repeaters do not halve the bandwidth. And they do not create a separate WLAN, that's the advantage. You always stay in the same WLAN network, which in my opinion is a plus.

You are on the wrong track here. Manufacturers can of course name their devices as they wish. They can also simply label normal access points as "new repeater." But that does not change the fact that it is/is still an access point and a repeater is a repeater.

But only if it is an access point. A repeater, true to its name (and function), only redistributes the existing network and shares the bandwidth with everyone else.

An access point, on the other hand, sets up its own network and then provides the full bandwidth you are talking about. Ideally, the devices work as a mesh so that the end devices can switch between the access points without signal and quality loss.

Then the new Fritz repeaters are access points. But exactly the thing with the own network is not really an advantage, at least from my experience. You sit on the terrace with your phone and surf on the WLAN of the network available there. Then you go to the kitchen and the network is used until you have no reception at all. In the worst case, you remain connected to the terrace network even though the kitchen network would have a much better signal.