WLAN Access Points - but which ones?

I have a Lite running. It’s OK but nothing more. Today I would get a Pro or better. But it doesn’t really hurt much, because everything that requires high transfer rates is connected to LAN on my end.

You can tell with the Unifi software that it’s not designed for the average (I have no idea what I’m doing) end user, but rather for the semi-professional area. I was a bit overwhelmed at first too, but if you put some time into it, you can set everything up really nicely. Once it’s running, it just runs and you don’t have to keep checking it.

An access point instead of a repeater is understandable – but what is worse about an "access point with mesh" compared to an "access point with separate network"?

You can distinguish 4 operating modes:

Repeater:
- Receives WLAN from the router and amplifies it.
- Disadvantage, each repeater halves the usable WLAN bandwidth. For example, from 400Mbit gross, it becomes 200, etc.
- The device (laptop, phone, tablet, etc.) has to switch itself (works well sometimes, and sometimes not)

Repeater with Mesh (Mesh is not a standard, basically every manufacturer can do what they want):
- Receives WLAN from the router and amplifies it.
- Disadvantage, each repeater halves the usable WLAN bandwidth. For example, from 400Mbit gross, it becomes 200, etc.
- (In the case of AVM/FritzBox) The FritzBox takes over control for devices that cannot switch themselves to the repeater or another band (2.4GHz, 5GHz) by simply "kicking them out," and these reconnect (with a better receiving signal).

Access point (Access Point):
- Is connected via LAN and sets up its own network (which can have the same password and the same SSID). Therefore, no halving of bandwidth as everything connected to the access point transmits data over LAN to the router.
- The device (laptop, phone, tablet, etc.) has to switch itself (works well sometimes, and sometimes not).

Access point (Access Point with Mesh):
- Has the above advantages of connection via LAN
- (In the case of AVM/FritzBox) The FritzBox takes over control for devices that cannot switch themselves to the repeater or another band (2.4GHz, 5GHz) by simply "kicking them out," and these reconnect (with a better receiving signal).

The AVM repeaters have the advantage that they can be operated in repeater or access point mode (I am not sure how it is with other manufacturers).
The desirable mode for AVM hardware would be the access point with mesh.... the "worst" would be the pure repeater...

I hope this is written somewhat understandably

not quite right when it comes to mesh. Of course, mesh is not a standard but normally mesh (unlike "dumb" repeaters) does not completely halve the bandwidth. Some manufacturers even have special antennas for mesh. Loss is then below 50%. Really, do AVM devices kick out devices with poor connection? What does AVM call that? Is/would be a cool function since normally the clients control the network selection. Do you have to configure something extra for that? I'm more familiar with Unifi...

These are the "new" features intended for devices that do not support 802.11v and 802.11k... but I believe they are only being tested in the current beta.....

Found it. Meshsteering. Hope it works more reliably than zero handoff with Unifi. The best thing is to sensibly control or set the frequencies and transmission powers of the individual bands and networks. The client then automatically does the right thing.

@guckuck2 not quite right regarding Mesh. Of course, Mesh is not a standard but normally Mesh (unlike "dumb" repeaters) does not halve the bandwidth entirely.

Wrong highlight?

But thanks for that, I will add right away that Mesh does not affect the bandwidth at all. That is the whole point. What an access point does via cable, Mesh does through its own dedicated wireless network, so that the "actual" WLAN remains unaffected. This eliminates the disadvantage of a repeater.