Friends,
one of the reason i went for RT-AC68U from my earlier TP-Link was built-in mediaserver of AC68U with belief that this will reduce my dedicated mediaserver desktop to be continuously on and its subsequent relatively higher power consumption as mediaserver capability is advertised for this product..
bought this product, bought one 2TB USB 3.0 Seagate harddrive with 500GB partition for media, loaded my media in it, but i am very much disappointed with the mediaserver instability of RT-AC68U..
thats very very bad and defeats the basic purpose of this so called advertised AC68U mediaserver.. one cant say ow ya that is how it is - it is advertised but it does not work !.. what I paid for in that case..
if this is how it is then this particular implementation of AC68U media server is useless for me as my kids cant have benefits of the media which is on the mediaserver as they cant access it from their clients when they need it.. that creates lot of disappointment..
it is substantial money i have putin in this AC-68U router and after all this i cant wish to have one more dedicated mediaserver desktop also.. i have tried few firmware by now but the mediaserver is bad anyway, so i think it is not that by installing that certain firmware this will be resolved.. will be happy if that is the case.. i am on latest 454 from 371 and merlin 35_4..
i am not able to understand how does all this pass from QA and verification gates of the organization before putting in the customer field.. if it is not going to work then the feature should not be in the product and not advertised so that customer like me wont buy it.. i am not their QA and verification team to verify these half baked products so that they can keep putting newer firmware in the market and we keep verifying that.. dont take me wrong, i understand market feedback is necessary to enhance the product but here i feel to have an unfinished alpha product having many issues which is already released in market as a final gold version.. product released to market needs to work for the advertised features else what did they verify before release..
mediaserver cant be said to function dedicated to one client at a time.. it needs to function on 3 atleast.. not sure if that is high expectation?.. else i was good with a USB in my DLNA Samsung TV with dedicated media in my kids Samsung galaxies and TP-Link giving me wan internet through its N300 wifi, atleast it was functioning.. if this AC68U mediasever is not going to work than atleast for me i have a costly brick not sure at this stage if i will get a refund.. will be hard for me to believe that a car is released to market with a "minor defect" that its advertised disk brake wont work.. if that gets to be true its a market recall they do..
please help what needs to be done for this so that this AC68U media server will function on atleast 3 clients properly.. will that be possible or this is inherently instable?..
one of the reason i went for RT-AC68U from my earlier TP-Link was built-in mediaserver of AC68U with belief that this will reduce my dedicated mediaserver desktop to be continuously on and its subsequent relatively higher power consumption as mediaserver capability is advertised for this product..
bought this product, bought one 2TB USB 3.0 Seagate harddrive with 500GB partition for media, loaded my media in it, but i am very much disappointed with the mediaserver instability of RT-AC68U..

- sometime if one client is working with AC-68U mediaserver, then other clients cant find the mediaserver atall
- sometime if other client gets to find AC-68U mediaserver and works with it, then the first one gets disconnected
thats very very bad and defeats the basic purpose of this so called advertised AC68U mediaserver.. one cant say ow ya that is how it is - it is advertised but it does not work !.. what I paid for in that case..
if this is how it is then this particular implementation of AC68U media server is useless for me as my kids cant have benefits of the media which is on the mediaserver as they cant access it from their clients when they need it.. that creates lot of disappointment..
it is substantial money i have putin in this AC-68U router and after all this i cant wish to have one more dedicated mediaserver desktop also.. i have tried few firmware by now but the mediaserver is bad anyway, so i think it is not that by installing that certain firmware this will be resolved.. will be happy if that is the case.. i am on latest 454 from 371 and merlin 35_4..
i am not able to understand how does all this pass from QA and verification gates of the organization before putting in the customer field.. if it is not going to work then the feature should not be in the product and not advertised so that customer like me wont buy it.. i am not their QA and verification team to verify these half baked products so that they can keep putting newer firmware in the market and we keep verifying that.. dont take me wrong, i understand market feedback is necessary to enhance the product but here i feel to have an unfinished alpha product having many issues which is already released in market as a final gold version.. product released to market needs to work for the advertised features else what did they verify before release..
mediaserver cant be said to function dedicated to one client at a time.. it needs to function on 3 atleast.. not sure if that is high expectation?.. else i was good with a USB in my DLNA Samsung TV with dedicated media in my kids Samsung galaxies and TP-Link giving me wan internet through its N300 wifi, atleast it was functioning.. if this AC68U mediasever is not going to work than atleast for me i have a costly brick not sure at this stage if i will get a refund.. will be hard for me to believe that a car is released to market with a "minor defect" that its advertised disk brake wont work.. if that gets to be true its a market recall they do..
please help what needs to be done for this so that this AC68U media server will function on atleast 3 clients properly.. will that be possible or this is inherently instable?..
Last edited: