Google explains why it stopped Acer's Aliyun smartphone launch


Recommended Posts

Earlier today there was some strange drama as Acer abruptly cancelled the launch of a smartphone. The phone was running the Aliyun OS, which is created by Alibaba and which Google says is actually a "non-compatible [version] of Android." At the time, Acer said that Google had "expressed concerns" about the launch, and now Google has come forward to explain its side of the story in a statement:

Compatibility is at the heart of the Android ecosystem and ensures a consistent experience for developers, manufacturers and consumers. Non-compatible versions of Android, like Aliyun, weaken the ecosystem. All members of the Open Handset Alliance have committed to building one Android platform and to not ship non-compatible Android devices. This does not however, keep OHA members from participating in competing ecosystems.

This is the first time in recent memory (if ever) that we've seen membership in the OHA actually have repercussions. To date, it has appeared to be a feel-good consortium of companies that ostensibly contribute to Android. However, now we see that membership has meaning beyond feel-good PR, and Google is not being shy about stopping fragmentation where it can within the Android ecosystem. Amazon is not a member of the OHA, by the way, and therefore there's nothing to stop it from creating its own Android variant that powers the Kindle Fire.

The situation is a bit murky, as the extent to which the Aliyun OS uses technologies from Android is a little unclear. When it announced the OS a year ago, Alibaba took pains to point out that the Android app compatibility feature came from its own work, not the "Dalvik" virtual machine from Android: "The cloud OS is the result of three years of development and uses AliCloud's self-developed distributed file system and virtual machine; the cloud OS is also fully compatible with Android-based applications." In a statement to the WSJ today, however, Alibaba stepped back from those claims, saying that "Aliyun OS is not part of the Android ecosystem so of course Aliyun OS is not and does not have to be compatible with Android." Alibaba reiterated that sentiment in a statement to The Verge, "Aliyun OS is built on open-source Linux and is not part of the Android ecosystem."

Whatever the technical or political justifications, canceling a phone launch while journalists are en-route is a fairly serious flub and both Google and Acer will need to spend more time working out what happened here. Google may yet have to resort to such heavy-handed tactics again to help keep Android fragmentation in check, but as Amazon has shown, some companies don't need Google's cooperation to take advantage of the OS it created.

Update: Andy Rubin has posted a fuller explanation of its stance on Android compatibility on the official Android blog, although he does not directly address this particular drama, Rubin does say that the OHA hopes to create a "virtuous cycle" of development for the platform and that each member of the OHA "contributes to and builds one Android ecosystem ? not a bunch of incompatible versions."

Update 2: Andy Rubin minced fewer words in his posting on Google+, where he flatly claims that Aliyun "incorporates the Android runtime and was apparently derived from Android."

http://www.theverge....-aliyun-android

Figured there was more to this story. Acer is a member of the OHA and as such, there are rules they need to follow. They signed an agreement with Google and Acer and Google are still talking and working through this.

  • Like 1

Update 2: Andy Rubin minced fewer words in his posting on Google+, where he flatly claims that Aliyun "incorporates the Android runtime and was apparently derived from Android."

Didn't seem to be a issue for Google when they was borrowing from Java

http://www.theverge....-aliyun-android

Figured there was more to this story. Acer is a member of the OHA and as such, there are rules they need to follow. They signed an agreement with Google and Acer and Google are still talking and working through this.

Yep.. here's the reason

"When it announced the OS a year ago, Alibaba took pains to point out that the Android app compatibility feature came from its own work, not the "Dalvik" virtual machine from Android:"

So you can't use Android name and create your own thing, especially when it's not using the same compatibility layers and virtual machine as stock Android.

Google is 200% right here.. This is why it's great that Google is the one developing Android.. so they can protect it from stuff like this.

Update 2: Andy Rubin minced fewer words in his posting on Google+, where he flatly claims that Aliyun "incorporates the Android runtime and was apparently derived from Android."

Didn't seem to be a issue for Google when they was borrowing from Java

You mean the total 15 lines?

They could of gone the Amazon route, took android, did there own independent marketplace and launch it.

Yep.. here's the reason

"When it announced the OS a year ago, Alibaba took pains to point out that the Android app compatibility feature came from its own work, not the "Dalvik" virtual machine from Android:"

So you can't use Android name and create your own thing, especially when it's not using the same compatibility layers and virtual machine as stock Android.

Google is 200% right here.. This is why it's great that Google is the one developing Android.. so they can protect it from stuff like this.

so much being "open" then

so much being "open" then

Huh? Google is open. Acer just made their own OS based off of Android. Something all members of the OHA agreed NOT to do. Amazon can get away with it because they are not a member of the OHA. However, OHA members can make WP8 phones and that is not a problem. Its just competing Android OS that the OHA forbids and that all members agreed to.

So if Acer wants to do their own thing, then they shouldn't of joined the OHA.

Huh? Google is open. Acer just made their own OS based off of Android. Something all members of the OHA agreed NOT to do. Amazon can get away with it because they are not a member of the OHA.

Acer didnt make the OS. Alibaba did. Acer was just the hardware vendor. The phone that google got cancelled was never branded as an android phone.

Acer didnt make the OS. Alibaba did. Acer was just the hardware vendor. The phone that google got cancelled was never branded as an android phone.

Doesn't matter. Acer was going to release a device based off of android and is still against what they agreed to. So Acer was violating their agreement with Google.

so much being "open" then

Android has never been Open. This has always been nothing more than a marketing line from Google. This isn't the only time Google has crafted contracts that remove all the "open" features of Android from an OEM. They have always used their Google branded apps to tie the hands of their OEM partners. What I find the most comical about all of this is Google uses this pressure to twist OEM arms when it comes to what devices they release, but they never use it to ensure end users get updates all the while claiming they care about users and updates, among other things.

These contracts came to light in the trial between Google and Skyhook from before Motorola was purchased by Google. Google banned the use of Skyhook WiFi based AGPS system because it wouldn't allow Google to get user WiFi data.

http://searchengineland.com/skyhook-case-giving-google-pr-headache-77870

Android has never been Open. This has always been nothing more than a marketing line from Google. This isn't the only time Google has crafted contracts that remove all the "open" features of Android from an OEM. They have always used their Google branded apps to tie the hands of their OEM partners. What I find the most comical about all of this is Google uses this pressure to twist OEM arms when it comes to what devices they release, but they never use it to ensure end users get updates all the while claiming they care about users and updates, among other things.

These contracts came to light in the trial between Google and Skyhook from before Motorola was purchased by Google. Google banned the use of Skyhook WiFi based AGPS system because it wouldn't allow Google to get user WiFi data.

http://searchenginel...-headache-77870

Uh oh, don't bring reason and facts into this, you crazy? /s

Android has never been Open. This has always been nothing more than a marketing line from Google. This isn't the only time Google has crafted contracts that remove all the "open" features of Android from an OEM. They have always used their Google branded apps to tie the hands of their OEM partners. What I find the most comical about all of this is Google uses this pressure to twist OEM arms when it comes to what devices they release, but they never use it to ensure end users get updates all the while claiming they care about users and updates, among other things.

Google isnt forcing anyone to sign contracts. If Acer wanted to do their own thing with a different OS, then they should of did what Amazon did. And if companies do not like Google's terms and conditions, then they can do what Nokia did and go WP only.

What I don't understand from this, how can Google talk about Aliyun fragmenting Android, when it's not compatible with and not branded as Android?

I don't care is it was derived from the Android code-base or the Linux kernel or Linux kernel whilst using Android-specific patches that live in the mainline tree now.

If it doesn't support Android, as Alibaba now claiming that its OS is not compatible with Android applications or its marketplace*, then there is no "fragmentation" of Android

assuming that the definition of "Android fragmentation" is the same as what all the tech blogs are always using.

But perhaps I'm overlooking something here.

(* I've read the part about their cloudservices being compatible with the Android framework, but now they've retracted that statement. So I assume it no longer is)

Google isnt forcing anyone to sign contracts. If Acer wanted to do their own thing with a different OS, then they should of did what Amazon did. And if companies do not like Google's terms and conditions, then they can do what Nokia did and go WP only.

Actually they are, if they don't sign the contracts then they won't get Google Play (Android Market), Google Maps, Gmail, or a host of other apps. You can't really sell an Android phone without those apps.

Amazon is a strong exception because they have built an entire ecosystem outside of Google. Acer can't easily do the same thing and if they tried I'm sure Android users would shun them for not using Google's apps.

So don't pretend that the Google apps don't matter to Android users.

Actually they are, if they don't sign the contracts then they won't get Google Play (Android Market), Google Maps, Gmail, or a host of other apps. You can't really sell an Android phone without those apps.

Google did not force Acer to sign a contract. Google did not force Acer, or any other company, to create Android devices and agree to their terms. If companies dont like Google's terms and conditions, they could of created Windows devices or even Black Berry devices.

So don't pretend that the Google apps don't matter to Android users.

Never even implied or said this.

No one's fault for not reading the contract but Acer's. And we shall see what happens since Google is saying one thing, Acer says another.

Google did not force Acer to sign a contract. Google did not force Acer, or any other company, to create Android devices and agree to their terms. If companies dont like Google's terms and conditions, they could of created Windows devices or even Black Berry devices.

My point was not if Acer needs to make Android devices or not. My point simply was Android devices are not open as Google claims. If it were Google wouldn't have these backhanded contracts in the first place.

Doesn't matter. Acer was going to release a device based off of android and is still against what they agreed to. So Acer was violating their agreement with Google.

then google shouldn't claim Android to be open if they are going force handset members in a "OHA" ironically named open handset alliance, which then locks its partners out of Android forks.

Google did not force Acer to sign a contract. Google did not force Acer, or any other company, to create Android devices and agree to their terms. If companies dont like Google's terms and conditions, they could of created Windows devices or even Black Berry devices.

I don't think you're understanding _exactly_ what you're saying. Sure nobody is forced to do anything, but if you really want to sell your Android powered device, you _have_ to agree to Google's terms and pricing.

There's a logical fallacy here, the whole point was that you want to make Android devices, not BB or WP and therefore you're forced to adhere to Google's conditions and pricing. Plus BB doesn't license their OS as far as I know and WP

wasn't an option when Acer went on-board with El-Goog.

If you wish to create a "real" Android device, the one with proper Google branding, eco-system and everything, you have to sign that contract and pay the price.

Also, I really would have liked if anyone was kind enough to give my first post a constructive reply.

Android has never been Open. This has always been nothing more than a marketing line from Google. This isn't the only time Google has crafted contracts that remove all the "open" features of Android from an OEM. They have always used their Google branded apps to tie the hands of their OEM partners. What I find the most comical about all of this is Google uses this pressure to twist OEM arms when it comes to what devices they release, but they never use it to ensure end users get updates all the while claiming they care about users and updates, among other things.

These contracts came to light in the trial between Google and Skyhook from before Motorola was purchased by Google. Google banned the use of Skyhook WiFi based AGPS system because it wouldn't allow Google to get user WiFi data.

http://searchenginel...-headache-77870

Listen..let's make something clear.. Android IS open.. you can go take it and make ANYTHING you want with it. Amazon is proof. So let's stop with this Android is not open malarky.

The reason Google is against this is because the other OS IS using Android and Acer is trying to use that OS and continue using Google's services. That's not gonna happen.

Google's services ARE NOT open. So when OHA was created every member agreed not to branch out with alternate Android OSs and use the official builds because that's the only way it will guarantee a healthy and compatible ecosystem.

Acer can abandon OHA and go use Android and build whatever they want. The downside for them will be no access to official Google services that are supported on Android.

Google made their services that give value. You can use Android and do whatever the hell you want. Amazon did it and nobody is against them but even Amazon can't take Android and branch it out. The license specifically stands that you can use Android for whatever you want but you have to build on top of the foundation making Android apps compatible with your eco-system. If you don't comply you can't use the code.

This seems like a very reasonable thing. It's in the interest of consumers.

This isnt about whether or not Google is open or anything else. This is about an agreement between Google/Acer and that is it.

I don't think you're understanding _exactly_ what you're saying. Sure nobody is forced to do anything, but if you really want to sell your Android powered device, you _have_ to agree to Google's terms and pricing.

I know exactly what I am saying. But again, Acer agreed to certain terms/conditions which they may/may not have violated. Acer and Google have open lines of communication on this issue and I am sure it will be worked out.

The reason Google is against this is because the other OS IS using Android and Acer is trying to use that OS and continue using Google's services. That's not gonna happen.

This is what is in dispute ATM. Each side is saying something different.

Amazon is a strong exception because they have built an entire ecosystem outside of Google. Acer can't easily do the same thing and if they tried I'm sure Android users would shun them for not using Google's apps.

So don't pretend that the Google apps don't matter to Android users.

What does "strong exception" means.. You are just contradicting your claims that Android is not open.. So the bottom line is.. It's not that Android is not open, it's that Google's SERVICES are incentive for Android OEMs to use pure Android as it was intended.

Yes... that's true, but it's not blackmail at all. Google has built great products. Why in the hell would they want to give it away? There are alternatives, you can use Android, and use alternate services for maps, app store etc..

There are no "exceptions". You either go the easy route and you comply with requests from Google if you want to use their services, OR you can totally freely go take Android, make your own services and agreements with 3rd party solutions and create your own ecosystem, app store etc. Just like Amazon did.

I don't see the problem at all. You are just making one out of nothing.

What does "strong exception" means.. You are just contradicting your claims that Android is not open.. So the bottom line is.. It's not that Android is not open, it's that Google's SERVICES are incentive for Android OEMs to use pure Android as it was intended.

Yes... that's true, but it's not blackmail at all. Google has built great products. Why in the hell would they want to give it away? There are alternatives, you can use Android, and use alternate services for maps, app store etc..

Amazon is easily a strong exception because there is no strong Android foothold in tablets and Amazon built their tablet to expand their Kindle platform more than anything else. The Kindle Fire, which I own, is without question a Kindle tablet. Regular phone OEMs don't have the online ecosystem that Amazon has nor could they build one. To suggest such is foolish.

This is extended further by Google having phone carriers sign on to OHA as well which prevents phone OEMs from selling Android phones to the carrier that fail to meet OHA contractual terms...

http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/oha_members.html

I have never suggested that Google shouldn't be compensated for building Android. I don't own Google shares or Acer shares so I really could care less how much Acer has to pay Google and vice versa, but I'm not against any business being compensated for their products. I'm a business person for a reason ;)

That being said, my point is simply that Android isn't purely open. Consumers have the image of Android being purely open as this is how Google has marketed the platform. The reality is Android is partially open. It isn't anymore open than Windows Phone is for an OEM or the Windows Mobile that existed at its launch.

Anyway, my point is simply to offer additional information to others in this thread. People are asking for "more information" as "there is more to the story" and I'm simply showing that this is a common Google tactic. You can see the facts as you choose to, but the fact is Google places strict contractual terms on its OEM partners.

I just wished they used that pressure to get Android users updates...

That being said, my point is simply that Android isn't purely open. Consumers have the image of Android being purely open as this is how Google has marketed the platform. The reality is Android is partially open. It isn't anymore open than Windows Phone is for an OEM or the Windows Mobile that existed at its launch.

Thanks for clarifying since you originally stated that android has never been open.

I, for one, never thought Android was completely 100 percent open. Nothing is and they need to protect some things. But they have encouraged, even publicly, the hacking/modding of Android.

Thanks for clarifying since you originally stated that android has never been open.

I, for one, never thought Android was completely 100 percent open. Nothing is and they need to protect some things. But they have encouraged, even publicly, the hacking/modding of Android.

That is the beauty of a clean discussion :)

To me open means purely open and anything less should be prefixed as such and was why I worded my statement in the manner I did. I've always been angry at Google for distorting the definition of open for users due to them marketing something other than the reality (marketing pure open while practicing a definition of open not that different from Apple with Mac OS, which we don't consider open).

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Samsung introduces new AI classroom tools and interactive displays at ISTELive 2026 by Fiza Ali Samsung has announced several new education-focused software features and interactive displays for schools during ISTELive 2026, taking place in Orlando, Florida, from 28 June to 1 July. The focus of these updates is on making shared classroom displays easier to use for teachers while giving IT administrators more control over managing devices. One of the key additions is the Samsung Account Management Solution (AMS). In many schools, multiple teachers share the same interactive display throughout the day, which means signing in and setting everything up can become repetitive. With AMS, teachers can log in by scanning a QR code or tapping an NFC-enabled ID card. Once signed in, their personalised workspace, including wallpapers, bookmarks, app shortcuts, and files, can be instantly accessed through Home Personalisation. Samsung has also included a screen lock feature, allowing teachers to lock the display if they need to step away briefly. Furthermore, the company is also updating its Education Portal with new tools designed for school IT administrators. The portal will allow IT administrators to register teachers, enrol devices, and manage user access from a central dashboard. Administrators can also link NFC cards to teacher accounts, making sign-ins quicker across shared displays. Another addition is a Tags feature that lets schools organise displays by building or classroom. Those tags can also be used to send emergency notifications to selected Samsung Interactive Displays through compatible platforms such as InformaCast and Raptor. Moreover, the tech giant's AI Assistant is gaining several new features aimed at supporting everyday classroom tasks such as lesson planning and classroom engagement. One of the features is Circle to Search, which lets teachers circle text or images on the display to quickly find related information, videos, or web results without interrupting the lesson. The content can then be brought into Samsung Whiteboard. Another feature, Live Transcript, converts spoken lessons into real-time captions, which could be useful for students with hearing impairments or those in multilingual classrooms. The AI Assistant also introduces AI Summary and AI Quiz. The summary tool creates summaries of recorded lessons, while AI Quiz generates questions based on lesson content so teachers can quickly check how well students are following along. Teachers signed in through Samsung AMS can also return to their previous AI-generated lesson materials without logging in again. Alongside the software updates, Samsung has expanded its Android-based Interactive Display range with three new models: the WAF-S, WAFX-PS, and WAHX-M. The WAF-S and WAFX-PS ship with Android 16, bringing updates to security, accessibility, and overall usability while maintaining compatibility with Google's education services including Google Classroom and Google Drive through EDLA certification. Meanwhile, the new WAHX-M is the biggest addition to the lineup, introducing a 98-inch display for larger spaces such as lecture halls and conference rooms. It will also be available in 65-inch, 75-inch and 86-inch sizes. Samsung says the WAHX-M further includes on-device AI features such as voice commands, text-to-speech, and an AI calculator, alongside support for Samsung AMS and AI Assistant. Samsung AI Assistant has been available since April, while Samsung AMS and the updated Education Portal will begin rolling out in July.
    • It's been $24 (single) or $89 (4-pack) for many days on both Amazon and Walmart as far as I know. That isn't a big discount. If these end up like the 1st gen, the 4-pack will routinely get down around $80, give or take a dollar. I think they have even hit $69 at times.
    • Microsoft brings Claude to its own Azure infrastructure, powered by Nvidia GB300 Blackwell by Karthik Mudaliar Anthropic's Claude models are now generally available in Microsoft Foundry on Azure and are running on Nvidia's GB300 Blackwell Ultra systems. Nvidia wrote in its announcement that the models are hosted on Microsoft Azure and accelerated by GB300 Blackwell Ultra GPUs, with Quantum-X800 InfiniBand networking used to support larger agentic systems and specialized sub-agents that can operate across business domains. This is great for customers and enterprises that want to build autonomous and domain-specific AI agents using Claude without moving outside Microsoft’s cloud platform. Microsoft currently offers Claude models in Foundry in two forms: “Hosted on Azure,” which runs end-to-end on Azure infrastructure and is generally available, and “Hosted on Anthropic infrastructure,” which remains in preview. This separation is quite important for organizations that have procurement, compliance, data processing, or internal governance requirements tied to Azure. Anthropic currently has 11 Claude models listed in Microsoft Foundry, including Opus 4.8, Sonnet 4.6, and even the unavailable Mythos and Fable models. Billing is handled through Claude Consumption Units (CCUs). Microsoft says CCU is an invoicing unit for Claude models in Foundry, with token usage converted using Anthropic’s published per-model token rates. The usage is billed through Azure Marketplace just like models from other distributors and appears on the customer's Azure invoice, while eligible spend can count against a Microsoft Azure Consumption Commitment. For starters, GB300 NVL72 is a rack-scale, fully liquid-cooled system that combines 72 Blackwell Ultra GPUs and 36 Grace CPUs. Nvidia has listed 37TB of fast memory, 130TB/s of NVLink bandwidth, and FP4 Tensor Core performance of up to 1,440 petaflops with sparsity. The deal is also part of a three-way partnership between Microsoft, Nvidia, and Anthropic. Under the deal, Anthropic has committed to buying $30 billion in Azure compute capacity and contracting additional capacity up to one gigawatt. Nvidia and Microsoft also said they would invest up to $10 billion and $5 billion in Anthropic, respectively.
    • WhatsApp is getting usernames, and you can reserve your preferred one now by Fiza Ali Sharing your phone number isn't always something you want to do, especially with people you've just met. Whether it's someone from a class, a local community group, or a sports team chat, handing over your number can feel like giving away more personal information than necessary. That's exactly the problem WhatsApp is trying to solve with its upcoming usernames feature. The company has announced that users can now reserve a unique WhatsApp username ahead of the feature's wider rollout later this year. Once usernames become available, they'll let people connect without revealing their phone numbers. It's a change that makes a lot of sense for group chats. Right now, everyone in the group can see your phone number. With usernames enabled, that won't necessarily be the case when someone contacts you for the first time. WhatsApp says it's opening username reservations early because more than three billion people use the app, meaning plenty of people are likely to want the same usernames. Reserving one now gives users a better chance of securing the name they actually want before the feature launches more broadly. If your preferred username is already taken, WhatsApp will also offer a built-in username generator to suggest available alternatives. The feature isn't only aimed at individual users. Creators, businesses, and organisations will be able to claim the same username they already use on Instagram or Facebook, making it easier to keep a consistent identity across Meta's apps. Furthermore, privacy is a big part of how WhatsApp is introducing usernames. There won't be a public directory where people can browse or search for usernames. Instead, people will need to know your exact username before they can start a conversation with you. Additionally, users can also choose to enable a username key, which adds another layer of control by requiring people to enter that key before sending a message. Once the feature rolls out, people who choose to use a username will no longer have their phone number shown when messaging a person or business for the first time. If you want to reserve a username, make sure you're running the latest version of WhatsApp, then head to Settings > Account > Username. The tech giant says usernames will roll out gradually over the coming months, and users will receive an in-app notification when the feature becomes available in their country.
    • When I think about a network, there are really two aspects, the hardware and the wiring. So here is what I would do for both. Wiring: Use Cat6A for the patch panel, outlets, and all structured cables (cables installed in walls). Run plenty of Wireless Access Point (WAP) cables, as a general rule, assume a signal can only pass through 2-3 walls and can't pass through a floor (that is conservative, but trust me on this if you want strong WiFi)  Cat6 patch cables are fine for now if you don't plan to run 10gig, those are easy to replace later if needed. Run OS2 single-mode fiber to anywhere you think you may have a server or sub-switch. (yes, single-mode for everything on a small network, don't mess with multimode unless you are at a scale where that minor cost and power savings will matter). If you really want to future proof, also run fiber to any high density WAP locations, it is likely that WiFi 8 and beyond WAPs will push the limits of 10g. Run 6-12 pairs of single-mode fiber between your MDF and the building's MDF, even if you only need 1 or 2 pairs now, those extra pairs will pay off down the road. Hardware: (its easy to say "get all the features incase you need them", so instead of futureproofing, I am going to take approach of suggesting areas worth investing in, and areas you can save money). Don't overspend thinking you need every feature on every port. You don't need 10g on every port, you don't need PoE on every port. Don't overspend on redundancy either, unless you are ready to buy two of everything, don't waste money buying two of some things and not others. Dual power supplies are worthwhile, but probably not HA or multi-path redundancy.  Get 1 "distribution layer" switch that your router/firewall will connect to as well as all your access layer switches below. This should be a fully managed 10g+ switch with a combination of copper and SPF ports, a few 25g uplink ports are nice for this switch. Given that you said it is a small network, I suggest also using that distribution layer switch for servers and WAPs, meaning it will need PoE. Speaking of wireless, get good professional tri-band WAPs, and either turn on the band stirring options, or limit 2.4 to an IoT only SSID. This will provide a solid WiFi capable nearly everything but the highest of bandwidth clients...you could even consider skipping wiring workstations depending on usage. Access layer switch for workstations and printers can be cheaper switches, 2.5g is a good sweet spot between price and future proofing, but even 1g is fine for most individual clients (the kind that could probably be fine on WiFi). You can consider saving a little on access layer switches by only getting 1 PoE switch for whatever needs it (remember your WAPs are connecting to the distribution switch, not here), and non-PoE for your workstations, because desk phones are falling out of favor. You can also save money here by not buying managed switches if you don't need them--but really do some soul searching there, if you go this route, then anything that isn't on your workstation VLAN would either need to be connected to the distribution switch, or its own access layer switch. Also, don't feel like you need a fancy fabric stacking switches for your access layer, that is the point of the higher-end distribution layer, to remove the need for things like that at this level. Home Hardware: I'm realizing the above assumed an office setting, if this if for your house and home lab then the above still applies, but you'll probably want everything managed and PoE, just because, but you probably also don't need multiple access layer switches. If your total port count is below 24, just skip separating distribution layer and access layer and just get one nice switch with the features you want. If you are at the point of considering a 48-port switch, I would instead get a nice high-end distribution switch for things that need it, and cheaper access layer switches with specs based on the needs of connected devices. For home use, don't worry about home running every device to the main switch, there is nothing wrong with running sub-switches for your media areas and office, those essentially become your access layer, just look for sub-switches with a 10g uplink so sharing bandwidth isn't an issue. Just make sure you always connect them to your distribution/main switch, don't daisy chain, the path should never have more steps than Client>Access>Distribution>Firewall>Internet or Client>Access>Distribution>Server if it is local.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      536
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      269
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      150
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      98
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!