I've noticed that many of the recommended routers dont have external antennas for Wireless.
Have anyone considered that this is a hindrance? I feel most are just reading for raw power, but I feel that comparing just any OpenWRT supported AX Router with and without Antennas, could be a thing signal wise.
Have anyone done this comparison? For example Belkin RT3200 is a super recommended router, but it lacks of external antennas. There are many other AX routers that, despite of being lesser in raw power, they simply have such antennas, most 4 units, some like Xiaomi is an antenna party (7 units).
From my experience, for example with some powerful outers without external antennas, the signal is drastically reduced. For example, last week I was comparing an ASUS XT8 (not OpenWRT comp, no antennas) vs a Dlink DIR-882 (4 antennas) and DIR882 literally blasted ASUS XT8 signal-wise.
For example its interesting that TP-Link release a ton of enterprise AP (EAPs) both planar and ominidirectional (the WALL versions) and neither of them have antennas (only the outdoor versions with just a pair of antennas). And they are meant to be used as Dumb AP where obviously Wifi signal prime.
Yes, but for example EAP are technically enterprise solutions not consumer goods and they are technically aberrant. They feel more hotel or office antennas more mostly for plasterboard scenarios. Now I feel a brick house is more demanding than a office...
If I see an AP without antennas I have a bad feeling
I modified my BT hub 5 after watching https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhX5KbaNmQg. I then added an Alfa patch antenna and improved a signal from a device on my property from RSSI 23% to 38%(-81 dBm). I suppose a big thing is to be a good neighbour and not swamp the area with your signal.
With the current insulators I find it difficult to throw the signal for a pair of rooms beyond the current routers. Without external antennas, I cannot find a real way to improve signal. I have even set a LPDA antenna in the roof to improve the signal for my 5G backup router. Overall I find that antennas are completely underrated and most of the times with just one router with attachable planar antennas one could do almost the same as what we are currently doing with dumb APs. But since dettachable antennas are not a thing anymore and most top routers don't even have a single antenna (not even internal, just the SoC itself) I have to buy dumb AP like peanuts.
But my original question was regarding current external antennas. I've been discussing this and many people find they are faux antennas. I have not eviscerated a router's external antenna because they look so cute nowadays its almost a crime.
This question has been asked -and answered- multiple times in the recent past, the forum search will find equivalent threads, but in short.
Internal antennas don't need to be worse than external ones (and may actually be better), but be aware that there are many different types of internal antennas ranging from just a PCB trace to dedicated antenna arrays that just happen to be under the plastic cover. With 802.11ax devices, you quickly go up to 8, 12, 16 or even 24 antennas, which is becoming rather unwieldy to manage with external antennas, let alone keeping them equidistant and in the correct spatial orientation - quite a few of these higher-end devices with internal antennas will beat most devices with external ones.