We need your opinion for the next generations of our travel router

We are making a new travel router and it’s up to you for the look and feel. Please cast your vote for your favorite design, and it can meet you early next year!
P.S. the difference between the two designs is just the pattern, and it doesn’t help with heat ventilation of the router.We will be appreciated if you can comment below about your reasons of choice. :pray:

  • Design A - No pattern on the top
  • Design C - Strip grooved pattern on the top

0 voters

Grooved pattern:

I voted for the grooved pattern as I assume it is lighter from the material removed for the grooves. Heck, I would have voted for open slots for even less weight and better cooling. :slightly_smiling_face: I see what looks to be a press clip on the rear that would allow the unit to be opened and cleaned of any dust build-up. EDIT: Nevermind, that’s the status LED’s. Thanks @Johnex

I think I might be very interested in this new product. I’ve been using an AR300M for a few years now and I’m ready to move onto something with more current technology. I would be all over a travel/mini router with:

  • 5 and 2.4G WiFi, maybe even WiFi 6
  • 2 Gigabit Ethernet
  • USB C power port
  • USB 3 port
  • Decent weight (100g max?)

I understand it needs to be heavier than my Shadow’s 40g weight, but Beryl is too much at almost 5x more at 184g.

1 Like

The slot is in the front and it’s the same LED status indicator as the recent products have. You won’t be able to open it to clean it.

1 Like

Well, I don’t think the weight will be measurable lighter, and it doesn’t help heat radiation. It’s just a grooved pattern decoration. Other hardware specifications are still confidential at the moment, we will notify you when we are ready.

As it is just for decoration, I must say ‘I don’t care’. :slight_smile:

Maybe the grooves will have a better grip? But as I am using my Beryl and my SlateAX regularly on the road, I don’t miss anything.

On the second thought it will just collect dust/dirt. And that is the reason why I voted for a. without grooves.


the pattern on the top look nice, but its gonna be a nightmare with dust. i want an rgb led for different status. open vpn, wiregard, no conection, offline etc…

1 Like

More important to me than design would be the provision of timely firmware updates (for existing products).


What do you want to clean?

@panpan ronintech thought he could open it and clean dust out, i just told him the design won’t allow that.

1 Like

Design C is not eye appealing at all. I’m not sure why it’s winning the polls. :thinking:
Maybe it’ll look better in person when I’m holding it.

Look is not critical but if you only have two ports you will not be able to bond with this router except on one ethernet and the dongle. Better to have three ethernet ports so one can bond on two of them without having to use the dongle.

I’d like if the grooves were also just vents, This would allow for additional cooling when you may not be able to extend the antenna.

Unlikely to have holes on the top. We will put a mini fan inside this router for ventilation.

We don’t care about looks. All we care about is it to be as light as possible and rock solid performance (no bugs)


i prefer no grooves. Looks cleaner and allows me to affix a label or a tracker tag :slight_smile:

1 Like

I personally like the grooves, it adds some character😄

However, most people will rarely even see the router. Making it fully flat is more practical, easier to clean, ability to add labels etc.

If the grooves doesn’t add anything except for style, they have no real purpose & would only be a (mild) annoyance to some users.

1 Like

Frame this a different way - what’s cheaper? As an aesthetic it’s fine either way, but I certainly wouldn’t pay any extra to have the grooves.

1 Like

A lot of people in my daily environment are not able to abstract the function from the layout. It starts with a newsletter for our customers (layout and text), goes over marketing material (item and color) and ends somewhere nearby strategy questions about the business application (database and front end).

If I’d be asked ‘what design is better?’, than I think the person is trying to design a portable case, that big enough for much power and small enough to fit.
I don’t think 'this person is responsible for my 5 GHz WIFI drop, when I stand 5 m away at 270° from the front of the router … Maybe this particular issue, and other routing related questions, will be asked later. I hope by the responsible person.

As far as I know, in the manufacturing process it won’t be a impact to print something easy on the surface. Design pattern or company name. So I believe it is just ‘what is nicer to see’.

Maybe someone can imagine a dildo-shape would be better, because the cigar box design is too clumpy in the luggage?
Maybe a standing tube design can get 4 antenna for better MIMO behavior (if this will be supported by the WLAN card).

If the question about the ‘grooves’ doesn’t groove, why can we discuss about other form factor, but instead demand zero bugs?

Please, GL.iNet folks, don’t take my comment too serious. I don’t know how I should explain a dildo shaped electronic device with antennas to the TSA.


We will make decision based on the voting result by the end of this week. If you haven’t voted yet, please act fast. The reason that we come out with the poll for the two designs is we don’t want the new router looks “boring”. It really depends on user’s preference, and at the end, we want the new look to boost more sales.