WiFi’s Evolution from Past to Present – and Why Hardwired Ethernet Still Matters

WiFi has come a long way from its inception in the late 1990s to the mesh network systems many homes use today. In its early days, wireless networking was a revolutionary convenience – freeing us from Ethernet cables and enabling laptops and other devices to connect from anywhere within range. Over the years, WiFi technology has improved dramatically in speed and coverage. Modern mesh WiFi systems (with multiple nodes spread around a building) have simplified setup and extended coverage, aiming to eliminate dead spots by “blanketing” entire areas with signal. This evolution has made WiFi more user-friendly and seemingly reliable for everyday needs.

However, beneath that convenience lie technical limitations – issues like wireless dead zones, interference, and congestion – that mesh topology can mask but not completely solve. For non-real-time activities like web browsing or video streaming, these limitations often go unnoticed thanks to buffering and error correction. Yet for real-time applications (such as live communication with solar inverters or energy trading systems), even minor network hiccups or latency spikes can cause serious problems. In this post, we’ll explore a brief history of WiFi’s evolution, discuss why mesh networks are not a cure-all, and explain – with examples relevant to energy device installers – why a hardwired Ethernet connection often remains the gold standard for reliability. We’ll also address common objections (like “it always worked fine on WiFi”) by examining the different definitions of “working fine” for streaming movies versus controlling critical equipment. The goal is a clear, structured understanding of when WiFi is good enough and when Ethernet is worth the investment, in a tone that’s professional yet accessible to both technical installers and curious customers.

A Brief History of WiFi: From 802.11 to Mesh Networks

WiFi Origins: WiFi (based on the IEEE 802.11 standards) was first released to consumers in the late 1990s. The technology was born from earlier wireless communication research and the opening of unlicensed spectrum bands in 1985 by the FCC. Early WiFi standards like 802.11b offered modest speeds (up to 11 Mbps) and operated on the crowded 2.4 GHz band. Back then, WiFi was mostly used for basic web surfing or checking email without plugging in a cable.

Growth and Improvements: Over the next two decades, WiFi evolved through multiple generations: 802.11g, 802.11n (Wi-Fi 4), 802.11ac (Wi-Fi 5), and the latest 802.11ax (Wi-Fi 6/6E). Each generation brought higher data rates, better security, and improved ability to handle multiple devices. Technologies like MIMO (multiple antennas) and dual-band routers (5 GHz in addition to 2.4 GHz) helped increase capacity and reduce interference. Today’s WiFi 6 can reach theoretical speeds in the gigabit range and uses smarter ways to share channels (like OFDMA) so more devices can connect efficiently.

The Rise of Mesh Networks: In parallel with faster WiFi standards, manufacturers tackled the problem of limited range. Traditional single-router setups often left “dead zones” in larger homes or buildings due to distance or obstacles (walls, floors). Earlier solutions like range extenders helped but were often tricky to set up and could halve the bandwidth. This led to the development of mesh WiFi systems. A mesh WiFi system uses multiple router-like nodes placed around the property, all part of one unified network. Instead of one router struggling to reach a far bedroom, you might have a main router and two or three satellite nodes working together. Data can hop between nodes, finding the best path back to the internet. If one node is out of range of the main unit, it can relay through another node – a self-healing, decentralized approach. For users, this is largely plug-and-play: you place the nodes, and the system optimizes the coverage, usually with a single WiFi network name across the whole site.

Mesh Simplifies Coverage: Mesh networks have undeniably simplified setup and improved coverage for many. They can eliminate many dead zones by extending signal to hard-to-reach corners. Devices automatically connect to the nearest node, which helps maintain a stronger signal as you move around. From a historical perspective, this is a big usability leap – compare manually configuring extenders (often with separate network names) a decade ago, to today’s mesh kits that you can set up with a smartphone app in minutes.

But What Hasn’t Changed? The convenience and coverage improvements are real, but the underlying physics and shared nature of WiFi remain. WiFi still uses radio waves, which are subject to interference (from microwaves, cordless phones, neighbor’s WiFi, etc.), and performance still degrades with distance or obstructions. All devices on a WiFi network (mesh or not) ultimately share the same medium. Bandwidth is still shared, and when many devices communicate or nodes relay lots of data, the wireless network can become a bottleneck. Mesh nodes themselves typically use wireless links (unless you wire them, which many home users don’t), meaning the “backhaul” traffic between nodes eats into the airspace as well. In short, mesh topology helps manage where signal goes, but it doesn’t create new bandwidth out of thin air – nor does it banish interference or latency under load.

Mesh Networks: Simplified Setup, Hidden Technical Problems
Mesh WiFi’s promise is whole-home coverage with minimal effort. And it often delivers on that promise for general usage – you can roam around your house on a video call or stream music on the patio without dropping off the network. However, it’s important to understand what mesh does and doesn’t fix:

Dead Spots vs. Weak Spots: Mesh nodes can cover dead spots (areas that had zero signal before) by placing a node nearby. But if a location is simply challenging for wireless (thick concrete walls, lots of metal interference, etc.), even a mesh node may still provide only a weak signal. In practice, you might find certain corners where the signal is technically present but still not strong or stable. Mesh blankets an area better than a single router, but signal strength and quality still depend on environmental factors. For instance, a node in the garage might have trouble talking to the living room node if there’s a metal appliance and a brick wall in between. The mesh improves coverage on average, yet some weak spots can persist, and installers might still need to experiment with node placement to avoid them.

Congestion and Bandwidth Sharing: Mesh doesn’t eliminate wireless congestion; all nodes usually share the same pool of spectrum. If one family member is downloading a big file and another is streaming 4K video, plus your solar inverter is trying to send data, all that combined traffic competes in the air. In fact, because mesh nodes forward each other’s traffic, you can get intra-network congestion – e.g. the link between the bedroom node and the main router could become a busy highway during peak use. A wired backhaul (connecting mesh nodes via Ethernet cables) can alleviate this, but that starts to defeat the “wireless” appeal of mesh. When using pure wireless backhaul, mesh nodes share and split bandwidth, so the more hops your data takes, potentially the lower the throughput.

Latency and Hops: Every hop over WiFi (from device to node, node to another node, etc.) adds a bit of latency (delay) and the chance of packet loss or retransmission. In a well-functioning mesh, this added latency might be just a few milliseconds. But under stress – say a momentary interference burst or many devices chatting – latency can spike. It’s not uncommon to see brief spikes in ping times or jitter on mesh networks, especially if nodes are on the edge of good signal. This usually isn’t noticeable for web browsing, but it can hurt sensitive applications (more on that below). Consumer mesh systems prioritize seamless coverage over minimal latency; they assume you value not having to log into different networks more than you care about a 5 ms vs 20 ms ping. For most, that’s a good trade-off, but it’s worth noting when reliability is key.

Reliability of Nodes: In a mesh, you have multiple active devices (APs) rather than one. Each has its own software. Sometimes nodes can crash or de-sync (lose connection to the others) – it’s rare, but it happens. There’s also the factor of firmware updates: if one node updates or reboots, ideally it hands off devices smoothly to others, but you might experience a hiccup. In essence, mesh introduces more points of potential failure. One networking professional frankly described the mesh approach as a “decentralized framework” that, while resilient in theory, can be less reliable in practice compared to a solid wired infrastructure. It’s not that mesh is bad – simply that there is complexity under the hood which can occasionally cause headaches (like a node needing a reboot to rejoin the group).

Bottom Line: Mesh WiFi greatly improves convenience and coverage, but it doesn’t magically solve all wireless issues. It reduces the incidence of completely dead zones and makes setup easier than running cables everywhere. Yet issues like limited bandwidth, interference, and added latency still lurk. For many household tasks, these issues are minor or manageable. But for certain applications – especially those needing rock-solid, real-time communication – the “last 5%” of reliability that wireless can’t guarantee might be crucial. In those cases, understanding mesh’s limits becomes important when deciding how to connect devices.

Non-Real-Time vs. Real-Time Applications: Why Buffering Can Mask Problems

One reason people often say “my WiFi has always worked fine” is that, for the activities they use it for, it does appear to work fine. Video streaming is a perfect example. When you watch Netflix or YouTube, your device is usually buffering content – downloading a bit ahead of what you’re currently watching. If the WiFi has a momentary hiccup (a quick drop or slowdown), the video might continue playing from the buffer without a glitch. At most, you might see a brief dip in quality or a spinning wheel for a second before it catches up. The buffering and the streaming protocols are designed to hide short network issues. File downloads and software updates are similarly tolerant: if the connection slows or pauses briefly, the download just takes a bit longer, but it still completes. These kinds of non-real-time or buffered applications can absorb variability in network performance. They give a false sense of reliability – you might not realize your network had any issue at all, because the app masked it.

Now contrast that with real-time applications – things that can’t wait or buffer without affecting the experience or outcome:

Live Video Calls (Zoom/Teams meetings): If your WiFi stutters, everyone hears your voice cut out or sees frozen video. The conversation is disrupted immediately. There’s no time to buffer when you’re talking to someone live; packets arriving late are effectively lost. High jitter or variable delay causes choppy audio and out-of-sync video in video conferences. We’ve all experienced someone saying “you’re breaking up, I’ll reconnect.” That’s the real-time nature – any small dropout is visible.

Online Gaming: Timing is critical when playing interactively. A 100 ms spike in latency can be the difference between virtual life or death in a fast-paced game. Gamers notice instantly if their ping jumps or if packets are lost – the game might lag or rubber-band. Unlike a buffered stream, a game can’t “pause and resume” without you noticing. This is why competitive gamers almost universally prefer wired connections; WiFi’s variability can throw off their performance. Even game streaming services (where gameplay is video-streamed to you) recommend Ethernet for stability, because wireless latency and interference can wreak havoc on the experience.

Energy Trading and Inverter Communications: These might be less familiar, but they’re increasingly important in modern smart homes and energy systems. Consider a solar inverter that is part of a home battery system participating in an energy market or a virtual power plant program. The inverter might need to send data and receive control signals in real time (or near-real-time) to, say, increase output or charge/discharge a battery in response to grid conditions or prices. If that communication is over WiFi and the network drops out for even a few seconds, the inverter could miss a command or fail to report its status. In an energy trading scenario, timing is money – a delay could mean you don’t reduce load in time to get paid, or you don’t respond to a frequency event, etc. Even outside of trading, many inverters report to online monitoring portals continuously. A flakey WiFi connection means gaps in monitoring data and possibly constant alert notifications for the owner (“Inverter connection lost”). In contrast to streaming video which “keeps working” with buffering, here “working” means continuous, timely data. A system that only updates sporadically or drops offline under stress is not truly working for real-time needs, even if it seemed fine for casual internet use.

Device Control and Automation: Think of smart home devices or industrial controls. If you send a command to a remote device (turn on a generator, open a relay, etc.), you expect it to happen right away. If the command is delayed or lost due to network issues, the result can range from inconvenient to dangerous. Many IoT devices in energy infrastructure (for example, a remote disconnect on a solar inverter) rely on prompt communication. Minor WiFi latency or drops that wouldn’t faze a Netflix stream can totally derail an automation sequence.
In summary, non-real-time applications define “working fine” differently than real-time ones. For a streaming app, “working” might mean “my show eventually plays without major interruption.” A few seconds of delay or a brief resolution downgrade is acceptable. For a real-time app, “working” means “uninterrupted, on-time delivery of data or commands.” A single 2-second delay is a failure in that context. Thus, when someone says “It’s always worked fine on WiFi!” in reference to, say, watching videos or browsing the web, they may be absolutely right – for those uses. But that same WiFi setup may not work fine for a real-time need like continuous inverter monitoring or rapid control signals. The false confidence comes from only testing one kind of workload.

It’s important for installers and users to recognize this distinction. A network that suffices for buffer-tolerant tasks might still struggle with low-latency tasks. This doesn’t mean WiFi is useless – it just means we have to apply the right tool for the job. If the job is unforgiving about delays, WiFi in its current form (even mesh WiFi) can be the weak link.

The Frustration of Debugging WiFi Issues

Anyone who has spent an afternoon trying to diagnose a troublesome WiFi connection knows how time-consuming and frustrating it can be. Unlike a cable where a firm plug either works or not, wireless problems are often intermittent and invisible. Common WiFi issues that drive people crazy include:

Interference: Maybe a neighbor’s new router on the same channel, or a microwave oven that causes the signal to drop whenever it’s running.

Coverage Holes: That one device in the far room that keeps disconnecting because the signal is just a bit too weak.

Congestion: Too many devices saturating the WiFi, or one device hogging bandwidth and slowing down others.

Device Specific Quirks: Sometimes a particular laptop or gadget doesn’t play nice with a router’s settings (e.g., a device that fails on a combined 2.4/5 GHz SSID, or an IoT gadget that only likes older WiFi modes).
Roaming and Handover in Mesh: Your phone sticks to a distant node instead of switching to the closer one, because of its own roaming algorithm – resulting in poor performance until you toggle WiFi off/on.

When something goes wrong, troubleshooting WiFi is an art. You might try moving the router, changing channels, updating firmware, splitting SSIDs, adjusting power levels, or a dozen other tweaks. Each change requires time to test and see if the issue is resolved. The invisible nature of WiFi means you’re often guessing – is the interference gone? Is the signal now stable? There’s no immediate feedback unless you have specialized tools.

This process can eat up hours. As one technical troubleshooting guide notes, even if most WiFi problems can be solved, it’s often “a time-consuming problem to troubleshoot.”. For professionals like installers, time is money; an hour spent fiddling with network settings or walking around with a signal strength app is an hour not spent on other productive work (and often, clients won’t be happy to be billed for “messing with WiFi” time). It’s also largely unrewarding because, at the end of it, the best outcome is things are “working as expected” – a state which, had the network been wired, might have been there from the start without all the fuss.

Consider a real scenario an installer might face: You install a solar inverter and connect it to the home’s WiFi. Everything seems fine on installation day with your phone connected near the inverter. But a week later, the customer calls saying the monitoring app shows the system going offline occasionally. Now you have to troubleshoot. Is it the inverter’s WiFi radio? The home router’s placement? The mesh system’s backhaul getting overloaded at certain times? Perhaps the homeowner added a new IoT device that’s crowding the network. Tracking this down might involve multiple visits: relocating a WiFi node closer to the inverter, checking signal levels, maybe testing a different router or a WiFi range extender. Each attempt may or may not solve it. Meanwhile, the customer is frustrated that their expensive solar system isn’t “reliable,” and the installer is stuck debugging networking issues that have nothing to do with the core solar equipment.

Another anecdote from a DIY solar forum illustrates how common these issues are. A user noted that “some routers and pseudo mesh systems are just not good at managing connections, especially when device count increases.” In that case, the person’s Fronius inverter and IoTaWatt (energy monitor) were dropping offline due to the network, not the devices themselves. The solution? The user ended up wiring those devices via Ethernet to bypass the flakey WiFi. This story is familiar to many in the field: the wireless router was the culprit, struggling under load, and the fix was to remove WiFi from the equation for critical devices.

These headaches lead many technicians to adopt a simple rule of thumb: if it can be wired, wire it. Save WiFi for mobile devices or non-critical things. This isn’t Luddite resistance to new technology – it’s hard-earned wisdom from countless hours lost to mysterious wireless gremlins. When an installer runs an Ethernet cable to a device, they gain immediate peace of mind. There’s no question about signal strength or channel interference or strange compatibility issues – a wired link is either up or down, with clear diagnostics (the link light, the Ethernet status).

It’s worth noting that modern WiFi tools (spectrum analyzers, WiFi site survey apps) and better hardware have made troubleshooting easier than, say, 10 years ago. Yet, compared to the plug-and-play nature of Ethernet, WiFi debugging still often feels like chasing ghosts. For a professional installer, that time and uncertainty are costly. And for a customer, repeated visits or ongoing issues can sour them on the whole system.

Ethernet: The Unsung Hero of Reliability

With all the emphasis on wireless, it’s easy to forget about the humble Ethernet cable. Ethernet networking has been around since the 1970s, and it remains the gold standard for local network reliability. When we say “hardwired,” we usually mean an Ethernet cable (typically Cat5e, Cat6, etc.) running from the device to a network switch or router. Here’s why, even in 2025, Ethernet often still reigns supreme for critical connections:

Consistent Speed and Low Latency: Unlike WiFi, an Ethernet cable’s performance doesn’t fluctuate due to walls or airwave interference. If your ISP provides 100 Mbps, you’ll get close to that over Ethernet anywhere in the house, whereas over WiFi you might see that only near the router and much less farther away. One network guide put it succinctly: “Ethernet gives you consistent speeds and low latency, whereas Wi-Fi does not.”. Latency over Ethernet is typically just a few milliseconds at most, very steady, with practically zero jitter. This consistency is golden for real-time applications – there are no surprise 500 ms spikes because someone used a hair dryer or because the neighbor’s WiFi overlapped your channel.

No Wireless Interference: Ethernet is a guided medium (usually copper wire); it’s not affected by radio interference from other devices. You won’t see packet losses because a microwave oven turned on. There’s also no sharing of bandwidth through the air – each cable run is a full dedicated link. In a home with 50 WiFi gadgets, they all share the same WiFi bandwidth, but if many of those were wired, each gets its own lane. This means that on Ethernet, heavy usage of one device has minimal impact on another (as long as the switch/router can handle the aggregate traffic). On WiFi, one user’s large download can cause another’s latency to rise. An Ethernet user will never have to wonder if the neighbor’s router is causing their slowdown – it’s just not a factor.

Higher Throughput and Full-Duplex: Consumer WiFi has improved speeds, but real-world throughput still often falls short of wired. A wired Gigabit Ethernet connection actually delivers 1 Gbps (or close, say 940 Mbps after overhead) consistently. WiFi might advertise “1200 Mbps” (Wi-Fi 6, 2x2 MIMO link rate), but you’ll rarely if ever see that in practice due to protocol overhead, half-duplex nature of WiFi (only one device talks at a time on a channel), and environmental factors. Moreover, Ethernet is full-duplex – meaning it can send and receive simultaneously without collisions – whereas WiFi is half-duplex (your device and the router take turns). The result: wired is not just a little faster, it’s often an order of magnitude faster in real use, especially as networks get busy. For an installer setting up, say, a system that backs up large data or sends high-frequency telemetry, that throughput headroom can be vital.

Stability Over Time: Once an Ethernet cable is in place and tested, it tends to work for years without intervention. There are no firmware updates needed for a cable, no need to reboot it. It either works or if something goes wrong, it’s usually a clear physical issue (like a cable cut or a connector coming loose). It’s highly stable. Contrast that with WiFi, where an OS update on a laptop can suddenly introduce a connectivity bug, or a router firmware update might change performance. One energy equipment manufacturer flatly states: “WiFi is an inherently less reliable connection than a hardwired ethernet cable. It should always be a preference to connect via ethernet when possible.”. That’s advice straight from the industry – if you want reliability, go wired if you can.

Security and Simplicity: While the focus of this post is reliability, it’s worth noting that wired connections have some ancillary benefits. They are generally more secure (an attacker would need physical access to plug into your network, versus potentially sniffing or cracking WiFi over the air). And they’re simple to set up – no need to enter passwords or worry about encryption standards. For an installer, plugging in an Ethernet cable and seeing the link light is a simple, satisfying confirmation. There’s no ambiguity.

Given these advantages, one might ask: If Ethernet is so great, why not use it for everything? The answer is usually the cost and inconvenience of installing cables. Running cable through walls or across distances takes effort (and money). Many homeowners balk at the idea of drilling holes or seeing cables run along baseboards. That’s why WiFi is so attractive – no wires, no mess. However, when it comes to critical devices – such as an inverter that absolutely must stay connected – the investment in one cable run can pay for itself many times over by preventing troubleshooting hours and system downtime.

Let’s put it in perspective: If an installer spends 3 extra hours trying to fix a WiFi problem, that’s probably more labor cost (or aggravation) than pulling a cable would have been. If a customer’s system goes offline periodically due to WiFi, that could mean lost energy trading revenue or at least support calls and frustration – which again have costs. In that sense, Ethernet saves money and time by eliminating a whole category of problems. It’s a bit like paying for quality wiring in a house versus using cheap extensions – you invest upfront to avoid issues later.

To be fair, Ethernet isn’t always feasible – maybe the inverter is in a detached garage and trenching a cable is indeed too expensive, or the customer absolutely refuses. In those cases, installers might use alternatives like powerline adapters (running data over electrical wires) or dedicated long-range WiFi bridges. But whenever a device is mission-critical and you can run Ethernet, it’s usually worth doing.

For example, one solar installer shared that they almost always run Ethernet to the inverter if possible, because experience taught them it’s much more stable long-term than WiFi (especially for data logging). They treat WiFi as a last resort. Many inverter manufacturers include an Ethernet port for this reason, and some even make Ethernet the default for commissioning. It’s telling that in commercial solar installations, you’ll rarely see them depend on WiFi; they pull cables or use industrial wireless links with robust error handling. The tolerance for failure is low when there’s serious money involved, and that mindset is trickling down to high-end residential as well.

Real-World Example: Solar Inverter Installation – WiFi vs Ethernet
To tie this all together, let’s walk through a scenario that many solar/energy installers and tech-savvy homeowners face:

Scenario: You’re installing a networked solar inverter (or battery system) that needs to communicate with a monitoring portal and possibly receive remote updates/commands. The internet router is inside the house; the inverter is outside by the meter box (or in the garage).

Option 1: Connect via WiFi. The inverter has built-in WiFi, so you join it to the homeowner’s wireless network. On install day, you see a decent signal (say, 3 bars out of 4) and the commissioning app shows it’s online. You finish up and leave. Over the next month, the system reports data, but occasionally there are outages in communication. The homeowner’s mesh node in that part of the house was relocated (unbeknownst to you) or maybe their kid’s new game console is soaking up bandwidth every afternoon. The inverter goes offline a few times, triggering alerts. Now you have to troubleshoot: maybe the WiFi signal at the inverter is marginal (-70 dBm or so). The homeowner tries moving the mesh node closer. It helps, but then someone power-cycles the router and the inverter fails to reconnect automatically once – offline again until a manual reset. Eventually, after multiple site visits, you and the homeowner are frustrated. They might even blame the inverter (“faulty product!”) when in fact it’s the network. Total time spent: several hours, and possibly goodwill with the customer.
Option 2: Hardwire it. Instead, imagine you had run a Cat6 Ethernet cable from the inverter to the router (or to a switch). It might have taken an extra hour or two during installation to route the cable through the attic or along a conduit, and maybe $50 worth of cable and parts. Once plugged in, the inverter gets a solid network link. No signal strength issues – the link is 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, and unless the cable is damaged, it will stay that way. Over that same month, even as the family’s WiFi fluctuated, the inverter stayed reliably online. No missed data, no alerts. Total time spent: that initial install time, and then essentially zero dealing with connectivity afterwards.
From a business perspective, Option 2 could actually be cheaper in the long run. That one-time effort saves multiple trips later. From the customer’s perspective, it’s hassle-free – the system “just works.” This reliability is especially important for things like energy trading (imagine participating in a program where your battery sells power to the grid on a schedule – if your network drops, you might miss a transaction window). It’s also crucial for remote support: if the manufacturer needs to remote in to update firmware or diagnose an issue, a flaky WiFi can prevent even that, turning a remote fix into a site visit.

It’s understandable that some customers question the need for Ethernet: “My smart TV in the garage streams Netflix fine over WiFi, why do we need a cable for the inverter?” Here, the installer needs to educate that what’s “fine” for Netflix isn’t the same as “fine” for an always-on device. The TV streaming might buffer a bit and the user doesn’t notice any short drops. The inverter has no buffer – it’s either connected or not, continuously. Additionally, unlike the TV which is used maybe a few hours a day, the inverter communication is 24/7. Even a 1% downtime means ~7 hours a month of lost data or connectivity. For a TV, 7 hours of cumulative buffering might be annoying but tolerable; for an energy system, 7 hours of missed data could span a critical event (say a grid outage or a price spike).

Installers often use analogies to convey this: It’s like the difference between mailing a letter vs. a phone call. WiFi with buffering is like mailing a letter – if the mail is slow one day, the message still gets there eventually, and you might not even know of the delay. Real-time control is like a phone call – if there’s static or a dropout, you notice immediately and the message might not get through at all. For the phone call scenario, you want the clearest line possible (Ethernet), not a walkie-talkie that might cut out (WiFi).

Addressing “It Has Always Worked Fine” – Redefining “Working” for Real-Time

It’s worth directly tackling the common refrain: “I’ve always used WiFi and it works fine. Why invest in Ethernet now?” This perspective usually comes from having used WiFi for things like laptops, phones, streaming devices, etc. Yes, WiFi works fine for many use cases – nobody is suggesting that your smartphone needs to be tethered by a cable for everyday use! The key is to recognize the difference in requirements:

If “fine” means an occasional glitch doesn’t bother you, then WiFi is fine for that purpose. For example, if a YouTube video buffers once or twice in an evening, you might shrug it off. If a home automation command (like turning on a smart light) takes an extra second once in a while, it’s no big deal. This is non-real-time fine – minor delays or brief dropouts do not materially affect the outcome.
If “fine” means it absolutely must not fail when needed, then we need to hold the network to a higher standard. Think about a security camera that you rely on to catch events live, or a medical device that sends alerts – you wouldn’t want those on a spotty connection. In the context of energy systems, if you say the inverter communication must be “fine,” you likely mean it should stay online continuously and update in real-time. That’s real-time fine – basically, near 100% reliability in the moment. Achieving that level of performance is much easier with a wired connection. It’s not that WiFi never could, but the probability of something going wrong is higher.
To address the objection concretely: Yes, your WiFi likely has always worked fine for what you used it for. But those uses didn’t expose the network’s weaker points. It’s like a car that’s always driven on smooth city roads – it might “always work fine,” but if you suddenly take it off-road in the mud, you’ll discover its limitations. In this analogy, streaming video or browsing is the smooth road; real-time control and data is the off-road condition. We’re not saying your WiFi is broken; we’re saying the task at hand is more demanding than what you’ve used WiFi for before.

Moreover, WiFi environments can change over time. Perhaps it was fine for years, but then a neighbor installed a powerful router on the same channel, or your household devices grew from 5 to 50 (think IoT explosion). We’ve seen networks that were once stable become problematic as conditions changed. Wired Ethernet future-proofs you to a large extent – no matter how many new WiFi networks pop up around, your cable will keep working at the same performance. A customer might then ask, “If conditions change, can’t we just tweak the WiFi or upgrade it?” Yes, possibly – but again that’s time and complexity. If you’ve already run the cable, you don’t have to worry about it.

Lastly, consider maintenance and support. Who is going to troubleshoot if “fine” turns into “not fine” later? If an installer delivers a system on WiFi and two months later it’s frequently dropping, either the customer must troubleshoot (which they may not know how to), or the installer gets the call. If it’s under warranty or service contract, that can cost the installer. If it’s not, it still costs goodwill or reputation. Many professionals have been burned by such situations – everything is great at install, and later the WiFi flakiness appears, causing customer dissatisfaction. Using Ethernet from the outset is an insurance policy against that scenario. It’s setting a baseline of reliability that you can count on.

So when someone says “it’s always been fine,” the gentle response is: “It’s been fine for what you did before. But what we’re setting up now has different needs – essentially real-time needs. ‘Fine’ for this means a higher bar. I recommend Ethernet so that we know it will be fine in the way we intend, not just in the way you’re used to.” You can bolster that argument by citing experts or manufacturer guidelines: for instance, as noted earlier, Victron Energy (a respected brand in power systems) explicitly advises that Ethernet is preferred whenever possible because WiFi is inherently less reliable. This isn’t just personal opinion; it’s industry best practice for critical connectivity.

Conclusion: Convenience vs. Reliability – Finding the Right Balance

WiFi has revolutionized connectivity, evolving from a niche convenience to the backbone of most home networks. Its history is one of improving speed and ease – culminating in today’s mesh systems that make coverage almost a non-issue for general use. For everyday tasks and consumer gadgets, WiFi is usually “good enough” and the freedom from wires is well worth it.

But as we’ve discussed, not all connectivity needs are equal. When it comes to applications that demand real-time, always-on performance – like monitoring and controlling energy systems – the small cracks in WiFi’s armor (interference, dead spots, latency, congestion) become much more apparent. Mesh networks, while improving coverage, cannot fully erase those underlying issues. They simplify setup, yes, but they can also give a false confidence that “wireless just works everywhere now.” In reality, even modern WiFi can falter when you need unwavering stability.

On the other hand, the trusty Ethernet cable continues to offer a level of reliability that wireless struggles to match. It may seem old-school or even overkill in an era obsessed with wireless solutions. Yet time and again, installers find that spending the effort to wire critical devices pays off in fewer headaches and happier clients. It provides consistent speed, low latency, and robust stability that make real-time systems hum smoothly. As one networking article summed up: WiFi gives you mobility, but “range and interference can wreak havoc on your connection”, whereas wired Ethernet keeps things solid and predictable.

For technical installers, the recommendation is clear: use Ethernet wherever reliability is paramount. Save WiFi for what it’s best at – convenience and mobility for non-critical devices. For customers weighing the cost or hassle of an Ethernet run, consider the long-term benefits: fewer service calls, no mysterious outages, and confidence that your systems (be it a solar inverter, a home battery, or any networked device) will communicate reliably day in and day out. In many cases, that peace of mind ultimately saves money and frustration, far outweighing the upfront investment.

In the end, it’s about the right tool for the job. WiFi, especially with mesh, is a fantastic tool for general connectivity – flexible, easy, and now fairly fast. But for the jobs that really matter to work without a hitch, don’t be afraid to go wired. A professional yet accessible way to put it is: *Use WiFi for convenience, but trust Ethernet for *mission-critical reliability. Embracing that philosophy will ensure that both installers and users get the best of both worlds: wireless where we can, wired where we must – and a network that truly “just works” for every application.