Hi @TCWGEngineers 

Thanks for posting in our business forum.

TCWGEngineers wrote

  @Clive_A Thank you for this post. I appreciate the single letter naming scheme however I'm finding the Omada naming incredibly hard to understand now.

 

I've found "Omada" has been slapped on a whole heap of switches that don't appear to be manageable by Omada. Are they really "Omada" switches?

 

For example: https://www.tp-link.com/au/business-networking/omada-switch-smart/sg2210p/

There is no mention of being Omada manageable but yet, it's in the Omada line up. This does not make sense and creates so much unnecessary confusion.

It is an Omada product.

For a compatible list, you should take a look at the Omada switch list. Some very old versions are not compatible with the Omada controller. For example, V1.

TCWGEngineers wrote

That's also not to mention the unmanaged switches in the Omada line up as well. Are they compatible with Omada or are they part of the Business Line up?

https://www.tp-link.com/au/business-networking/omada-switch-unmanaged/

I hope someone in the marketing and web teams can make this clearer on the website. They need to be clearly seperated if they cannot be managed by Omada. This is not the first time I've been caught out either. I've bought a managed TP-Link switch thinking I could adopt it just to find it is not compatible.

As said, the Omada switch is separate from the L2 switch which is an unmanaged switch. They are marked as Omada but they are not controllable.

Switch is layer 2. I am only discussion the Omada product line here. My goal is to discuss Omada as much as possible. I don't intend to include all the models we have. Your provided AU website is not correct about some models. I think that requires a revision from our web team.

You should send an email to the local support team regarding that website thing.

Refer to the global site: https://www.tp-link.com/en/business-networking/omada-switch-unmanaged/

Hi @TCWGEngineers 

Thanks for posting in our business forum.

TCWGEngineers wrote

  @Clive_A Thank you for this post. I appreciate the single letter naming scheme however I'm finding the Omada naming incredibly hard to understand now.

 

I've found "Omada" has been slapped on a whole heap of switches that don't appear to be manageable by Omada. Are they really "Omada" switches?

 

For example: https://www.tp-link.com/au/business-networking/omada-switch-smart/sg2210p/

There is no mention of being Omada manageable but yet, it's in the Omada line up. This does not make sense and creates so much unnecessary confusion.

That's also not to mention the unmanaged switches in the Omada line up as well. Are they compatible with Omada or are they part of the Business Line up?

https://www.tp-link.com/au/business-networking/omada-switch-unmanaged/

I hope someone in the marketing and web teams can make this clearer on the website. They need to be clearly seperated if they cannot be managed by Omada. This is not the first time I've been caught out either. I've bought a managed TP-Link switch thinking I could adopt it just to find it is not compatible.

I also revised some of the descriptions for better clarity.

Hi @DataMeister 

Thanks for posting in our business forum.

DataMeister wrote

Considering the new Omada products that aren't centrally managed.

 

Omada used to be the branding for centrally managed products similar to how Ubiquity has Unifi branding for all of their centrally managed products. Does TP-Link plan to have a new branding strategy to indicate parts that are centrally managed like Unifi?

 

Without a catchy brand name just for those products it is not going to be search engine friendtly and seems a bit like you'll be shooting yourself in the foot. What was the strategy behind diluting the Omada branding in the first place?

The Omada centralized product line does not change. The smart switch or above still keeps the old naming format.

Just added some switches to fill up the line. The easy smart and unmanaged switch. As we grow, people seek a wholesome solution. The Omada naming, centralized management, would still be the first concept. But the lower-end(basic) products still need to be available. So they can fill up their system with the basic switches. The branding is moving to Omada to stand the overall business products.

And the old name TL-SG100 will gradually fade out from history. TP-Link Switch Naming Format

Omada Pro is not targeted and available for regular consumers.

Hi @DataMeister 

Thanks for posting in our business forum.

DataMeister wrote

  @Clive_A  - Do the unmanaged switches show up as devices in the Omada interface in a limited way?

No. Unmanaged switches basically stay stealth on any scan tools. Not to mention the Omada.

Hi @DataMeister

DataMeister wrote

  @Clive_A - "Just added some switches to fill up the line. ...  ... So they can fill up their system with the basic switches."

 

The idea of filling out the product line might be misunderstanding the consumer mindset. I would be surprised if any customer really cares about having matching logos on all their switches. What they care about is how it works. For an unmanaged switch it functionally doesn't matter if it is a regular TP-Link switch or Trendnet, Netgear, or whatever logo.

 

If the Omada name has become more popular than your regular TP-Link unmanaged switches it isn't because of the naming. I think by putting the Omada brand on things unrelated to the Omada centralized interface, you are going to end up damaging the branding you've established. 

Thank you for thinking about every aspect of this naming stuff.

Since I cannot control this naming format and the project manager's decision, I recommend you write an email to the local TP-Link sales team regarding this matter. It would be more convincing for this message to come from the sales team.

We also need to collect as much as feedback from the market not limited from a single point of view.

Appreciate your comments and suggestions. We will pay attention to the sales number, and the feedback from the market as well.