I agree, this is all very much a "it varies building to building" situation. I've been in several hotels and office buildings where the hallway walls weren't load bearing in the traditional sense -- that function is served by the structural steel. In fact, I believe most modern tall buildings don't use load bearing walls at all, and just rely on this steel skeleton. In many hotels of this nature, the walls between suits are double insulated for privacy, whereas the walls to the hallway are single insulated because the hallway itself (plus the wall to the suite across the hall) acts as another sound barrier. If the insulation choice is rockwool, then while the insulation is an improvement over fiberglass for fire resistance, it is a detriment to wi-fi. And since these are fire-stop walls, wi-fi considerations are done after fire resistance, privacy, and cost considerations during building. There's also the consideration of access. If an access point goes out in a hotel, you can't just go into the room and fix it if the room is occupied. In a medical office, there may be lots of patients going in and out of that room that obviously require privacy. Busy medical offices don't want to shut an exam room down for hours if they're booked. If it's an office building, you have more leeway, but heavy furniture may need to be moved, or in extreme cases disassembled entirely. Also, a lot of spaces are designed so that the rooms and offices may have finished ceilings, whereas the hallways have drop ceiling. Plus there's the fact that hotel guests can be (rightfully) a little paranoid about any electronic device that looks "out of place" within eyesight of where they change clothes, sleep, or enjoy "personal recreational activities". Though you and I know it is just an access point, you don't want any reason to diminish your guests' absolute faith in their privacy, founded or unfounded. It also increases the possibility of vandalism or accidental damage when it's in an private area. All in all, wi-fi coverage isn't just about coverage. There's a lot of other factors that go into it. Most wi-fi client devices don't roam anywhere near quickly enough, even in 100% perfect coverage, to base the installation decisions on that first and foremost. I need to look at the robustness of the entire solution, including coverage, maintenance, and security. Requiring more access points for the same coverage may cost more up front, but the total cost of ownership is lower when considering possible downtime of an access point and what issues that may cause. Throwing 24 APs down one long hallway is a pretty extreme example of course, but I've not come across that kind of hallway walls that had such a huge deadening factor that weren't also shared by the other interior walls.

Not if you're in a different channel?

@@Coz131 how many collision free Channels are there, 9n case you want to use HT40/VHT80 (yes another NoGo, but even VHT40.)

@@rarbiart I don't deploy 40/80 in high density scenarios. 20 is appropriate for offices 95% most of the time. Also reduce signal strength to as low as you can? Of course don't deploy them in hallways too but that's a given.

Usually yes. Best have one access point in each office. Whenever you want to have maximum performance, place an own AP in that room, low signal strength, own channel. Then 5 GHz channels works perfectly. Even better is creating own names for 2.4 Ghz and for 5 Ghz. Place the static devices to 5 Ghz and use 2.4 for cell phones and moving devices. 2.4 Ghz is slower in general but is stronger to penetrate walls, so it's perfect for granting mobile devices a stable but slower connection like for WhatsApp or doomscrolling of Twitter on the toilet. But computers or 4k streaming devices should get 5 Ghz and should be connected to an AP within same room or at least very close range. If your offices on the second floor are close to each other and from the hallway there is each just one drywall in between the AP and the computers, one AP for all offices should word. If you expect high bandwidth use from several clients simultaneously, better choose a 'mumimo AP' (with more antennae inside the AP to have more simultaneous connections). Unify APs are great. Even the standard ones should work great for you (no need for the pro or flex versions for high density areas). To avoid: APs using the same or neighbouring channels, cheap 35 USD access points (they do not offer mumimo and can not server multiple connections well at the same time), using wifi repeaters (instead: use mesh, and use wired APs where possible, repeater or wifi connected mesh AP is fine in your garden cabin 50 feet away from the house since you will use it for increase coverage (cell phone), but not for daily working with a dozens of workstations simultaneously)

there's a function built in by KZfaq on the video (the little gear icon) you can watch in faster speed :)

there is a button in YT to adjust, it's up to your choice!

What about behind the tv ? Or under the bedside table ?

Also you can disable leds on some access points.

@@FR_SMRTT Disabling leds would be an option.