dslreports logo
 story category
Preparing For 802.11n
Can the Wi-Fi Alliance keep control?
Earlier this year the Wi-Fi Alliance vowed to crack down on some of the song and dance (cross-vendor interference, bogus speed claims) that occurs in the industry among vendors who release hardware based on standards not ratified by the IEEE. Today they re-iterated that desire, as vendors started offering "pre 802.11n" gear more than a year before the standard becomes official. 802.11n gear features four receive and four transmit antennas in a MIMO configuration, uses 40 MHz of bandwidth, and has the potential to achieve speeds up to 540 Mbps (raw throughput).
view:
topics flat nest 

dadkins
Can you do Blu?
MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA

dadkins

MVM

Let me know...

...when it's an *Official* standard! 540mbps? I want it!

dslwanter
20 years on this site
Premium Member
join:2002-12-16
Mineral Ridge, OH

dslwanter

Premium Member

Re: Let me know...

If they're talking routers I don't care, no broadband service offers that. But if we can get wireless like that then bring it on!!!
mishaq
Premium Member
join:2004-01-24

1 recommendation

mishaq

Premium Member

Re: Let me know...

It would be very useful for interconnecting buildings on one network. Wireless doesnt just have to be for internet access.....

dslwanter
20 years on this site
Premium Member
join:2002-12-16
Mineral Ridge, OH
·Armstrong
Ubiquiti UniFi AP-LR
Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X SFP

dslwanter

Premium Member

Re: Let me know...

said by mishaq:
It would be very useful for interconnecting buildings on one network. Wireless doesnt just have to be for internet access.....

Yeah a big router right linking to buildings. That's what I said. But for broadband itself that is a while off for my area anyways.

Nerdtalker
Working Hard, Or Hardly Working?
MVM
join:2003-02-18
San Jose, CA

Nerdtalker to dadkins

MVM

to dadkins
540mbps theoretical maximum bandwidth.

I've never seen 54megabits on 802.11g, or 11 megabits on 802.11b. This will probably prove the same.

Its still not worth it to me to see faster and faster speeds if the AP is insecure, or your ISP only provides 3.3 megabits of bandwidth.

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Re: Let me know...

said by Nerdtalker:
540mbps theoretical maximum bandwidth.

I've never seen 54megabits on 802.11g, or 11 megabits on 802.11b. This will probably prove the same.

Its still not worth it to me to see faster and faster speeds if the AP is insecure, or your ISP only provides 3.3 megabits of bandwidth.

Your right, if the product and standard was meant to just make internet access faster. But the real goals of this standard are for new products that would allow high speed wireless connections between DVD players and recorders, DVR's, TV's, Multimedia sound systems, laptops, etc.

Morac
Cat god
join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ

1 recommendation

Morac to Nerdtalker

Member

to Nerdtalker
said by Nerdtalker:
Its still not worth it to me to see faster and faster speeds if the AP is insecure, or your ISP only provides 3.3 megabits of bandwidth.

But it's fast enough to make streaming of full quality (and possibly HD) video a reality. So instead of just streaming music around your house you could stream movies wirelessly.

Whatever real world speed they come up with it will be certainly be faster than 100 ethernet which is what most networks run on. Not very many home users use or need giga-ether so basically you could replace your wired network with wireless.

TexasGuy
49 States And Texas
Premium Member
join:2002-12-02
Houston, TX

TexasGuy

Premium Member

Another health hazard.

It will fry your brain before reaching 540Mbps

keyboard5684
Sam
join:2001-08-01
Pittsburgh, PA

keyboard5684

Member

Re: Another health hazard.

Well, maybe, but it does use a large channel width. 40 mhz is a lot of spectrum to use up, does not leave much room for your neighbors to use.

Another thing to clog up the unlicensed spectrum. Higher speeds with less interference (adding in less interference) should be the key. If you sell a bunch of these things, say in an office building, no ones network would work. You would have businesses arguing with business over who gets to use what part of the spectrum.
jdir
join:2001-05-04
Santa Clara, CA

jdir

Member

802.11Z

I'm proposing 802.11Z - yes, it's the ultimate 802.11 speed at the rate of 1petabits/sec. It can dice, slice and comes with a set of ginsu knives.

joako
Premium Member
join:2000-09-07
/dev/null

joako

Premium Member

Re: 802.11Z

said by jdir:

I'm proposing 802.11Z - yes, it's the ultimate 802.11 speed at the rate of 1petabits/sec. It can dice, slice and comes with a set of ginsu knives.
Meh, I'll stick to 802.∞

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102

Premium Member

Why buy so soon?

Why would people even buy equipment that does not operate to published wireless standards?

TZi
join:2001-07-05
Miami Beach, FL

TZi

Member

Re: Why buy so soon?

... Probably for the same reason that people buy diet pills on TV that claim you can get skinny just by taking them - "no diet or excercise required", and it'll improve your sex life too ...
ignorance is bliss
B777300
join:2002-01-02

B777300

Member

As far as i know..

540 Mbps is gonna be crap probably.. Its going to be on the 5.8 GHz spectrum no? Im not a radio expert.. but it will probably shorter range than current standards, as much as 2x less range.. Why? more atteunation and to overcome that you need more power.. so its basicly even more dangerous than b/g wireless.

Skaap
@83.220.x.x

Skaap

Anon

Wireless speed vs throughput

Hi,

I work in the wireless industry (licensed & unlicensed) mainly dealing with PTP links.

When a wireless product is rated at 11mbits, that is the speed of the data crossing the link on the wireless portion, once it gets re-framed into ethernet etc, the actual throughput is approximately 6mbits/s. this is the case with all wireless technologies, unless they state what the actual throughput is.

Another example is the Airspan product, it is a proprietary technology, which is frequency hopping (a lot more secure than DSSS), it is rated at 4mbits/s and achieves a throughput of 3.2mbits/s.

In my opinion, manufacturers/whoever should be trying to concentrate on making the use of bandwidth/channel space more efficient.

-rob

mrloonie74
@charter.com

mrloonie74

Anon

Re: Wireless speed vs throughput

Agree's
And this is getting rediculous about the wireless days.

I mean think about it.
if we leave our system open then we are screwed.
hackers love to have fun.

but i would like to find more info about this new technology.

might have to make some phone clals this is the first i have ever heard of it.

its almost like internet thru powerlines its new but it works.

with minor issues.

that scares the cable companies also.

surprised there not offering tv thru phone lines yet.

its highly possible also