Slashdot Mirror


The Coming Time for 802.11a?

abhikhurana writes " This article on 80211-planet.com predicts a real boom in the market for 802.11a in the coming year. An excerpt from the article: In tests in my SOHO LAN, I found that in real world conditions, 802.11a averaged four times faster than 802.11b. In addition, with its 5GHz frequency, 802.11a avoids the interference slow-downs that b must suffer with microwave ovens, high-end wireless phones, and other 802.11b networks. Also makes an interesting read for knowing about the technologies which maybe driving the wireless bandwagon in the coming years."

21 of 195 comments (clear)

  1. Switching Over by Oculus+Habent · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Fresh starters may be more inclined to adopt faster, "cleaner" wireless, but the push will be moving people from 802.11b - having incompatible networks makes buying decisions harder...

    Though some will probably opt for both, as many businesses use b, and won't want to spend the money to replace all the cards in all the laptops.

    I wonder when Apple will produce 802.11a cards, and if they'll support a & b.

    --
    That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
    1. Re:Switching Over by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 4, Informative

      Apple won't go with 802.11a since 802.11g is on the way.

      http://thinksecret.com/news/airportupdates.html

    2. Re:Switching Over by monkeydo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The transition is much easier with wireless. You just put in an 802.11a base station next to your .11b base stations. For new clients you buy .11a cards. There is absolutely no need for a single base station to do both. since they are on different freqs you just put them next to each other. Your normal "technology refresh" on the clients and eventually all of your 802.11b is gone. Do it as quickly or as slow as you like.

      --
      Si vis pacem, para bellum
      The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
  2. How long ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How long should I wait to get wireless? I don't want to get trapped in an upgrade loop, like I've been in with computers.

    Since '92 I've just been happy to stay 1-2 generations behind to keep the cost down.

  3. Nice... by chainrust · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here is a nice comparison of B and A on 80211 planet. Also, a whitepaper for A is available at Proxim Communications. Also, don't forget the FAQ!

    My personal feeling about this: The U.S. government should sponsor a 802.11a nationwide network, so we can all have cell phone and data access anywhere, and a provider can 'buy' an area from the government to charge wireless rates for. Kind of like the current system we have in place for land-line phones.

    Everyone comes out happy:
    the cell phone company has a local monopoly
    the customer has access to wireless data and phone everywhere
    the government 's pocket gets fatter.

  4. The truth is buried in the article by Brento · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The truth is about halfway down the article, where they acknowledge that 802.11g is coming down the pike with better range than 802.11a, plus backwards compatibility with 802.11b. Any of us who already have investments in 802.11b are going to be more than a little hesitant to rip out that infrastructure and replace it with another incompatible format - when we can get an even better format, with backwards compatibility, by waiting a few more months.

    I don't even buy the argument that homeowners just now getting wireless should get 802.11a equipment: they can't take their wireless cards and use them at public or private 802.11b access points. Why pay extra for something you can only use at home, when you can get something cheaper that works all over the US? It would be like buying a cellular phone that only worked in your neighborhood.

    --
    What's your damage, Heather?
    1. Re:The truth is buried in the article by Brento · · Score: 4, Informative

      Is there any introductory reads about all the different 802.11's? it seems that we now have a b c d e f g.

      Google and ye shall receive.

      --
      What's your damage, Heather?
  5. Higher frequencies are a beautiful thing... by d.valued · · Score: 4, Informative

    ..especially when you can use them to their fullest.

    Other advantages of the 5 MHz frequency are that the same antenna you use for 2.4 can be used at almost double gain (as long as you're careful), since the wavelength is almost half as long you can use the same antenna. The thoroughput kills 11b by a factor of 5 to 1 at max.

    Disadvantages... At 5 MHz, walls are a factor. Objects start to interefere more. So on a campsite, 11a will be amazing. In an office, you'll need repeaters. Hardware costs more right now, on par with what 11b cost at first.. then again, you can get 11b cards right now for under $50.. even Orinocos for under $60.

    --
    I used to be someone else. Now I'm someone better.
    Real life is underrated.
  6. 802.11b is good enough by joshv · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think we have reached the 'good enough' point with wireless networking. 802.11b is faster than any internet connection I will have in the forseeable future, and performs perfectly well for the small day to day file transfers over the LAN. It doesn't work for large file transfers, but when I need to do those, I pull out the Wi-Fi card, walk the laptop over to the hub, and plug a spare cable into it's ethernet port.

    I won't be upgrading until there is a compelling reason, and I can't see there being one for at least the next 3-5 years.

    -josh

  7. There is already support for people with 802.11b by sweetooth · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's in dual band devices such as this one from linksys http://www.linksys.com/Products/product.asp?grid=2 2&prid=452

  8. Poster mentions 802.11a, but... by Nomad7674 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ...the article also mentions 802.11g, which is more likely to become the standard for the vast majority of users. It is backwards compatible with the Apple Airports and Linksys wireless routers that are making so many inroads into homes and small businesses. Why pay a premium to upgrade everything to 802.11a when with 802.11g you can upgrade the router first and then the cards one at a time as money makes itself available? This option also allows for the largest compatibility for visitors - inmportant in public places like coffee bars and airports which are already adopting wireless standards for customers.

    That is my two cents. Of course, the big variable is when 802.11g recieves finalized specs. 802.11a is already there.

    One more question for the grou: I have read a lot (for a Business Analyst) about wireless networking and have yet to see a place which explains the "lettering system" used by the 802.11 products. Why are a, b, and g given those names? Are there 802.11c and d awaiting consideration?

  9. Re:how about XP running third-party WLAN software. by John+Miles · · Score: 4, Informative

    I don't know anything about XP's WLAN support (Windows XP is the first MS product that crosses my personal threshold of big-brother toleration, so I have no intention of upgrading beyond Win2K until absolutely forced to). But those DLink cards are garbage.

    Snag a couple of Lucent Orinoco Silver cards on eBay -- they go for a song these days -- and plug them into the DLink PCI carriers you're already using. You'll instantly see a 50% or more improvement in effective working range.

    --
    Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
  10. And how long.... by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Until the 5 GHz band becomes just as crowded as 2.4?

    802.11a is not the wave of the future. It's going to be a nice for those hardcore who absolutely need obscene speed and live in an interference-prone environment.

    It has to compete against the HUGE installed base of 11b hardware that is *far cheaper* than 11a and is more than adequate for 90% of the people out there.

    I was thinking of upgrading to 11a since I happen to be a power user - But that means that the card I bought would be useless on most networks I might roam to (such as my former college's wireless network). In the end, 11b won out because:
    a) I already had some 11b equipment
    b) My parents had 11b equipment
    c) I have never had problems with 11b interference - Spread spectrum is pretty resistant to CW interference (Microwave ovens - People could run microwaves all they want in my apartment and I wouldn't notice any difference on my network.) and 900 MHz analog is "good enough" for me in the cordless phone arena, which means that the most famous 802.11b interference culprit (2.4 GHz phones) isn't present.
    d) 11b hardware was a helluva lot cheaper than 11a hardware.

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  11. Bringing down the price by AirLace · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A 10 mbit 802.11a can cost as much as a gigabit NIC, which isn't too favourable if you're not going to do much roaming. The fact that you have to buy several Wi-Fi cards to get a wireless network together makes the proposition daunting for homes and small businesses. It doesn't have to be fast (or even secure, that's what ipsec is for), but for the technology to become truly ubiquitous, it needs to be priced at commodity levels, say around £10 to £15.

    Personally I'm hedging my bets on systems that offload most of the processing to the host CPU like the stuff Microsoft is working on. It allows not only for cheaper hardware, but also gives more flexibility and upgradability (care to upgrade your Wifi setup to 100mbit with a software update?) The only thing that could potentially go wrong with this technology is if Microsoft tries to abuse its position and fails to release open specs for the hardware or releases proprietary (or no) drivers for non-Windows operating systems. However, given their commitment to FreeBSD it's quite possible that they'll go ahead and release some BSD-licensed reference drivers for FreeBSD which can be ported to other architectures.

  12. the non US world by johnjones · · Score: 4, Informative

    I belive that you cant legally run 802.11a in the UK or europe

    intel had to get a licence for London Fashion Week where they did video streaming of differant shows

    not sure about china or taiwan anyone know

    regards

    John Jones

  13. Re:5 Ghz? by d.valued · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here's an exercise which should help clear this up.

    Name everything you can think of that interferes with 2.4 GHz band.

    Here goes... Wireless phones, microwave ovens, satellite TV, wireless broadband, medical equipment, cell phones.. There's a huge list because the frequency mixes high enough bandwidth and fairly good range at low power.

    Now, let's try 5 GHz.

    Short list, huh.

    Not much is there yet because there's the wall problem. With computers and the 11a ability to down-negotiate bandwidth, it can be tolerated and handled. Not much else can do that.

    --
    I used to be someone else. Now I'm someone better.
    Real life is underrated.
  14. 802.11a -- A personal heck. by Umrick · · Score: 5, Informative
    Our facility was 802.11a (using Intel APs). The amount of trouble we had was just this side of insurmountable. Fortunately, thanks to a manufacturing defect in the Intel APs, we got to send them back for replacement 802.11b units.

    The real world:
    • The shorter range means a much greater density of units in any facility of any size. Fourty feet is the normal range.
    • If you have an older building with lots of brick/cement/steel, 802.11a will not penetrate nearly as well. Expect your range to drop to as little as 20 feet in a dense structure.
    • Many of the currently available access points will not roam properly(Intel at least).
    • There are no readily available antennas yet available for increasing range baring some nice directionals.
    • Average throughput in our environment was 6Mbs due to roaming computer(Medical practice) problems. They would authenticate to one unit, but never roam until they lost all signal from the first.

    That said, a small office or home that can be covered by a single unit should work acceptably. I would wait for 802.11g before installing a large number of units based on 802.11a, especially for any core business use.

  15. Re:how about XP running third-party WLAN software. by mac123 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Methinks you are configuring things wrong on your system or on your WAP

    XP doesn't forbid the use of 3rd party WLAN configuration software (I am running Orinoco's Client Manager).

    It also doesn't require an encryption key. I turn mine off once in a while to allow others easy access.

    Works with no encryption, 64 bit or 128. XP controls none of this...the WAP does

  16. I'd be happy with bluetooth AND 802.11b ? by johnjones · · Score: 4, Interesting

    does anyone actually know of a PCMCIA card that does both Bluetooth and 802.11b ?

    that would make alot of people Very happy

    regards

    john jones

    p.s. bluetooth phone dialup when your not in the office and 802.11b for when you are

  17. Speed Doesn't Affect Home Usability; Distance Does by billstewart · · Score: 4, Insightful
    For the home user, the speed of a wireless connection doesn't affect usability - your connection to the outside world is probably DSL or cable modem, usually not more than 1.5Mbps, so even if you only get 2Mbps out of your wireless, it's fast enough. (Also, the last time I had a 1.1Mbps DSL connection, I found that my end was almost always faster than the other end; the only way to fill it was to download more than ~10Mbps from a really big server.) Sometimes you might be doing big file transfers between different machines in your house, but most people don't do that very often, except for backups where speed doesn't matter - the video stuff that vendors are using to say that you should buy their products isn't really widespread, especially since DVD players for PCs are cheap enough that the difference in price between 802.11a and 802.11b can buy you an extra DVD drive.

    Distance affects usability, of course - if the thing can't talk from the living room to the bedroom, that's a problem. But speed isn't enough to justify the extra cost for most home users.

    Business is a different matter - there you often have enough machines sharing a server in the same building that total bandwidth matters.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  18. Just a note by afidel · · Score: 5, Informative

    If your microwave is interfering with ANY 2.4Ghz product then REPLACE IT ASAP. A microwave in good operating condition should not leak any 2.4Ghz radiation as the entire chamber should be properly sealed and the screen on the front of the microwave should keep the radiation in. Some people freak about cell phones and wlan devices, but the max power output of an 802.11b radio is 100mw for a client card, while a microwave over has radiated power in the hundreds of watts.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.