Slashdot Mirror


802.11g Slows Down

Moosifer writes "Computerworld reports that in order to step on fewer 802.11b toes, the IEEE has reduced the actual throughput of 802.11g in its latest (and allegedly final) draft. I think I might keep old firmware on my linksys AP and card so that I can at least pretend I have faster gear." It's been moved from 54Mbps all the way down to 10-20Mbps, more than just a slight change.

12 of 302 comments (clear)

  1. So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How do they plan to market it against 802.11a? The advantage you were gaining in speed in exchange for distance is almost gone now.

  2. Re:Early parts overclockable? by Mensa+Babe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Actually, the biggest problem will be with older, buggy firmware, which people will use due to the higher speed. This is not the first time IEEE has made a similar mistake... *sigh*

    --
    Karma: Positive (probably because of superiour intellect)
  3. Wasn't 54Mbps bogus anyway? by John3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It almost seems that the new standard will more accurately reflect the real throughput for these devices, especially in mixed 802.11b/g environments. It's better to lower the expectations now before people purchase and are disappointed. I've read plenty of comments at amazon.com from purchasers of 802.11g access points where they were surprised that "backwards compatable" meant that mixing the b/g would make everything run slower.

    --
    "We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers." Carl Sagan
  4. If you NEED that bandwidth... by cruppel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just plug in a cable. While I admit (by the time this posts, like seven other people before me) that knocking it down below one half of the original throughput is weird, 54Mbps is not neccessary. If I need 54Mbps I'll just grab an ethernet cable.

    Normal/casual connections need no more than a megabit per second anyway. Browsing, SSH, IM etc does not require a enormous connection. Maybe if there were a "safe mode" there would be both safety for 11b and speed when only 11g is present in the area.

    1. Re:If you NEED that bandwidth... by ciroknight · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But I need that bandwidth... and I need it MOBILE!!! It'd be really nice to be able get in my car and drive between work, school and home, and have constant access to the internet, but it would be practically useless if I couldn't actually do anything with it more than check email and read /. I want to be able to hear a song on the radio, then, before I forget it, download and have it! Novel idea indeed.

      My next qualm is, all the cables in my room. Since my "media center" has at least 50 different cables running behind it (ethernet, coax for modem and tv, power, monitor, usb, etc), I'de love to get rid of at least some of them. And as bluetooth gets better, I can get rid of the cables for just about everything else (except power). I happen to have a nice and speedy 100MBit connection to my campus network, I'de hate to give that up for 20Mbps just because my wireless system won't let me reach those limits. (For all of you who say "100MBit is impossible in most cases, we use about a good 60Mbps on average, filesharing mostly.) But that's really the only reason for me to have wireless, so if it's not fast, it's wasted.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    2. Re:If you NEED that bandwidth... by Keeper · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why not just run a cable? Because people like me who live in an apartment don't want to trip over an ethernet cable every time they walk from the living room to the kitchen ...

      I personally want to have all of the big toys in the computer room, with a media pc of some sort in the living room. On top of that I'd like to have a laptop using desktop sharing and use any computer wherever I want, should I so desire. It works ok on 802.11b, but it sure as hell would be better with more bandwidth.

  5. Don't worry about your firmware upgrades by jolyonr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It appears from the comments here that quite a few people haven't bothered to read the article (slashdot users commenting before reading the article? there's a suprise!).

    This is NOT a proposal that's going to slow down all the 54Mbps cards out there to 10-20Mbps, all it's saying is "Hey, we were a little optimistic, these g cards have never been 54Mbps, and it would be a little more honest at this point to tell people that they're only 10Mbps-20Mbps cards."

    So hold off on your firmware upgrades if you wish, but you still won't have 54Mpbs wireless!

    Jolyon

    --


    Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
  6. Re:Calling all Trolls by geddes · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Uhh, besides that, I'd be willing to bet most manufacturers will just say "screw it", and give their cards the full speed anyhow, standard be-dammed.
    Exactly, this is precisely what will happen. It is incredibly stupid for the IEEE to kill the throughput because now manufacturers will IGNORE the standard. Once one company does it, and continues to claim 54 Mbps on their box, all the other ones will have to follow to remain competitive, and then the IEEE will have been a failure, since there will no longer be a universal 802.11 standard
  7. Re:Early parts overclockable? by mattyohe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the IEEE didn't make a mistake.. This spec had to be approved by them and the current 802g products on the market aren't IEEE certified. Now that they got arround to cert'ing it they brought down the speed, thats all.

    --
    - what is the definition of simultanagnosia?! I've been meaning to look it up!
  8. Re:Crap. by JoeBuck · · Score: 4, Insightful

    802.11b is billed as 11, but it can only do 5. Make sure that you compare apples to apples. Even if the actual throughput is 10 Mbps, it's still double 802.11b's actual throughput.

  9. Not really much of a slowdown by Ryan+C. · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The post and article compare incompatible metrics, 54Mbps is the theoretical bandwith, vs. 20Mbps measured throughput. The maximum throughput of the draft devices is between 22-24Mbps. The new 10Mbps mode is only when an 802.11b network is detected in the same channel, which is better than the nasty and unpredictable timeslicing that happens with most draft equipment. So... real speed loss = 22-24 to 20. Bad, but not that bad.

    -Ryan C.

    --
    -Ryan C.
  10. Thank you for bringing some sanity into this by 1000StonedMonkeys · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can't believe it took this long for someone to pick up on the fact that they were comparing to completely different numbers.

    The drop in effective data throughput in pure 802.11g environments is only about 2Mbps (from 22Mbps to 20). It's nothing to sneeze at, but it's hardly the 24Mbps drop that the headline would imply.