Slashdot Mirror
802.11g... It's Official
JoeBuck writes "This article in CommsDesign reports that the IEEE has officially approved the IEEE 802.11g standard, as well as another standard (802.15.3) for shorter-range, very-low-power operation.
Two other standards designed to improve compatibility between different vendors' access points were also approved."
I triple E, 8 Oh 2 point eleven, G.
Yeeaa. Fo shizzle my wi'ahless using nizzles, wi-fi all day players.
Fizzle pizzle
future 801.11g products will be able to release their specs so we can make good (or at least working) Linux drivers...
"Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
802.11g operates at the same frequency as 802.11b. The good news: existing antennas and other range extension techniques should work fine (Pringles can, anyone?). The bad news: interference is going to be a nightmare. In heavily-populated areas, it's common to have a dozen or more legacy 802.11b signals, which tend to hog the bandwidth that would otherwise be available for .11g. Add in microwave ovens (which interfere massively on the same band), and many people will be lucky to see even 20 Mbits/sec.
The security is also a mixed bag: although the WEP mess is improved, security is still going to be a headache, particularly for people who want to roam safely.
The best thing about standards is... there's so MANY of them!
-Zipwow
I don't know which is more depressing, that 2/3 didn't care enough to vote, or that 1/2 of those that did are crazy.
So, pretty soon we're going to be able to pay more for equipment that's moderately faster, doesn't go as far, and costs more. Oh, and doesn't have jack in terms of linux/*bsd support.
F33r! Terra! The hype is coming!
-Peter
== Just my opinion(s)
I thought .g was already an IEEE standard?
Hmmm I guess my mom was right when she said i was behind the times..
---
Here is the link to IEEE
a l.html
http://standards.ieee.org/announcements/80211gfin
ENJOY
Victory is gained, not in knowing your opponents next move, but in preempting them.
I remember an article on slashdot a while back stating that they were considering reducing 802.11g's bandwidth to something in the range of 10 - 15Mbps. I guess this stamp of approval has discarded this?
An important question that I didn't see adressed in the article is what about products that are out now? Is the standard significantly different than, for example, apple's airport extreme? Being involved in the communications industry I know standards basically come down to which company wins the "no let's do it my way" fight (e.g. the cat 6 cable standard). Who was the winner in this case?
Hansel USA - Chut up and read!
Does anybody know if the new 802.11g chipsets support promiscuous mode? Or do we need to keep an old PrismII card around to go wardriving?
IEEE approves wireless network specs
.11g and .11b operate at ranges of up to 300 feet.
.15.3 spec suitable for its target application: small consumer devices, many of which will be operating in the same environment in close proximity. It features quality of service, connection management, advanced power management modesâ"allowing long and QoS synchronized sleep modes, ad hoc and peer-to-peer topology support, mesh support and enhanced security.
By Patrick Mannion
EE Times
June 12, 2003 (11:59 a.m. EST)
MANHASSET, N.Y. â" The IEEE on Thursday (June 12) gave its stamp of approval to two new wireless local- and personal-area networking standards and two corresponding recommended practices. The move is expected to open the floodgates to product introductions and upgrades while ensuring interoperability between those products.
The most anticipated of the four are the IEEE 802.11g and 802.15.3 standards for WLAN and WPAN connectivity, respectively.
The newly approved 802.11g standard specifies data rates of up to 54 Mbits/s in the 2.45-GHz band. While 802.11g uses orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM), mandatory provisions have been made within the standard to make it inherently compatible with the well-established 802.11b standard at 11 Mbits/s, which uses complementary code keying (CCK) modulation. Both
The 802.15.3 standard for High Rate WPANs also operates in the 2.45-GHz band and at similar rates, from 11 to 55 Mbit/s, but is designed for shorter-range (1 to 50 meters), very-low-power operation. It also uses time division, multiple access (TDMA) protocol.
The use of TDMA makes the
While 802.11g products based on the draft standard are already available, products based on the new 802.15.3 standard are not expected to appear until 2004.
The two recommended practices approved today are for 802.15.2 and 802.11f. The first, 802.15.2, addresses the coexistence issue between WLANs and WPANs operating in the 2.45-GHz bands, such as Bluetooth, 802.15.3 WPANs and 802.11b and g WLANs.
The second, the 802.11f Inter Access Point Protocol, ensures interoperability between access points from multiple vendors, which primarily enables client roaming.
Bush is on fire and its not good for my lungs.
I guess Apple either did a lot of bitching or threw money at the IEEE (or possibly both) to get the standard finalized at 54mbit. I had heard that the IEEE was skeptical about that speed and had mentioned something along the lines of mid-to-low 20's. Anyways, I'm glad to see that Apple's investiment in their Airport Extreme products wasn't a waste. Now if we could agree on a wireless power standard...
Totally Life!
ALL replies
We have had 802.11g gear on the market for nearly a year, if not longer? TAlk about the tail wagging the dog! Now if only we can get the vendors to release the specs for the registers for these 802.11g cards we can start to have OSS drivers made. Apparently the gear is all capable of being tuned with control for power, and frequency adjustments, so the FCC doens't want home users using 802.11g gears as the next-generation of HAM radio. Not to mention the ability to interfear with existing radio licenses granted.
It isn't a lie if you belive it.
...does this mean more articles about Bluetooth...or less?
For those reporters out there who will write stories about this for "joe consumer":
The "g" in 802.11g stands for "gamma", and no, the IEEE did not skip over proposals 802.11c, d, e, & f before settling on "g".
Chip H.
it's in my head
Ok, 802.11g is bad enough to pronouce, but I am not saying "eight-oh-two-dot-fifteen-dot-three" all the time, dammit!
I gather that 802.15.3 is supposed to compete directly with Bluetooth; does anyone have any idea how they compare (in terms of speed/power consumption/security/etc.)? If it's a Bluetooth-killer, we should call it Redtooth.
"A witty saying proves nothing." --Voltaire
802.15.3 last I heard wasn't really "approved" by the Bluetooth SIG. In fact, the whole 802.15 working group was trying to take over engineering aspects of Bluetooth from the Bluetooth SIG and leave the SIG to handle marketing, compliance, branding..etc.
But that didn't apparently happen because Bluetooth didn't want to wait X years for the next standard. Also, IEEE has a nasty habbit of ignoring backwards compatability when taking over a standard (we didnt design it, so who cares).
So, now we have this new, high rate, low power, WPN, that is supposed to be backwards compatabile with 802.15.1 (which is IEEE code word for Bluetooth. They built the 802.15.1 around the existing Bluetooth spec, but _changed_ it a bit).
Yet, no where, have i seen, an engineer say " 802.15.3 IS COMPATIBLE WITH Bluetooth". Maybe i missed that somewhere. Anyone know if this WPN will work with the present day number 1 WPN on the market?
Either way, this is really cool technology. High bandwidth, cheap, low power WPN means wireless KVM switchs among lots of other cool gadgets.
-malakai
-Malakai
A Dragon Lives in my Garage
now we are going to hear another wave of uninformed folks complaining about the supposed speed limitation of 24Mbps... heheh
:)
from the same site: also, here's his announcement on 802.11g's ratification today. anyway, great news.
Large print giveth, and the small print taketh away
Now, are there any 802.11g Prism chipset based cards? (read -- supported by Linux). How about wireless sniffer support? (read -- war driving).
that there are now officially no drivers for ANY 802.11g devices out there for linux. Now we can officially be ignored and spat upon by all the device manufacturers inspite of our growing numbers, homeuser and corporate user alike.
In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
Last I heard, they were thinking of knocking down the speed to like 20 instead of the 54. I guess this didnt go through?
"Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms,
More information here:l
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/15/pub/TG2.htm
When lots of people are using the same access point, the bottleneck isn't the wireless rate, it's the connection from the base station to the network.
Found the slashdot article I was referring to here. Article says 10 - 20; not 10 - 15... my bad. Still, my point stands.
How is it that I can go down to Fry's and buy a wireless router which supports a standard which hadn't even been approved? Or a DVD writer that may or may not be supported tomorrow, and which may or may not work with my DVD player? Or a graphics card which I may be able to be heard over if I scream loud enough, or which may play my games without crashing me to the desktop every two seconds.
Sure, competing standards a A Good Thing, but only if the companies that espouse them are willing to stand by them until the consumer has gotten their money's worth out of them. I constantly worry that my growing DVD collection will only be useful as a set of dinner plates in the near future, because of some new and exciting standard which the industry wants to force on me.
Growth, prosperity, innovation, yakkety yak. All I want is to pay some money and have something useful for a number of years. How many people are getting rich suckering us into the latest and greatest technology every year?
http://www.hometoys.com/htinews/feb02/articles/nav in/navin.htm
WTF Moderators???? I'll see you in meta.
Dammit! Last post got hosed somehow. Here: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/05/22/221624 7&mode=thread&tid=137&tid=193
The only remaining question regarding 802.11g: what are the marketroids going to call it? Super-Wi-Fi? Ultra Wi-Fi? Wi-Fi II? X-Fi?
It was my understanding that the 10-20 Mbps number we were hearing was actual throughput, not theoretical maximum. The maximum never changed from 54 Mbps, but when you throw in protocol and error correction overhead, the number actually drops somewhere between 10-20. Just like 802.11b claims 11 Mbps, but the actual throughput is closer to 4-5 Mbps.
Sounding like a Rap song is okay, besides sounding has become too generic to describe the RIAA's music.
IEEE has a nasty habbit
I read as:
IEEE has a nasty hobbit
<Gollum>Nasty Hobbitses!</gollum>
All Your Memory Are Belong To Java
I don't care about linux drivers, someone will make them, about microwave interference, it can be dealt with, 802.11b interferance be dammed, there are not really that many people that have wireless networking, all I want is my fricking Standardized fast wireless networking with backwards compatability!
The great thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from. Subtle but important difference. IHTH.
I can see a whole new generation of kids using the phrase "ere come an' 'ave a look at mi nu-fangled wireless". I was intrigued at first; "54Mbps not too much of a downgrade" I thought. However when you take into consideration how much the signal degrades even between walls let alone other equipment that could intefere ("ok who's baking potatoes in the Microwave!"), the appeal soon drops.
There are two circumstances where I could see this technology having advantages. 1. Mobile devies - damn if I had a laptop I would definitely be using wireless. 2. Inter-house (site) comms - this also would be nice, however the range is abysmal (300ft come on). I for one will be sticking with my wired 100Mbps LAN. It's reliable, faster, subject to less interferance, more secure and for the moment cheaper.
OK, it seems that there are a *lot* of people who either don't read the articles closely, or in the case of the last one posted on Slashdot, don't differentiate between "radio data rate" and "data throughput".
:) Although I do hear rumblings about drivers possibly surfacing soon - fingers crossed.
On ordinary 802.11b gear, the maximum "radio data rate" is 11Mbps. Once you account for the inherent loss in throughput because of the uncertainty of the medium (air), and the fact that the protocol was designed to accomodate this uncertainty, your actual maximum "data thoughput" is about half of that - around 5Mbps. 11Mbps 802.11b != 11Mbps throughput, it never has, it never will.
The same goes for 802.11g - the maximum radio data rate was, and _still is_ 54Mbps. However, the throughput is again slightly less than half of that, in the 20Mbps range.
The reported "change" to 802.11g to "20Mbps" media frenzy stemmed almost entirely from simply clarifying that the actual "data throughput" was about 20Mpbs, *not* that the radio data rate had changed, been knocked down, whatever.
You get roughly 20Mbps "data throughput" in a pure 802.11g network - and again, similar to 802.11b, 54Mbps 802.11g != 54Mpbs throughput.
A 4x increase in throughput using 802.11g over 802.11b is nothing to complain about. Now, if we could get Atheros 802.11g drivers for Linux, I'd be a much happier camper
Brad
ok, so... "nizzle" is slang for "nigger" which is slange itself?
Um, besides, "nizzle" is more akin to "nipple" than "nigger" and makes a F-load more sense. Not that snoop dog makes sense, I'm just sayin', yo.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
However, people (like myself) who want to take a gamble on buying technology that could shortly be obsolete should be able to. It's called capitalism, and such first adopters are the primary reason technological innovation is profitable.
[ home ]
I think this is the first time I have *ever* heard anyone claim this.
Maybe it isn't that the hardware manufacturers are too fast, maybe the standards groups are too slow.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Eight Oh Too Eleven Gee What does the future have instore for thee? Is it good? Is it bad? Will it make Bill Gates mad? Does it route and will it ping? Will it help find porn for my ding-a-ling? Eight Oh Too Eleven Gee What does the future see? - Ra Hahn - Where Ends the Sidewalk
Does this mean I might actually get new firmware for my WAP54G? It hasn't been updated since February!
While looking into the differences of 802.11 a|b|g I found this article over at tom's hardware. It appears that the second generation 802.11a protocol devices now have much better range than the previous first generation 802.11a devices. This can also be seen by a recent whitepaper by Atheros (The company whose chipset is used in most widely available wireless devices from such companies as Netgear, Linksys, and D-link). With better bandwidth performance than most 802.11 b|g devices on the market and equivalent range to b|g devices, all while operating in the 5 ghz range, perhaps 802.11a will make some what of a comeback. The potential really comes from the fact that right now you can buy wireless APs now from Linksys (WAP55AG) and D-Link(DWL-7000AP) and wireless cards from linksys,netgear,and d-link that do all 3 protocols. I know that right now I will be looking at running my AP in 802.11a mode and not worrying about interference coming from the 2.4ghz range.
Go Illini!!!
Wonderful - now the WEP vulnerabilities will be even faster!
Hey, AIEEEEEEE.... How's about getting 802.11i finalized sometime this century, so we can be fast and resonably secure?
Didn't we recently read that 802.11g was to cut it's speed from 54Mbps to 10-20Mbps? What happened to this?
Tis I: Me.
The great thing (to my thinking) about 802.11g is not the 54mpbs (which realistically is a throughput of only about 20-25mbps at best) but rather the power requirements.
Portable users are and always will be the mainstay of the Wireless Networking market and as performance machines come out the fight to keep battery life up is also going strong.
The Pentium-M and it's chipsets help this a great deal (but don't get me started on Centrino, that's just a marketing scam). However, one of the big winfalls for portable users will be the prevalence of 802.11g networks. They require half of the power of an 802.11b network and transmit data about 4 times faster.
This is the real prize you earn for switching to 802.11g.
no, not really, but i do know a few couples that are particularly open-minded...does that count?
OK, once again.
802.11a: 5.4GHz operating frequency, 54MBPS data rate. Uses OFDM modulation, similar to DSL and HDTV VSB.
Good things about a:
-more channels than at 2.4HGz=more users simulataneously
-less interference from bluetooth and microwaves
-more advanced modulation standard=more data in less BW.
Bad things about a:
-a lot harder to manufacture: you can't even use the common FR4 substrate. Testing is more of a pain
-the modulation standard requires higher quality (more linear) transmitters
-5.4GHz experiences more attenuation, so less range
802.11b: The old reliable: 2.4GHz operating frequency (the same as a P4!), with 11MBPS data rate. Uses CCK, which is a massaged QPSK modulation method
Good things about B:
-most commonly avaliable type
-WiFi certification for interoperatiblity
-can use lower cost ic and materials. Testing is easier.
-longer range than A with less power (better for laptops)
Bad things about B:
-lower data rate
-more 'congested' spectrum
-CCK is less effecient in spectrum usage
-less channels available
802.11b+: Almost nobody has it: TI's PBCC modulation that gives 22MBPS on normal B. PBCC is an optional capability for G.
Good things about B+:
-it is/was available earlier
-Was cheaper
-Pretty much B, only a $10 more expensive.
Bad things about B+:
-I bought it because I couldn't wait for G
-Nobody except TI made chips that support PBCC
-Really, think of it as G-, not B+
802.11g: Same frequency as b, same modulation as A
Good things about G:
-backwards compatable
-easier/cheaper to get more linear transmitters for 2.4GHz than 5.4GHz.
Bad Things about G:
-no WiFi interoperability certification yet
No, I don't trust in god. He'll have to pay up front, like everybody else.
I just ordered a Netgear WRG614 802.11G wireless router and a WG511 pcmia access card from Amazon... Does anyone know whether this and all the other older models are software upgradeable to the final standards? Or a year later when I want to use 802.11G somewhere else I'll need to buy a pcmia card supporting the final specs instead of the only the draft? Aside: When are all the cool gadgets like 802.11G wireless cameras coming out? I want a camra which I can put anywhere then log into it from a wifi pocketpc or laptop.. things like these have some serious potential (for good and bad I must admit). A wifi enabled tv/projector would be really cool also. I just flip open my laptop, it finds the projector and asks me whether i want use it... shoot all sorts of things.. like transmitting my music selection out to my car, etc. Wifi makes it all possible.
I don't see how 802.11g helps anyone unless it is a new install, and even then your screwed because of your neighbors 802.11b access point causing your speed to ramp down.
Frankly I'm tired of my MP3 player dropping out when I'm microwaving burritos, I'm gonna go 802.11a after I buy that new disk array for my wife.
-- Jack
Why are blacks only allowed to use certain words? What makes them more priviledge than other races? Why is it nobody gets upset about the words "cracker" "honkey" or "redneck"?
I am so fucking tired of people perpetuating ignorance and stupidity. They are only words! All words have appropriate times to use them and inappropriate times. It's all about context. The post was a fucking joke.
I'm white, but that doesn't mean shit to me. I don't think about race. And if you think I'm racist, ask my wife, who just happens to be black. We are all human beings. We are all equal and nobody owes anybody anything regardless of what our ancestors may have done. Grow the fuck up.
Damn it - they add many for dots to these standards people will be trying to ping them.
Pleeeease could we try to think of real names for things that are memorable - Bluetooth isn't going anywhere for now, simply because people can remember it's name to ask for it.
What I don't understand is:
Why we have to buy a new card for every 2.45 GHz protocol?
Why doesn't someone just produce a card that is capable of transmitting _whatever_ in the range and then do all the fancy stuff with software - or flash rom?
Then we could do all of the changes in software. Are there technical considerations I'm ignoring? If so I'd love to know what they are! I mean really isn't it just a glorified transmitter?
Imagine how much faser we could innovate!
IEEE has a nasty habbit of ignoring backwards compatability when taking over a standard (we didnt design it, so who cares).
A good example of this is DIX ethernet vs. 802.3 ethernet- the idea is that if IEEE just rubber stamped DIX ethernet and said "This is the standard" the playing field would have been sharply tilted towards Digital,Xerox and Intel.
So my understanding is that inevitably IEEE standards a changed just a little bit to put all vendors on an even playing field for product conformance.
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
That's because you're dumb. Your neighbor will not decrease your data rate any more than if he had a .11g access point, unless he uses it to connect to yours.
For those that don't know- 802.3 ethernet made a minor change from DIX- they just changed the MAC header format, nothing big! [sarcasm]
DIX had a header layout of: [destination mac address][source mac address][frame type].... [crc]
where 802.3 has [dest mac addr][src mac addr][frame length]....[crc] ( combine with 802.2 and you don't need a type field, you have SAPs!)
Now both formats are compatible by mutually exclusive Length/type field values: Since the ethernet frames are limited to 1500 bytes, all Types have to be values greater than that.
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
Is it just me, or this sounds like a Bluetooth killer?
Frankly I'm tired of my MP3 player dropping out when I'm microwaving burritos, I'm gonna go 802.11a after I buy that new disk array for my wife.
Well, look on the bright side - I don't think you need to worry about birth control if your microwave is leaking enough to cause network dropouts.
We are all human beings, but no one is in a position to oppress white americans so words like "honky" "cracker" don't have the same effect. Also, I don't know if you knew, but it's still pretty f*cked up to be Black in america these days. Don't believe me? ask your "wife".
I hope you know...
AC
If you feel the need to go this long on an explination as to why you're not a racist. Chances are that you have deep prejudices. The whole bit about a black wife (even if it was true) holds as much water as the "I have black friends so I'm allowed to tell racist jokes"
Please sir. Accept yourself and talk to your wife about your beliefs, and maybe you can keep the relationship solid.
EHC
Should C++ compiler vendors have waited until there was a C++ standard before selling C++ compilers? Sure there were inconsistencies between compilers, but everything seemed to go fairly well. With hardware, interoperability is a bit more important, but that's what firmware updates are for!
fuck you. your shit is exactly what perpetuates that sort of thinking. Anyone who is offended needs to just cool the fuck off and let the word become freely used. I seem to recall it worked pretty well with the fags. They call each other fags, and use the term with pride. Yet I don't see anyone being reprimanded by fags for calling fags fags, because the fags made the word fag unoffensive by making it not matter. Clamoring for special usage of a term is ineffective and sets us back hundreds of years. And I have previously lived in San Francisco, so yes i've known enough fags to know from experience.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
This delusion that we can all live in a more tolerant world if we just start throwing the words "nigger", "spic", "kike", or "faggot" around is pure white middle class. Please sir if it would make your life easier by not having to think about what you say in social situations JUST IN CASE "nigger" or "fag" slips out you should keep your self out of that position. Don't make the people that your ancestors oppressed deal with your unwillingness to accept your bigotry.
EHC
Eight Oh Too Eleven Gee,
What does the future have instore for thee?
Is it good?
Is it bad?
Will it make Bill Gates mad?
Does it route and will it ping?
Will it help find porn for my ding-a-ling?
Eight Oh Too Eleven Gee,
What does the future see?
His id states that he is a slanty eyed asian. Asians are not held against saying nizzle. Only crackers. Did you not recieve your Negro Handbook when you were born?
Oh.. You're white?
Of course you are.
Fo Sheezy, My Neezy.. Keeps my arms all breezy.
http://use.perl.org
Its time you got a new microwave
instead of a going for a new 802.11a device.
Speaking of IP addresses for wireless headphones, has anyone heard anything on the progress of ZigBee? ZigBee (IEEE 802.15.4) was supposed to be the low-cost/low-power/low-bit-rate Bluetooth clone which was supposed to cost ~$0.50-$1.00.
umm.. we used to call cigarettes fags back home. caused a problem when I got to US of A and asked for one.
Well, I suppose I should not have stepped into the propogation discussion. But...
Well, it is a function of the antennea size and wavelength. There are some propogation effects that occur. Note that a large part of the article compares throughput of 802.11b to 802.11a, which has a few different parameters combined. However, you did notice that the 802.11g had higher throughput that 802.11a at the extreme of range (figure 1-10,pg 14).
That said, I am going to quickly walk hey, it's Elvis! Over there! away and drop the topic.
No, I don't trust in god. He'll have to pay up front, like everybody else.
Seriously. The reason devices haven't been split up into wireless sub components (such as headphones) is that then they would all need their own power source, hence batteries. The wires provide both the SIGNAL and the POWER.
Life is not for the lazy.
Uh...
Yes he will, he is increasing the noise level in your radio range. Therefore you will be transmiting "slower" because the error rate goes sky high.
What were you saying about "dumb" before?
Yeah - In Australia the Greek community did the same with the previously derogatory word "Wog". The made it humorous and the strength of their own self belief bade it a laugh "with" rather than "at". Comedy productions such as "Wogs out of Work" made us all laugh and now only the angriest redneck would heap shit on a fellow Aussie for being Greek.
Embrace the chaos
OK its slang for nigga..to get technical..
..unlike the racial charged version Nigger
Don't say nigger..thats derogatory say nigga.
If your gonna use slang spell it right..
How lame this whole flame is getting makes absolutley no sense but you will see that if you use the word.
Nigga..its the depowered version
Black people never call each other Nigger they call each other Nigga..
In fact test it out..
Go into any ghetto , make sure you dress as a Wigga.
Then go up to a black person and say "What up my nigga?" Be ready to speak more ebonix after that or you may be beaten up anyway.
After succesfully doing that go up to the biggest, blackest, meanest, person you can find and say.
Hey whats up Nigger!
Make sure you have health insurance of course and perhaps an S&M fetish for extreme beatings..
Notice if you speak ebonix and a black person says what? or looks pissed it's because you didn't speak it good enough or they are educated and think your a dumb ass.
Best course of action is up to you. Either you thicken your ebonix hope you looked thugged out enough to pass as some crazy white boy from the trailor park or you give up the ruse and try to talk normal.
Most of the time the best thing to do if you speak ebonix to an educated black person is sneak away in shame. I suggest listening to people speak before speaking to them
Nuff said..
Show and Prove my Nigga...!
I would like to see regulations laxed to allow for stronger signals so that we can have super hot spots. I am having ok results with b and I am debating weather to go to g because of the money. Just my thoughts, Jake@ plutoid.com
Regards, Jake Johnson http://www.plutoid.com
Actually, they would get up to the speed of
their service. My cable is "up to" 3 Mbps.
I get that, and sometimes between 3.2 and 3.5.
So my network feeds me whatever the cable modem
is running it. Someone with DSL, which is
usually slower, won't hit 2 Mbps surfing.
Surely you misspoke... as the network won't
speed up the DSL (or cable) connection, right?
From what I have heard ( By a reputable co-worker/Linux Guru/IEEE Member ) you won't be seing OSS Drivers for 802.11g any time soon. Apparently Uncle Sam doesn't want all the specs made public for 802.11g, due to military interests. From what I undersood (correct me if I am wrong) 802.11g is capable of private chanells (Guessing this is done by slight frequency shifts or something), and U.S. Military is currently using such a private chanell. Henceforth they don't want an army of curious (or malicious) *NIX hackers sniffing around on thier network so they are not allowing the info to be freely available. This doesn't mean that a hardware vendor cannot take pitty on us and make binary drivers available. What I would really like to see are some drivers that split the packet stream and transmit on both 802.11g & 802.11a (Ala-ISDN). 108Mbit/sec Raw Data rate via photons would be very sexy indeed.
Cheers,
Fuzzy_The_Quantum_Duck