Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intel Puts WiFi Back Into Next Gen Chipsets

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the everybody's-doin'-it-man dept.

bizpile writes "After announcing that they were removing WiFi from their next generation of chips, Intel has decided to put it back. The next generation of chips are also expected to include the 1066MHz frontside bus Intel introduced this week and support 667MHz DDR 2 SDRAM."

21 of 83 comments (clear)

  1. Intelligent by kc0re · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I hope all the feedback from the slashdotters got back to Intel. It was a misguided and dare I say non-intelligent decision to remove it. Wi-fi is a part of all things now, and Intel needs to stay with the times. While money could be made from a marketing perspective to release one chip, then release another chip with wi-fi. People would buy both, or buy one and then the other.. People are dumb.

    1. Re:Intelligent by lukewarmfusion · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm not as informed on this subject as many others here, but didn't Intel's first integrated wireless chipset run 802.11b? And didn't it become a problem as soon as 802.11g hit the shelves? I'm not an Intel user, so maybe this is solved with some other mechanism (I dunno what, though).

      Personally, I like the fact that I can upgrade my individual components and customize my machine. I'd rather my CPU not lock me into its integrate features when they might become obsolete.

    2. Re:Intelligent by Not_Wiggins · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It was a misguided and dare I say non-intelligent decision to remove it. Wi-fi is a part of all things now, and Intel needs to stay with the times.

      From a populist POV, you're absolutely correct.

      But, I'm not all that excited to see WiFi making its way "back" into a mainstream product without there being significant (enough) strides to securing the communication.

      Wireless is still not easily secured enough for the general populace, and making it even more pervasive before an intelligent solution to our current problems is presented is being non-intelligent.

      Take a walk around your area with a laptop/PDA and Kismet to see what I mean.

      --
      Diplomacy is the art of saying, "Nice doggie!" until you can find a rock.
    3. Re:Intelligent by sglane81 · · Score: 2, Informative

      didn't it become a problem as soon as 802.11g hit the shelves?

      B and G work together as it should (mostly). They're both on 2.4 Ghz. 802.11A is on 5.4 Mhz. G is backwards compatible with B, so either B or G will work on B or G. From what I've seen, if you have a heterogeneous B & G network, you will experience B speeds, whereas if you had a homogenous G network, you can expect the full 54. You probably meant 802.11A in your statement.

      I'd rather my CPU not lock me into its integrate features when they might become obsolete.

      Which is why you have expansion slots like PCI, AGP, and PCI Express (ISA, VLB). Your motherboard probably comes with integrated video, but you probably have upgraded it to an AGP card (or PCI Express). The same is true with the WiFi integration. They're not forcing you to use their WiFi (which has little/no linux drivers). You can always add an expansion card.

      --
      This is the Internet. You can say "fuck" here. - AC
  2. Maybe they would be doing better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If they knew what they wanted to be doing?

    I have yet to see AMD have these poor planning issues (also thinking of those TV chips that could have cut costs for consumers that were cut recently).

  3. AMD is far, far ahead of Intel.. in a galaxy far, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "The next generation of chips are also expect to include 1066MHz frontside bus Intel introduced this week and support 667MHz DDR 2 SDRAM."

    Still not as fast as AMD's 1600mhz FSB which has been around a while now. And who cares about quadruple pumped ram when we (AMD fanboys) have 64 bits and DDR4 to playwith!?

  4. "Wi-Fi" meaning... by RealProgrammer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do they mean 802.11a, b, or g? Certainly not 'a', I hope not just 'b'.

    I bet they're struggling with heat dissipation and power consumption.

    Probably they see that 'g' is commoditized and ripe for inclusion on the motherboard, and that the practical concerns over heat and power will be solved..

    --
    sigs, as if you care.
  5. Speeds? 802.11? by VE3ECM · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Okay, the article is a little light on details.

    What 802.11 protocols is this going to support?
    The article claims Intel's main reasoning for this is to make the PC "...act as a Wi-Fi access point."

    Okay, if they're not going to put in the new protocols (ie 802.11n, etc.) what's the point?

    Anyone have anymore details?

  6. WTF? by Zemplar · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm still waiting for Intel to put WTF back in their chipsets.

    Perhaps it's been delayed until after the RTFA implementation?

    1. Re:WTF? by johnalex · · Score: 2, Funny

      Honestly, I read too much /. The seminary I attend has a Women's Theological Fellowship, which the participants always abbreviate "WTF" in their e-mails and memos to the students. I can't tell anyone why I always break into spasms when I get a message from WTF. They just wouldn't understand.

      --
      JA
      http://www.johnalex.org/
  7. New Slogan by Arbin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Insecurity Inside! Now 150% easier to hack!" I've had bad experiences with integrated systems that include everything on the motherboard. Back when, it was so nice to just replace the bad component, and not just the entire bloody motherboard.

    1. Re:New Slogan by timster · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I know I won't buy a CPU unless the ALU is a separate component. I hate to replace a whole CPU just because it blew its multiply circuit.

      Everything on the motherboard is not so great, but as technologies become more stable they tend to migrate there. If I'm just building a business PC and I don't need stellar graphics I'm just fine with integrated video. If I don't have any special networking needs I'm happy with integrated Ethernet.

      I remember when your IDE interface was a card, and your serial port was on a card, and your sound was on a card... that wasn't so great, either.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
  8. Wifi Access Point by Denis+Lemire · · Score: 5, Informative

    If I recall correctly, it was pointed out in the last article along this line that Intel was NOT removing WiFi from their laptop chipsets. The new chipset under developement were to have a built in access point. This is what was being removed. There was NEVER any intention to remove WiFi client support.

  9. Nothing changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    no, nothing changed. The original interpretation of Wi-Fi having been "dropped" was a misinterpretation.

    The original decision was to remove *soft AP functionality* from the chipset. Not to drop Wi-Fi entirely. Go back and read what was said back then.

  10. everyone sing along by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Put your Wi-fi in you take your Wi-fi out
    you put your Wi-fi in and you shake it all about....

    1. Re:everyone sing along by JazMuadDib · · Score: 2, Funny

      you do the marketing,
      and turn it off before ship out.
      That's what it's all about!

  11. More fodder for us wardrivers! by drewzhrodague · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hooray! More fodder for us wardrivers! More units made = more units sold = more units wardriven! Game ON!

    --
    Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
  12. I know what I'll do with mine... by RandoX · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...build a new MAME cab. Because let's face it, what could be cooler than MAME?

  13. But what about WiMAX? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2, Informative

    I hear Intel is integrating WiMAX into a chip to go on the laptop motherboard - and that this chip/core/whatever is also capable of WiFi.

    WiFi(b, g) could be viewed as a slightly degraded version of the OFDM/OFDMA PHYs of WiMAX, operating just adjacent to one of WiMAX's several bands, with a somewhat different MAC. So it's easy to do with the same hardware. The DSP has more than enough capacity and runs much the same algorithms, the radio can tune the band, and the MAC logic is related but simpler, and well-debugged. 802.11a isn't that much different either, and also in range of the radio. So once you have working designs for each it's pretty trivial to do both WiMAX and WiFI in the same chip (at least if you're not trying to do them at the same time).

    Perhaps this release thrash is related to that.

    What I want to know is when WiMAX becomes a standard part of the laptop support chip line.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:But what about WiMAX? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wi-Fi usually operates at much smaller distances than WiMAX; that's why you can get away with a smaller antenna. Cellular operates at much lower speed than WiMAX; that's why you can get away with a smaller antenna.

      Nope.

      Antenna size (beyond a half-wave dipole or a quarter-wave whip above a relatively large ground - such as a handset) doesn't give you any more power. It just lets you direct the power you have more selectively, making your signal stronger in some directions by stealing power from other directions. (When receiving it lets you intercept more approximately in proportion to the area of the antenna plus an imaginary quarter-wavelength "aura" region around it, provided it's coming from the correct direction - expanding the antenna unavoidably makes it directional.)

      But "size" is in terms of wavelengths of the frequency in question.

      WiFi usually operates at shorter distances - but it uses less efficient modulation and coding schemes. WiMAX can pack more bits per unit of bandwidth and its forward error correction lets you pull them out from much closer to the noise floor. So (at the same frequencies as WiFi - and one of the WiMAX bands is right there) it can go farther or send more bits with a given amount of power.

      WiMAX is similarly more efficient than the codings used on most cellphone systems - so again you can go farther for a given bit rate or run a higher bit rate over the same distances for a given unit of power. If you want to send live HDTV you'll still drain your batteries faster than if you want to send voice. But if you're sending voice (or anything with a similar bit rate) you might come out ahead.

      A typical WiFi deployment uses omnidirectional antennas at both the transmitter and receiver. With the energy going in all directions from the transmitter and noise picked up from all directions at the receiver. A typical WiMAX or cellphone deployment uses a high-gain directional antenna at the base station, acting as a spotlight rather than a floodlight on transmit, a telescope collecting lots of light from that particular direction on receive. Just as with cellphones (or WiFi with a beam antenna at one end) you can get a good connection over several miles to a small omnidirectional antenna this way.

      Just as with cellphones (or WiFi with beam antennas at BOTH ends) you can go still farther if you use large aimed (or electronically "steered") directional antennas at BOTH ends. But you can happily go miles with a directional antenna at the base and a rubber duckie at the subscriber station.

      WiFi g is 52 MBps raw, while a 14 MHz WiMAX channel is 70 MBps raw. But WiFi is pure contention while WiMAX uses allocated timeslots (similar to DOCSIS cable TV boxes) so WiMAX makes more efficient use of the spectrum - you don't have to waste power retransmitting because of collisions. WiMAX can operate on licensed bandwidth, too, so you can have a lower noise floor (no microwave ovens, speed-trap radar, cordless phones, or non-system hotspots to compete with) and that means lower transmit power again.

      So for distances of a couple miles without obstacles, using directional antennas at the service provider end, a WiMAX enabled laptop with an internal antenna could be running at a battery drain comparable to a similar WiFi setup running at your local coffee shop, airport, or office hotspot.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  14. War in 1066? frontside bus of 1066? coincidence? by Alives · · Score: 2, Interesting

    http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/bayeux.htm I think this is foreshadowing some kinda tech war... Intel invades AMD's corporate offices? More on this story as it unfolds...