Slashdot Mirror
Is There Too Much Enthusiasm Over Wireless?
lukOh asks: "in the US, 802.11b/g (2.4Ghz) devices use an
83Mhz-wide frequency range; in-use channels spanning 22Mhz and centered on one of 11 5Mhz steps (badly named as "channels"). This means there should be no more that 3 networks in close proximity, 5 'channels' far from each other, to avoid harmful interference. Now, in the middle of the mixed area where I am, the number of usable WLANs (SNR>20dBm) has gone from 10 to an unworkable number of 20, in just one month. Has the community/the market overestimated the practicality of wireless networks? Are we generally relying too much on such a young, IMHO immature technology made on 'startups hope' and broken firmwares? How can this mess possibly be handled in a working environment, especially the moment your boss asks you to give him access to 'the wireless'?"
"Access points can be easily detected, but the same isn't always true for every single client (or Bluetooth device) searching or using a network. Bluetooth itself employs the same 2.4Ghz range with 1Mhz-wide channels and much less power. To avoid interference a device jumps channel-to-channel, when the currently selected one is busy.
Most WLANs are managed by less-than-perfect SOHO access points. Connecting to an AP in such an environment is a gamble (even from 1ft away), especially when: WPA/WPA2 must be used; 802.11g stability is a dream; anywhere up to 7 networks are on the same 'channel' (1 and 11, being the most used, are standard on many devices); and now 'channel wars' are very common (i.e. 2 or more users concurrently hunting to set a free channel for their network, making the entire range unusable for hours)."
Most WLANs are managed by less-than-perfect SOHO access points. Connecting to an AP in such an environment is a gamble (even from 1ft away), especially when: WPA/WPA2 must be used; 802.11g stability is a dream; anywhere up to 7 networks are on the same 'channel' (1 and 11, being the most used, are standard on many devices); and now 'channel wars' are very common (i.e. 2 or more users concurrently hunting to set a free channel for their network, making the entire range unusable for hours)."
No one else is using it.
everything will be wireless one day
.kyle
You sir, are weak. Being able to untangle that mass of cableage behind one's desk is a staple of geekhood, gross wire length (like number of LEDs in one's living space) is a status symbol. You fail.
and the constant bombardment of high speed wireless access ads from the phone company (Verizon)?
Can you ping me now? Good!
Why yes, I *AM* new here. Why?
Ummmm. Can you remind me what the vt100 equivalents of eBay, Google and Skype were?
Usenet, Gopher, and Ma Bell?
Stop the world; I need to get off.
Slashdot has been filled to the top with slobbering wireless fanboys for years and years. This is the very first article I've seen where the poster isn't gushing all over the ISM band and how they'll put a brazillian bits/second through it from over the horizon.
I did see quite a few theoretical posts - ie there are three channels, a good engineer will use three 120 degree sectors. That is better, but they go on to say the next ISP that comes along is SOL. Not the case - they just elbow there way in, and people keep loving up the ISM band until it turns into packet bukkake - 100% utilization, 0% throughput.
Anyone who seriously wants to deploy that stuff should go google for "n9zia wireless" and read the Green Bay packet crazies ideas, which is where I learned half of what I know. The other half came from hard experience.
There will, of course, be two dozen fanboys all set to reply to this. You need to ask yourself the following questions:
Ever climb a tower?
Ever made a 21.7 mile shot using 802.11b?
Ever operated a wireless ISP in a metro area?
Ever been invited to speak at WispCon?
If you're not qualified, please shoot your mouth off on some other topic. Really. This article is a step in the right direction for Slashdot - away from wireless delusions of grandeur and towards a bit of realism.
I am very easy to get along with, but I don't have time to waste being nice to people who are being stupid. -Theo
But his Etch-A-Sketch is already wireless?
If they actually have a computer, simply connect his computer to the wireless router via CAT-5.
I oned up you there- I updated the firmware in one guys wireless router to fix some known reliability issues I was having.
ah if I only had a laptop... But once a Real Programmer(TM) has started coding, nothing will get in his way (particularly not pesky little things like ergonomics) until the job is completed, or he passes out from lack of nutrition/sleep/water.
"I think it would be a good idea" Gandhi, on Western Civilisation
Dude, if you're gonna shoot, shoot. Don't talk.
Besides, nobody may understand what the hell you're talking about, but some will pretend they do, just to score some karma. Hell, you might even get a response that reads like it was lifted directly from a rejected fanfic script for ST:TNG!
Geordi: True, a 1-6-11 spread will maximize the spectrum with minimum nodular-crossinterference, but a triple-stepped 4 channel spread will remodularize the wifi matrix-
Riker (adjusting uniform): which would maximize headerless throughput and give us another 10 Teracycles on the core processes!
Picard: Make it so.
Troi: I'm feeling a sense of accomplishment here.
Chewbacca: Arrrr!