802.11n Spec Still In The Air

Vitaly Friedman writes "Standards for the hotly anticipated Wi-Fi successor haven't yet been agreed upon. Where's that leave all those early-bird products? 802.11n is a highly anticipated successor to today's Wi-Fi, promising a huge performance boost. The draft spec promises to deliver data rates up to 180 Mbps, which could make wired home networks unnecessary and should allow high-definition wireless video streaming. At issue is whether the draft spec is far enough along that companies can make products that will provide that performance but still be compatible with each other and with older Wi-Fi equipment."

Comments

No Wires!

[celardore]

I don't care what they settle on. If I can get 180mbps from one part of my house to the other, without pesky wires - I want it sooner rather than later.

Re:No Wires!

[Aqua_boy17]

I know, I can't wait until my neighbor upgrades so I can check this out. :P

so basically what they're doing is

[Tezkah]

putting the cart (the product, in this case the routers) before the horse (standards).

nothing could possibly go wrong!

It's a start, but I'm still waiting.

[Trifthen]

Can we please, PLEASE make the next spec. avoid the overcrowded 2.4Ghz range? Every time I use my microwave, my connection becomes unusable.

Re:It's a start, but I'm still waiting.

[Tezkah]

uhh.. isn't the reason why we can use wifi in most countries because the 2.4Ghz is unregulated?

have you tried changing your wireless to a different channel? i find that helps, and is less of a hassle than being harassed by the FCC (or insert_local_regulatory_body from your country that does the same thing).

Re:It's a start, but I'm still waiting.

[babbling]

Who cares? I just want to know what's going to happen after they reach 'z'.

In the Air

[Nom du Keyboard]

802.11n Spec Still In The Air

Cute!
[/sarcasm]

Firmware updates will make it okay.

[loftwyr]

It really doesn't matter how far the spec is, as long as the basics are there, they can do a firmware update to bring the products in line once the final spec is released. This has happened all over the place.

That's what having firmware updates is for.

Re:Firmware updates will make it okay.

[gregmark]

But couldn't a change to the standard necessitate a hardware change as well?

The same mistakes, over and over: 802.11g revisit

[postbigbang]

It's like how it was with LattisNet, then 10BaseT.

Or 802.11g. Everyone's bucking for market share, to be the first ones on the block, to entice you with speed.

-Compatibility? Who knows.
-Backwards compatibility with 802.11b/g? Who knows.
-Data rates that are what was advertised? Early tests say no way, not even close by b/g standards.
-Firmware all nicely baked? Nope.
-Non-CardBus capability? Dream on.
-Low-power chipsets? Nightmare on.
-Test regimens? No.
-Test equipment? No.
-New cellular distribution capabilities? Who knows? It's not a standard yet.
-Requirement that it has even a modicum of internal security like WPA2? Ho ho ho....
-Any open source motherboards? You wish.
-Resplendent ubiquitous deployments? Not for years.
-Faster than b/g and EV-DO (not EV-DOa)? Probably.

Weren't we here about four years ago? Didn't anyone learn any lessons? Ok, it's about early marketshare. It can't be about anything else.

Curse of Lomo? No, Curse of MIMO.

802.11 cannot replace home networks

[MobyDisk]

0xA reasons 802.11N is not likely replace home networks any time soon.

1) 180Mbps is the theoretical throughput if the devices are right next to each other.
2) Even then, you STILL won't get that speed. A typical cat 5 cable and switch will give you 99.9% of the theoretical max.
3) The latency is higher (gaming)
4) It's harder to configure.
5) It's less secure.
6) It's constantly changing.
7) It is expensive.
8) Linux drivers are hard to find.
9) ISPs won't support it.

Please reply to continue the list. There has to be at least one more.

Re:802.11 cannot replace home networks

[NineNine]

#1 in my book, which you seem to have forgotten: RELIABILITY! I won't be getting rid of my cat 5 cables any time soon for this reason alone.

Re:802.11 cannot replace home networks

[SuperMog2002]

I regularly transmit raw audio files upwards of 100 MB between my Windows machine and my iBook. Over wireless, we're talking several minutes to transmit. Over wired: a few seconds. Sure would be nice if I could transmit those files wirelessly in a short amount of time.

The point I'm getting at is that home networks are not always just about sharing the Internet connection. For sharing large files between local computers, 802.11g is just a pain.

Re:802.11 cannot replace home networks

[lelitsch]

Some thoughts on your ten points

1) 180Mbps is the theoretical throughput if the devices are right next to each other.

Probably not for the ultrageeks, but full motion DVD streams at up to 10.08 Mbps. So for most home users 180Mbps with all kinds of degradation will still allow them to run stuff at speeds where other parts (last mile,...) will be the bottleneck, not the wireless network.

2) Even then, you STILL won't get that speed. A typical cat 5 cable and switch will give you 99.9% of the theoretical max.

You might blow a few hundred exabyte over your network, 99.9% of people won't

3) The latency is higher (gaming)

If you are playing an MMOG, the latency of your home network pales against the latency outside your house, even if you hook directly into L3 networks.

4) It's harder to configure.

Really? That's a UI problem. I find it easier to configure my wireless than crawl back into the closet I use as a server room.

5) It's less secure.

But properly configured, it is more secure than most people need. And the NSA can listen to your wired network.--Which is why a lot of high security instalaltions use fibre optics.

6) It's constantly changing.

Oh, and wired networks aren't? God, I am old enough to remember CAT-10 10MB, 100MB, Gigabit. All of them needed new routers and occasionally new cables.

7) It is expensive.

How is a $29-100 WiFi router more expensive than a wired one plus a few hundred yards or cable plus ripping open the walls to put in cable conduits? You might not mind blue wires running all over the place, I certainly do.

8) Linux drivers are hard to find.

Ok, but that's on Linux developers. Also, 95% of to population are not running Linux on their home network.

9) ISPs won't support it.
What does the ISP have to do with it? They see my router--what happend after that is my business.

probably not enough for real hidef video

[Surt]

It'll be close. You might get enough bandwidth out of this for hidef video ... 1080p/60 prefers 135MBps to look good. Given a max of 180MBps, the likelihood that you'll deliver that kind of bit rate over any distance is not good. Lower res formats will probably be fine, but the so called 'true hi def' won't. I guess we'll all still wire up gigabit networking or wait for the next generation wireless networks for our ultra cool hi def wireless entertainment.

Here we go again

[Linker3000]

Anyone care to recall the happy days of analogue modems and the pre-ratified 'standards': Courier HST, K56flex, X2 and all that?

It must be difficult to take the time to ratify standards when the manufacturers are forcing themselves out of the starting gate to meet customer 'I want it now' expectations.

Buying a 'pre-n', wifi enabled laptop with Blu-ra..er..HD-D...er...whatever... is the true mark of someone living on the bleeding edge.

not so fast

[thebdj]

The draft spec promises to deliver data rates up to 180 Mbps, which could make wired home networks unnecessary

So untrue. I have the fortune of running my wired lan at gigabit speeds which is very nice and skip free while streaming and still being able to use the network for other high bandwidth operations at the same time. Not to mention the problems that will continue to haunt wireless for some time.

"What problems?" you might ask. Well, let us start with security. While the methods and keys used to lock wireless networks continue to grow stronger, it is still easier to get onto a wireless network then it is to sneak into someone's apartment and plug into their network like you would have to do with a physical connection. There is also the interference concern. In areas of high population density, especially apartment communities, you have to start worrying about interference from nearby networks. The larger these communities are, the fewer separation between channels available to avoid the interference problems. You can also get interference from other devices on the same frequency. I have heard of varying degrees of problems with 2.8 GHz phones and wireless B/G networks.

I do not think we are going to see an end to wired networks just yet.

Not directly related, but...

[Mick Ohrberg]

...what are we going to do when we run out of characters in the alphabet for the 802.11* protocols? Do like the tropical storm/hurricane name-givers and move to the greek alphabet? 802.11iota?

It rolls over

[nightsweat]

Once you hit 802.11z, it rolls over and all wireless connections have to ripped out in favor of 802.12 compliant 100Base standard wiring.

Let's pray it never comes to that.