Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

802.11n Should Be Finalized By September

Posted by Soulskill on from the speedy-process dept.

adeelarshad82 writes "It's probable that the 802.11n standard will finally be approved at a scheduled IEEE meeting this September, ending a contentious round of infighting that has delayed the standard for years. For the 802.11n standard, progress has been agonizingly slow, dating back almost five years to 2004, when 802.11g held sway. It struggled throughout 2005 and 2006, when members supposedly settled on the TGnSync standard, then formed the Enhanced Wireless Consortium in 2006 to speed the process along. A draft version of 802.11n was approved in January 2006, prompting the first wave of routers based on the so-called draft-n standard shortly thereafter."

7 of 104 comments (clear)

  1. Compatibility with Draft-N by nsteinme · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Will the final version be (backwards?) compatible with Draft-N routers and wireless cards?

    --
    call me FOSS im the boss with the sauce and the source
    1. Re:Compatibility with Draft-N by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would think that it would have to be, otherwise no one will use the real standard due to backwards compatibility. Most probably the draft version of N will be about the exact same as the final version of N.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Compatibility with Draft-N by Bakkster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Which is, of course, the mistake of releasing, producing to, and buying products based on a draft of a standard: there's nothing standard about it.

      Trying to get compatibility to the draft could prove difficult, depending on the changes. If it isn't there, that's what you get for buying non-compliant hardware. Typical early-adopter penalty.

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
  2. Re:Hooray, I guess? by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    However, 802.11n has a much larger range than 802.11g. So while you might not use all the speed, the fact that you can get a much better connection everywhere in your house makes it a better standard.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  3. Re:California Budget by JCSoRocks · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously. I don't remember how long it took but it always seemed like a/b/g came along fairly quickly. Then n was rumored for a while, then it was finally "drafted" and I got all excited and figured it was only 6 months or a year from being final.... not so much. Here we are 3 and a half years later and I still haven't bothered to buy something based on n because I've been burned too many times by things that don't quite meet the official spec.

    --
    You are using English. Please learn the difference between loose and lose; they're, there, and their; your and you're.
  4. Re:IEEE FAIL! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since 2004.

    Trouble is, with something like Wifi, where much of the value lies in ubiquity and interoperability, there really isn't a "forward" to move toward without a standard(official, informal consensus, or de-facto standard + clones).

  5. Re:Hooray, I guess? by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Perhaps I'm missing something, but don't iPhones only support B/G wireless networks? That would mean you would be only getting the G signal...

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.