Slashdot Mirror
Wi-Fi Now Has Version Numbers, and Wi-Fi 6 Comes Out Next Year (theverge.com)
The Wi-Fi Alliance said Wednesday it was rebranding the "802.11" Wi-Fi standards that have long served as a source of potential confusion for users. From now on, said the Wi-Fi Alliance, the current 802.11ac standard will be known as Wi-Fi 5, while its successor 802.11ax will be known as Wi-Fi 6. From a report: In the past, Wi-Fi versions were identified by a letter or a pair of letters that referred to a wireless standard. The current version is 802.11ac, but before that, we had 802.11n, 802.11g, 802.11a, and 802.11b. It was not comprehensible, so the Wi-Fi Alliance -- the group that stewards the implementation of Wi-Fi -- is changing it. All of those convoluted codenames are being changed.
Now, instead of wondering whether "ac" is better than "n" or if the two versions even work together, you'll just look at the number. Wi-Fi 5 is higher than Wi-Fi 4, so obviously it's better. And since Wi-Fi networks have always worked together, it's somewhat clearer that Wi-Fi 5 devices should be able to connect with Wi-Fi 4 devices, too.
Now that the retroactive renaming is done, it's time for the future. If you've been closely following router developments over the past year (no judgments here), you'll know that the next generation of Wi-Fi is on the horizon, with the promise of faster speeds and better performance when handling a multitude of devices. It was supposed to be called 802.11ax, but now it'll go by a simpler name: Wi-Fi 6. The Wi-Fi Alliance says that it expects companies to adopt this numerical advertising in place of the classic lettered versions.
Now, instead of wondering whether "ac" is better than "n" or if the two versions even work together, you'll just look at the number. Wi-Fi 5 is higher than Wi-Fi 4, so obviously it's better. And since Wi-Fi networks have always worked together, it's somewhat clearer that Wi-Fi 5 devices should be able to connect with Wi-Fi 4 devices, too.
Now that the retroactive renaming is done, it's time for the future. If you've been closely following router developments over the past year (no judgments here), you'll know that the next generation of Wi-Fi is on the horizon, with the promise of faster speeds and better performance when handling a multitude of devices. It was supposed to be called 802.11ax, but now it'll go by a simpler name: Wi-Fi 6. The Wi-Fi Alliance says that it expects companies to adopt this numerical advertising in place of the classic lettered versions.
For example, call it WiFi 2018.
Then we could have non-techies doing really stupid things like asking if Office 2019 needs WiFi 2019 to work properly.
this will end up with manufacturers claiming every little thing they improve should increment the number, so they can sell new APs and routers.
Everyone will still just call it WiFi. FCC dictates strength and range, Iâ(TM)m not an engineer so I canâ(TM)t claim to know much about the signal, but from my perspective, WiFi is a capped technology. Like tube tv. It is pretty much perfected for home use. Maybe someone can comment on the business side of things...
...they should just skip to Wi-Fi 10
I have a "Zero Policy" tolerance.
*/
All cay can say as a network engineer, obviously 6 is better than 4....no no no that makes no sense the number plus letters made perfect sense... Sigh....
I think anyone who can't figure out that the letter 'n' comes after 'b' or that in version numbers that include letters 'ac' comes after 'n' is also too stupid to know that 6 comes after 5.
After window 3.11 Microsoft tossed out the idea of coming up with reasonable versions.
With going to Dates, then just letter combinations and back to a number, then skipping numbers and just sticking on 10
Apple did the same thing. After iOS 9 they just got stuck on OS X (Ten)
Solaris dropped the major version number and just sold the minor number.
Mozilla just changed to match Google Chrome version for no reason.
Version numbers should mean something.
Major number means a major revision or change on key components.
Minor is just for patches and fixes.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Will wifi6 work on the same frequencies than wifi6? And what about wifi4 and wifi7?
You cannot compare apples and pigs!
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
The 802.11 names are IEEE technical standards. The WiFi alliance people are just marketing weenies more than anything. The IEEE 802.11 type standards will continue to exist as they always have.
This is just marketing goop.
so obviously it's better.
Thanks for the info, but I want Wi-Fi 11
Details matter, and the summary just isn't correct. Different wi-fi versions haven't always been compatible. The 802.11b and 802.11g standards used the 2.4 GHz band while the 802.11a standard used the 5 GHz band. There was hardware that supported both the 2.4 and 5 GHz bands, but a lot of the hardware didn't. An 802.11a adapter couldn't connect to 802.11b or 802.11g networks. And if your adapter supported just 802.11b or also 802.11g, you couldn't connect to an 802.11a network. More recent standards have backward compatibility, but that hasn't always been the case. The summary is wrong.
Didn't they get the memo that we're using vaguely related random alphabetical nonsense for versions now?
I want WiFi Twinkie, which is clearly better than WiFi Quiche.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
"so obviously it's better"
You STUPID retarded INDOCHIMP msmash. Higher versions are necessarily better? How about going from Windows 7 to Windows 8? Or any of the recent Android/phone versions as of late? You, ma'am, are retarded and deserve to be a Slashdot janitor, not an editor.
like formula 2 is better than f1 and second is better than 1st
I can certainly compare apples and pigs. In fact I can go better than that and combine them!
Behold, the Appig 2019 SE, in carmine red with jasper accents!
Some alternative naming that was thankfully rejected:
WiFi argh
WiFi Vista
WiFi Zero
WiFi Wii
iWiFi
JuiceFi
Straight to Wi-Fi 10.
Wi-Fi 18.10 Horny Hamster
Wi-Fi 5 is higher than Wi-Fi 4, so obviously it's better.
Can't wait to tell my doctor that about my blood-pressure and cholesterol - thanks The Verge and /. editors!
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
With the exception of the obsolete "a" and "b", the rule is that a revision with 2 letters is newer than 1, then a later first letter (expected to change in Wi-Fi 7), then a later second letter. Thus "g" < "n" < "ac" < "ax". I don't see what's so illogical about it.
But there will not be a WiFi 9...
I'll wait for WiFiX
I talk to so many people who still do not understand which band to use, and why one device is running at one speed and another at yet another speed. Wireless is not simple no matter what you use to identify each one. But making a overall change won't come without some more re learning of old vs new. Which is not really helping anything in my opinion.
That quote is from the linked report, idiot.
I thought 802.11ac was for Anonymous Cowards.
Cool story, incel.
Will wifi6 work on the same frequencies than wifi6? And what about wifi4 and wifi7?
You cannot compare apples and pigs!
I can definitely compare my ginormous nígger cock to your little pale white shrimp dick.
Even better, if they were not hung up on being so rational about it we could have had WiFiPi.
WiFi 802.11a , b and g DO NOT get a version number. WiFi 1 , 2 and 3 DO NOT EXIST. TFS does not state this.
WiFi 802.11n will be retconed as WiFi 4.
WiFi 802.11ac will be retconed as WiFi 5 as TFS clearly states, and WiFi 802.11ax will be WiFi 6. (due early next year).
This will help with compatibility issues (WiFi a is not compatible with b or-g (pun intended) ). Yes compatibility between n and a is optional, not mandatory, but I guess this guys had to start somewhere, and pretty much all 802.11n routers on sale nowadays are dualband...
Again, this is a positive move, and long overdue.
*** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
One big problem I see... as far as I can tell, the standard does nothing to clarify whether a given device supports ONLY 2.4GHz, or whether it supports 2.4GHz *and* 5GHz... and if it supports 5GHz, which channels it supports & how.
There are lots of 802.11ac devices, for example, that either don't fully support the use of U-NII(2C) channels, or have crippled DFS implementations that use a sledgehammer instead of a scalpel... satisfying the FCC's requirements, but doing it in a way that results in a product so crippled it almost might as well not even bother with U-NII(2C) channels(*).
I'm also curious to know how they intend to deal with things like AP-roaming and dynamic handoffs... something that was theoretically defined on paper way back in 2008, but (AFAIK) has NEVER really worked properly with consumer devices on home networks. Or pretty much ANYTHING besides a tightly-controlled Enterprise network.
This is my major beef with wireless network gear today... it's DAMN NEAR IMPOSSIBLE, even if you know EXACTLY what standards you need compliance with, to actually walk into a store like Best Buy and make an informed purchasing decision based on their advertising literature and packaging. And if you DO go online and read teardown reviews, there's still no guarantee... the manufacturer could have completely changed not only the general design, but literally changed out the entire chipset with a completely different one that has inferior performance or standards support while keeping the model number (often, even the UPC) unchanged. Linksys & Netgear are both notorious for this... often, they'll indicate the revision on a sticker on the device itself, but put NOTHING on the packaging that's visible before you break the shrinkwrap to indicate whether you're getting the one that earned 5-star reviews & had people drooling, or the later version that got 1 & 2-star reviews and is a pale, cruel imitation of its earlier self.
----
(*) Many of the 5GHz channels share spectrum with weather radar & have to make a "robust" attempt to detect its presence and refrain from using frequencies where it's detected. The variability comes from the fact that some devices take the cheap approach... shutting down and going dark entirely for at least a minute to listen for radar, and assuming the worst at the slightest hint of a signal. This makes the FCC happy, but results in a product that's dysfunctional (to put it nicely).
The cheap/usual way is for the AP to just "go dark" for a minute while listening on the channel for things like weather radar transmissions. When this happens, the wifi connection appears to just silently drop for no apparent reason, then reappears about a minute later (assuming it didn't detect what it thought was a radar signature).
The more sophisticated way is for an internet-connected device to include a GPS receiver & query the FCC's database directly after discerning its location... if it's not within range of a known radar site, it can skip the majority of physical DFS checks requiring radio silence (basically, doing it once at startup). Alternatively, the AP could include an additional radio receiver & logic so that prior to "going dark" on a DFS channel to listen, it could temporarily switch to an alternate, non-restricted 5GHz channel (and notify clients it's about to change channels). The alternate channel might suck, but IMHO, "works poorly for a minute " is STILL a huge improvement over "goes dark and doesn't work AT ALL for a minute every hour"
I might be wrong, but I think 802.11ad MIGHT (in theory) have the necessary hardware to simultaneously use two non-contiguous 5GHz channels (say, 36 and 104), in which case it could (conceivably) "go dark" on channel 104 for DFS while maintaining an active link with connected clients (at half-throughput) on channel 36... but whether any 802.11ad device you can actually go out and purchase TODAY as a non-Enterprise customer (or any random electronic device conceivably purchased at Best Buy or Walmart) can actually SUPPORT that is anybody's guess.
Unless you're Yoda, in which case it's
6, 7 ate.
Unless you're a stupid nígger - then you think you're being funny!
They should learn from USB and rename the old one WiFi SuperSpeed aka WiFi 6 Gen1 aka Wifi 7 Gen1x1 and call the new one WiFi SuperSpeed+ aka WiFi 6 Gen2 aka WiFi 7 Gen2x1. Then the next one can be called WiFi SuperSpeed+ as well but also be referred to as WiFi 7 with WiFi 7 Gen 1x2 and WiFi 7 Gen2x2 modes.
My other account has a 3-digit UID.
Here in Germany, The "FRITZ!Box", as it is officially called by AVM, has become the dominant router in the last 15 years. Pretty much every ISP uses them. Often they don’t even rebrand them.
They are known for a shitton of features, doing things the right way (so not the shitty way you described), auto-updating the OS and even completely new OS versions, many years after the router was shipped, and, well, I’ve set up my own routers, using Linux and servers as well as single-board systems, and even I often just didn’t expect a consumer router to do THAT (and quickly try to copy it, if I even can :).
And I’m rarely ever the guy who says more positive than negative things about a product. (Hey, I’m German. What did you expect? :)
Are they a known product in the US? They should be.
Do I get the Wifi 6 high speed router, or the Wifi 6 full speed router?
But maybe all the bazillion ways to authenticate are even worse.
Sunday Sunday Sunday!
WiFi XXX
buy the whole network, but you only need the edge...
It'll be Wi-Fi 6 next year, & Wi-Fi 10 the year after that.
Numbers coming out at this particular point in history are not selfless, especially so soon after the last standard started shipping.
Numbers are ALL about an upgrade threadmill. They're trying to set us up for the camera megapixel wars all over again. Or the Chrome vs. Firefox versioning wars. Eventually you end up losing the numbers and gaining them again (Windows is a terrible example of this)
In a world where we end up with fragmentation and planned obsolescense is a system where security theater has a profitable cry for easy, mandatory upgrades. WPA 3 is coming out soon. Without real research this late into the night I'd guess that's Wifi 6 material. Except, my router is 2 versions behind. And not a single Wifi camera out there* actually comes close to version 4, if you count the 5Ghz band. I bought a cheapo Android v7 phone 12 months ago to replace my 4 year old v4.4. The latter has had lots of time to catch up, but still failed to acquire support for that band, among several other things.
Again, I don't want some kind of standards board demanding that I support Wifi N+1 lest we get disconnected because nothing really supports N-1 fully. I want people to suck it up and do it like a job posting where someone sits down and clearly states the demands, and I pick one device for the job, even if it's partly outdated. Until all new phones in a month can be guaranteed to ship on a specific version "number", I can't trust the dumbing down. After all, your Samsung Note version 9 is different feature-wise from the Samsung J's sold the same year, so no single standard should be allowed till we're ready to put the production-line where their mouths meet our wallets.
* short of 2 expensive topend DSLR models (read, not at all pocketable)
So they`re burying 802.11s (mesh) even deeper.
Marty DiBergi: "Why don't you just make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?"
Nigel Tufnel: [pause] "These go to eleven."
"The nice thing about standards is there are so many of them to choose from." - Andrew S. Tenenbaum
What the people want is Ubuntu style release monikers like
Wifi Whispering Wildebeest