| reply to dcurrey
Re: DIR-655 New Firmware 1.30 I think it's odd to entirely drop 803.11B, instead of trying to make B/G/N simultaneous connection work. As my girlfriend has a wireless B palm device that she on occasion uses, I think I'm going to hold off on this release. |
|
Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·ViaTalk
| What scares me the most is #10. This firmware can not downgraded to previous versions..
Why would they lock it like that. I can understand if its the default on new hardware but if I update to 1.3 I can't go back to 1.22b5 if it doesn't work. |
|
| reply to frdrizzt
My thoughts exactly. I use a Palm Tx at times and the lack of ability to down grade could be interesting. |
|
| reply to dcurrey
I think they're putting it inline with the rest of product line based around firmware...I noticed this on some of their other routers (DGL's). |
|
Reviews:
 ·Clear Wireless
·Clearwire Wireless
 ·AT&T Southwest
| reply to frdrizzt
When I bought my DIR-655 it was marketed as a B/G/N device. As one of those who use their Palm T|X on a regular basis I will NEVER be accepting any firmware that removes B. In my home state of Texas we have consumer protection laws that this change by D-Link clearly infringes on.
It's called BAIT and SWITCH! Totally unscrupulous practice. I hope someone buying a brand new 655 with this firmware sues them. the marketing D-LINK product site still claims B/G/N compatibility. I'm sure the box still says it too.
If DLink wants to abandon the headache of getting N to work in unison with B, fine do it with new products. Existing products marketed as compatible should not have their features so unilaterally co-opted in this fashion. Its deceitful, unscrupulous. Not to mention a sure signal that D-Link is not a company that will stand with and behind its products.
I will be purchasing another company's networking gear from now on! |
|
 tipstir
join:2004-11-14
Boca Raton, FL
kudos:1 | said by PamelaTS:When I bought my DIR-655 it was marketed as a B/G/N device. As one of those who use their Palm T|X on a regular basis I will NEVER be accepting any firmware that removes B. In my home state of Texas we have consumer protection laws that this change by D-Link clearly infringes on. It's called BAIT and SWITCH! Totally unscrupulous practice. I hope someone buying a brand new 655 with this firmware sues them. the marketing D-LINK product site still claims B/G/N compatibility. I'm sure the box still says it too. If DLink wants to abandon the headache of getting N to work in unison with B, fine do it with new products. Existing products marketed as compatible should not have their features so unilaterally co-opted in this fashion. Its deceitful, unscrupulous. Not to mention a sure signal that D-Link is not a company that will stand with and behind its products. I will be purchasing another company's networking gear from now on! It's N or Bust.. That's all no sense turning back to B. G wireless routers a so cheap now. But G works better than N. N works then doesn't work, then works then doesn't work. I can't work like that.. I shouldn't have to worry about N and firmware updates.. |
|
|
|
 HolmanGTPremium
join:2001-11-20
Saint George, UT
2 edits | reply to PamelaTS
"I'm sure the box still says it too."
Actually the new V4 DIR-655 box does not say B/G/N any longer,PamelaTS. It now says Backward compatible with "G" systems.
I Have one in my hot little hands as we speak. I didn't notice the absence of "B" until I had it open and read your post and looked at the box. Ouch! They do not make it real obvious that you can not use "B" they just make the statement about "G" and absolutely no mention of "B" so unless you are specifically looking for something that is not there you will get bit, but no "B" bits. 
[Edit] I was in Best Buy this afternoon and the DIR-825 makes no mention of being "B" compatible. Can someone that has one verify this? The Box only talks about G & N. |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·ViaTalk
2 edits | said by HolmanGT:Actually the new V4 DIR-655 box does not say B/G/N any longer,PamelaTS. It now says Backward compatible with "G" systems. I Have one in my hot little hands as we speak. I didn't notice the absence of "B" until I had it open and read your post and looked at the box. Ouch! They do not make it real obvious that you can not use "B" they just make the statement about "G" and absolutely no mention of "B" so unless you are specifically looking for something that is not there you will get bit, but no "B" bits. [Edit] I was in Best Buy this afternoon and the DIR-825 makes no mention of being "B" compatible. Can someone that has one verify this? The Box only talks about G & N. The description on Dlinks website for dir-655 only mentions backward compatability to G. Datasheet only list IEEE 802.11n (draft 2.0), IEEE 802.11g, IEEE 802.3, and IEEE 802.3u NO 802.11b |
|
Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
·Clearwire Wireless
·AT&T Southwest
| said by dcurrey:said by HolmanGT:Actually the new V4 DIR-655 box does not say B/G/N any longer... It now says Backward compatible with "G" systems. The description on Dlinks website for dir-655 only mentions backward compatability to G. Datasheet only list IEEE 802.11n (draft 2.0), IEEE 802.11g, IEEE 802.3, and IEEE 802.3u NO 802.11b So they have, when I posted my prev message I don't believe they had changed it yet (web site). The support site »support.dlink.com/products/view.···IR%2D655 does still mention B compatibility (I have it in PDF now, so let them change it now). Not to mention I'm one of those people that don't throw boxes for tech gear away. The box my A3 came in definitely says B/G/N. So their changing their marketing site does not in any way protect them from their liability to provide for the product as it WAS SOLD!
If they really wanted to just drop B as they appear to be headed. Then it should as in the DIR-685 they announced, be so from the beginning. This change should only applicable to NEW products changing specs of an existing product line for any reason other than governmental regulation is fraudulent. Revenues they have had for these products over the last few years is now based on fraud and deceit. |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·ViaTalk
| Doesn't the final N standard require it to be backward computable with G and B. Are to not going to worry about being officially certified by the WiFi Alliance.
Does this new trend indicate they don't expect the current hardware to be able to handle the final N standard and are doing what they can to make it work the best it can. |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·AT&T Southeast
| said by dcurrey:Doesn't the final N standard require it to be backward computable with G and B. Are to not going to worry about being officially certified by the WiFi Alliance. looks like b has be in there by this or im reading it wrong.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-Fi_Alliance
- Interoperability is the primary target of certification. Rigorous test cases are used to ensure that products from different equipment vendors can interoperate in a wide variety of configurations. - Backward compatibility has to be preserved to allow for new equipment to work with existing gear. - Backward compatibility protects investments in legacy Wi Fi products and enables users to gradually upgrade and expand their networks. - Innovation is supported through the introduction of new certification programs as the latest technology and specifications come into the marketplace |
|
| All of this talk of compatibility reminds me of ethernet...
No one has 10 Mbps networks anymore, yet even Gig supports it (10/100/1000).
I can't remember the last time I've seen 10 Mbps in use. |
|
| The linksys ATAs for voip use a 10 mbps connection. |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·AT&T Southeast
| reply to Streak
said by Streak :
No one has 10 Mbps networks anymore, yet even Gig supports it (10/100/1000).
We are talking about wireless not wired  |
|
| said by hayabusa3303:said by Streak :
No one has 10 Mbps networks anymore, yet even Gig supports it (10/100/1000).
We are talking about wireless not wired True...I was just referring to standards in general.
I don't know any networking companies that'd say, "no one uses 10 Mbps anymore, we should drop it". |
|
