1 edit | reply to gate1975mlm
Re: Its about time!!! said by gate1975mlm:WoW this took a long time to happen! The IEEE standards committees have made themselves almost completely non-relevant. They take so long to do anything that the standards they vote on are almost old technology by the time they act. The marketplace does a better job of identifying a market leading technology and ignoring all the losing versions. The IEEE would do better to just see who won the war and then declare them the winner.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
 MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by fAcEtIOUs:said by gate1975mlm:WoW this took a long time to happen! The IEEE standards committees have made themselves almost completely non-relevant. They take so long to do anything that the standards they vote on are almost old technology by the time they act. The marketplace does a better job of identifying a market leading technology and ignoring all the losing versions. The IEEE would do better to just see who won the war and then declare them the winner. Absolutely. I've felt this way about a lot of standards bodies for a long time. This is not the 50's and 60's, this is the digital age, they need to get with the times and streamline their ratification procedures or risk becoming obsolete.
That said, 802.11n has been pretty hit or miss for me. I've gone through several brands, several different chipsets, and it's ALL been extremely prone to interference. Speeds fluctuate dramatically, so much so that I've disabled it on my access points and gone back to standard 802.11g for connection stability. |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
This sounds good if you only have one proposed standard. However, it isn't such a good idea if you have multiple, incompatible technologies fighting for the market, or, worse, if you have different manufacturers with slightly different interpretations of what the same "standard" should be, resulting in devices that purport to be compatible but really aren't. |
|
| reply to Matt
said by Matt:That said, 802.11n has been pretty hit or miss for me. I've gone through several brands, several different chipsets, and it's ALL been extremely prone to interference. Speeds fluctuate dramatically, so much so that I've disabled it on my access points and gone back to standard 802.11g for connection stability. A friend of mine bought a refurbished .11n router, but I decided to take his and bought him a .11g router. I used the .11n router for a while (prior to getting U-Verse) and that thing was not all that. It supposed to have up to 300 feet of accessibility but my roommate still had a week signal  .
--
Illegal aliens have always been a problem in the United States. Ask any Indian. Robert Orben
|
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
We'd then end up with competing standards for years at the detriment of the consumer. It would certainly profit the companies who would lock in consumers to their proprietary standard, but no one wants to deal with the massive confusion in the marketplace a lack of standards would create. |
|
 djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
kudos:1
 ·Verizon Wireless..
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·VOIPo
·PHONE POWER
| reply to Matt
That said, 802.11n has been pretty hit or miss for me. I've gone through several brands, several different chipsets, and it's ALL been extremely prone to interference. Speeds fluctuate dramatically, so much so that I've disabled it on my access points and gone back to standard 802.11g for connection stability. Me too. I'm extremely disappointed with N. I use a laptop just a few feet from my N router, an it rarely shows a full speed connection, regardless of what channel I'm on. In "N exclusive" mode, the actual throughput I get is only about double what I saw with G, which my ancient D-Link "G+" router was capable of, without sacrificing compatibility with my old stuff.
--
AT&T U-Hearse
Your funeral. Delivered.
|
|
|
|
| Me 3. I've got a Linksys WRT160N and I am very disappointed in the performance of N. Its so bad I am considering picking up some powerline adapters, I have used them in other applications and they worked a lot better than this.
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition."
Beyond AM. Beyond FM. XM |
|
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12
1 edit | said by BillRoland:Me 3. I've got a Linksys WRT160N and I am very disappointed in the performance of N. Its so bad I am considering picking up some powerline adapters, I have used them in other applications and they worked a lot better than this. Yep, the WRT160N was my most recent purchase having previously used a WRT350N and a D-Link DIR-655, and a Trendnet TEW-633GR. The speeds aren't bad, but the damn connection is constantly cycling rates so there are maddening pauses. It only seems to be stable if I'm in the same room. Glad to know it's not just me. |
|
| This constant cycling is also happening in the 5GHz range? |
|
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by vinnie97:This constant cycling is also happening in the 5GHz range? I don't have any 5GHz gear. |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:said by gate1975mlm:WoW this took a long time to happen! The IEEE standards committees have made themselves almost completely non-relevant. They take so long to do anything that the standards they vote on are almost old technology by the time they act. They're probably trying to regain relevance in some diabolical scheme to take part in the broadband stimulas. The Draft N Standard is the running joke of most standards organizations. I'm sure the chipset manufacturers will be glad to know they finally have the stamp of the IEEE.
--
BF69~~~Please stop suffocating gerbils! |
|
| reply to Matt
said by Matt:said by BillRoland:Me 3. I've got a Linksys WRT160N and I am very disappointed in the performance of N. Its so bad I am considering picking up some powerline adapters, I have used them in other applications and they worked a lot better than this. Yep, the WRT160N was my most recent purchase having previously used a WRT350N and a D-Link DIR-655, and a Trendnet TEW-633GR. The speeds aren't bad, but the damn connection is constantly cycling rates so there are maddening pauses. It only seems to be stable if I'm in the same room. Glad to know it's not just me. Oh no, its not just you, I see the exact same behavior. Real fun to get those drop outs when you're using Remote Desktop.
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition."
Beyond AM. Beyond FM. XM |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
that's a load of BS. do you really think that is better? that it will lead to companies willfully accepting a competitor's technology? it won't lead to a system where there are 5+ transmission methods to wireless LAN all screwing each other over?
the hardware manufactures should also take a fare amount of blame to the numerous drafts of 802.11N. they are the ones that thought it would be a BRILLANT idea to start making products based on draft standards. the consumers that bought the stuff aren't any better. my college is waiting till real 802.11n equipment arrives before upgrading, i'm waiting until then also. i bet, that if a draft to ratified 802.11n incompatibilities occur, everyone will blame the IEEE completely and not the manufacturers that release hardware based on draft specifications, knowing full well that it the standard can change before final ratification. |
|
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | The draft stuff was approved by the IEEE and still doesn't work well. This article mentions that the FINAL 802.11n spec was released, but the Draft 1.0 and Draft 2.0 gear was sanctioned by the IEEE and based upon standards. |
|
| reply to Matt
said by Matt:said by fAcEtIOUs:said by gate1975mlm:WoW this took a long time to happen! The IEEE standards committees have made themselves almost completely non-relevant. They take so long to do anything that the standards they vote on are almost old technology by the time they act. The marketplace does a better job of identifying a market leading technology and ignoring all the losing versions. The IEEE would do better to just see who won the war and then declare them the winner. Absolutely. I've felt this way about a lot of standards bodies for a long time. This is not the 50's and 60's, this is the digital age, they need to get with the times and streamline their ratification procedures or risk becoming obsolete. That said, 802.11n has been pretty hit or miss for me. I've gone through several brands, several different chipsets, and it's ALL been extremely prone to interference. Speeds fluctuate dramatically, so much so that I've disabled it on my access points and gone back to standard 802.11g for connection stability. My D-Link G router had tons of connection drops and slower speeds. I upgraded to a Belkin N+ and have NO connection drops and SUPER amazing speeds!
--
»Check this out! |
|
| reply to djrobx
Not sure why but that's not uncommon for any router. Did some research awhile back trying to figure out the same thing, and the person said something I forgot mow but it's not uncommon |
|
| reply to Matt
said by Matt:The draft stuff was approved by the IEEE and still doesn't work well. This article mentions that the FINAL 802.11n spec was released, but the Draft 1.0 and Draft 2.0 gear was sanctioned by the IEEE and based upon standards. That's not true.
The IEEE working groups draft and approve the standards, 802.11n in this case. The IEEE doesn't approve or certify any equipment to said standards. Usually a non-profit industry consortia is formed for that specific purpose, if it's needed. In the case of Wi-Fi, the Wi-Fi Alliance is responsible for device testing and certification.
I don't think it's fair to blame the IEEE for companies creating equipment based on draft standards, id est incomplete and a work in progress.
If you want to blame someone for bad devices, blame the device companies for making them and the Wi-Fi Alliance for approving them.
Also, concerning standardization and standard bodies: yes, it takes long time to create standards. It's common complaint. That's generally the price to be paid to get standards though, because standards require consensus, typically over 70% approval required (let's see any legislature get that).
Look at the upside of standards: customer confidence in implementations, a bigger market, increased competition, more products, and lower prices. A win all around.
Standards wars do the exact opposite. There are few, if any, winners. |
|
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | So the gear itself is certified by the WiFi Alliance, but engineered to the IEEE specs. That makes sense. Either way, the gear and the process to get to the final standard is terribly broken. I have little faith that the final 802.11n standard will do anything to improve the problems with 802.11n gear -- unless they require it to operate in the 5GHz range. |
|
| reply to Matt
Oh, sorry, I was thinking of the wrt610n. |
|
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by vinnie97:Oh, sorry, I was thinking of the wrt610n. No problemo.
I think running in the 5GHz range would remedy a lot of the issues I experienced. 802.11n needs a 40MHz channel (20MHz is standard) in the 2.4GHz range to achieve max throughput, but I found even when my APs were in 802.11n mode with a 20MHz channel forced, they still wildly varied their rates. |
|
