 | | Its about time!!! WoW this took a long time to happen! | |
|
 |  ThrowDemsOutIf you can't convince 'em, confuse 'emPremium
join:2002-03-03
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:4
1 edit | 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 | Re: Its about time!!! said by ThrowDemsOut: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. | |
|
| | | | | Re: Its about time!!! 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
| |
|
| | |  djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·VOIPo
·PHONE POWER
| 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.
| |
|
| | | | Reviews:
·Cox HSI
| Re: Its about time!!! 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 | Re: Its about time!!! 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. | |
|
| | | | | | | | Re: Its about time!!! This constant cycling is also happening in the 5GHz range? | |
|
| | | | | | | MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: Its about time!!! said by vinnie97:This constant cycling is also happening in the 5GHz range? I don't have any 5GHz gear. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Its about time!!! Oh, sorry, I was thinking of the wrt610n. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: Its about time!!! 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. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
2 edits | Re: Its about time!!! I'm using DD-WRT on my Asus WL-500W. Up until this month, I was using it regularly in 40MHz but rates still varied wildly in comparison to your experience (it is now rebooting when using 40MHz so I have to leave it at 20MHz, which effectively halves the available bandwidth...not so sure it makes much difference anyway).
I'm getting 7.2Mbps transfer rates from the room over right now at 20MHz....fairly consistent but still a bit too slow for some 1080p streaming.
I'm in the market for that 610n thanks to its dual band action and DD-WRT support. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: Its about time!!! I have had a horrible experience with DD-WRT and the newer N routers. You should research it very well before you buy thinking it's going to work well. For my WRT160N, I had to use a special community build (NEWD) of DD-WRT as the main Brainslayer distro was completely borked and no one seems to care. | |
|
| | | | | | Reviews:
·Cox HSI
| 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 | |
|
| | | | | | | Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: Its about time!!! Actually, the reason it's not uncommon has to do with the sheer number of devices that use the 2.4 GHz range (not just other routers, but cordless phones, especially those that channel/frequency-hop, such as DECT) are a big reason why range shrinkage is an issue (not just with draft-N, but even g). It's why dual-band N adapters *and* routers are the only real solution to come close to taking advantage of all of N's advantages. | |
|
| | | | | | 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 | |
|
| | | | | said by Matt:said by ThrowDemsOut: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! | |
|
| | | | 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. | |
|
| | | | 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. | |
|
| | | | said by ThrowDemsOut: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! | |
|
| | | | 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 | Re: Its about time!!! 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. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Its about time!!! 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 | Re: Its about time!!! 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. | |
|
| | | | said by ThrowDemsOut: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. Let's place blame where it belongs, at the feet of the chip makers and vendors, not the IEEE. This happened with 802.11g too because the two competing standards would neither give nor take. The problem is that vendors start developing hardware prior to the standard being completed and then they try to abuse the IEEE process to protect their R&D investment.
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. If the marketplace worked so well at setting standards, then there would be no need for the IEEE, ISO and other standards bodies. The fact is that such organizations existence is directly a result of trying to let the marketplace decide. Remember, we tried that approach prior to the standardization of TCP/IP. The problem with taking the marketplace of ideas approach to standards is that you have to deal with a myriad of incompatible standards causing issues for a long time until a clear winner comes out on top, if that ever happens.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" | |
|
| | 802.11N updates that never came My first draft N router was abandoned by D-Link in disgrace as it was a complete disaster. My second draft D-link router has not received a firmware update now for almost two years and is no longer supported. Considering that it's still working I do not plan on replacing it anytime soon. I'm afraid by this point people have fallen in a technological complacency, even those who would spend top dollar to stay at the edge of technology a few years back. | |
|
|  ZoneriderZoneriderPremium
join:2004-12-01
united kingd
1 edit | Re: 802.11N updates that never came firmware upgrades may be required for interoperability, and I am sure they will continue supporting the draft N after N is ratified. The certification is little more than recognition. | |
|
| Reviews:
 ·Bell Sympatico
| "Buy it now and we will send you a firmware update when the spec is completed" Sure. But really, once it’s signed, who will follow it, and which manufacture will break it just to one-up the competition with a new (usless)feature.
Third party firmware provides better product support updates then the manufacturers; not surprising because the manufactures only get paid for hardware (regardless if it works well).
Cutting Edge Obsolescence!
--
DD-WRT httpd vulnerability! Update Now!!: »www.dd-wrt.com/dd-wrtv3/index.php | |
|
| | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
1 edit | Re: 802.11N updates that never came Yep. pre-B where nothing was compatible »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.1···cy_mode), then we have B, proprietary B+, G, proprietary G+, Pre N, N draft 1, N draft 2. Now we have N, how long before we see proprietary N+? Then some patent lobbyists create 802.11 UWB | |
|
| | | | | Re: 802.11N updates that never came Shoulda' got an Asus WL-500W...released in 2006 and firmware-upgraded to support the latest draft.  | |
|
 MichailPremium
join:2000-08-02
Boynton Beach, FL
kudos:1 | Official or not Official or not the best thing I've done for my home network was to ditch 802.11g. | |
|
|
See 9 replies to this post |
|
 funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | 802.11N cool but too late, too compromised Wi-Fi.org lost my support when they lowered their own lowered standards to allow cheap 802.11b/g-style antenna arrays several months ago -- all to save a manufacture about 25¢ a unit. Yes, the N-stuff is cool, but they threw the baby out with the bathwater.
Meanwhile, can someone explain to me why we're so in love with the 2.4 GHz band? Crowding in this band is the reason most of us will never realize N's potential! Where's the 5 GHz stuff?
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL
Evil does seek to maintain power by suppressing the truth, or by misleading the innocent. --Spock and McCoy stardate 5029.5 | |
|
|  aaronwtPremium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: 802.11N cool but too late, too compromised said by funchords:Wi-Fi.org lost my support when they lowered their own lowered standards to allow cheap 802.11b/g-style antenna arrays several months ago -- all to save a manufacture about 25¢ a unit. Yes, the N-stuff is cool, but they threw the baby out with the bathwater. Meanwhile, can someone explain to me why we're so in love with the 2.4 GHz band? Crowding in this band is the reason most of us will never realize N's potential! Where's the 5 GHz stuff? I have several 5Ghz wirless N devices. They aren't very hard to find. what's difficult are devices that handle 2.4Ghz N and 5Ghz N concurrently. | |
|
|  not quite rightI'm not cool enough to be a Mac person
join:2001-06-23
Puyallup, WA
kudos:1 | said by funchords:Meanwhile, can someone explain to me why we're so in love with the 2.4 GHz band? Crowding in this band is the reason most of us will never realize N's potential! Where's the 5 GHz stuff? Higher the frequency = less penetration of walls & objects.
--
"Not many people know this, but I happen to be quite famous." | |
|
| |
|  fireflierCoffee. . .Need CoffeePremium
join:2001-05-25
Limbo | The answer I've read to that question is inter-operability. If you put out gear purely on 5Ghz, consumers who were running 802.11b/g now have to upgrade all their gear to 802.11a or n (assuming the AP runs dual-mode a/n).
If you put N on 2.4Ghz, the AP can run dual or tri-mode (802.11b/g/n) and they upgrade some gear to get n, but the old stuff still works on b/g.
The downside is crowding.
--
Tradition: Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid. --despair.com | |
|
 C0deZer0Oc'D To Rhythm And PolicePremium
join:2001-10-03
Davenport, FL | And now, Finally... It'll be worth upgrading from the existing .11b/g stuff I have now.
Why? Because standards that are followed mean that different brands have to work with each other, and none of this "turbo/powerboost" stuff that will only work if you buy ONLY one brand's networking products, that usually doesn't work in the end anyway.
--
Front Line Force Fortress Forever | |
|
| | | Re: And now, Finally... Yay now I can look into upgrading my home cisco 1242AG to a 1252N Wireless AP | |
|
| | |
| | |
1 edit | Re: And now, Finally... cool good to know
I know I could have simpily bought the 1252N instead but I don't like using equ that is still in draft | |
|
| | | | ke4pymPremium
join:2004-07-24
Charlotte, NC Reviews:
 ·Verizon Broadban..
·VOIPo
·RoadRunner Cable
·Northland Cable ..
·Packet8
| Re: And now, Finally... said by DarkLogix:cool go to know I know I could have simpily bought the 1252N instead but I don't like using equ that is still in draft Eh, it was certified by the WiFi alliance when I bought it Feb of 2008. That's all that matters to me. You have that little logo and it doesn't work, you've got something to go on with the vendors. | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: And now, Finally... I bought the 1242AG back around 2006 and at that time N was still very early and as its a home network I decided to wait | |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon Online DSL
| My Experience with N I have a Linksys WRT310N. When I get back to where it is (850 miles away) I'm going to do some iperf tests on it with wireless clients (all my computers are N, with Atheros chipsets for my Macs and Intel for my PC). I'm sure the results will come out a good bit better than the G equipment I'm using, though I'm not sure by how much yet. One thing I do know is that PowerBoost saturated by G link, and it doesn't saturate my N link (was using a WRT54G v8 before).
So *something* is working, just not sure how much at this point. | |
|
jammmin
join:2000-12-14
Upper Marlboro, MD | Wireless N works fine for me I have the Trendnet Draft N Wireless Access Device that I use with FIOS. Works great. | |
|
 HpowerRoflmao
join:2000-06-08
Glendale, CA
·Charter
| Wireless G for me Too many mixed experiences with wireless N. I chose to stick to wireless G and be happy with the reliability rather than upgrade all my workstations to support wireless N and waste my money.
--
The Internet is about to go down....it is actually. | |
|
 kdwycha
join:2003-01-30
Riverview, FL | WILL MY D-LINK DIR-655 BE OBSOLETE WHEN THIS OCCURS? Just curious if there will be a firmware upgrade for say my D-Link DIR-655 which uses wireless N draft version I guess. Or will this hardware eventually not be compatable with wireless n hardware? | |
|
| | | Re: WILL MY D-LINK DIR-655 BE OBSOLETE WHEN THIS OCCURS? With the CRAP firmware dlink has been putting out lately it will not matter if it works or not. | |
|
| | kdwycha
join:2003-01-30
Riverview, FL | Re: WILL MY D-LINK DIR-655 BE OBSOLETE WHEN THIS OCCURS? heh that is certainly true :P | |
|
 ScreeIn the pipe 5 by 5
join:2001-04-24
Mount Laurel, NJ | finally But there's still no "universal IM"!!!! lol | |
|
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| No point in changing now. It's already as confusing as it gets for wifi.. In earlier wifi standards, the signals were on a set frequency range around 2.X ghz.. now comes along "N" with 5ghz single and DUAL BAND technologies working with draft 2 "N" just to make things more confusing. The consumer is in luck, because the amount of equipment that runs purely on 5ghz (less known / utilized) N is rare.
Just make Draft 2.0 final and call it a day. Let bandwidth hogs channel bond on 2.4 & 5.X ghz simultaneously to maximize throughput.
If they change the spec to something that requires firmware upgrades, with the amount of draft 2 N equipment out there, no one will trust the ITU telecom standards self proclaimed "know all, be all of wired/wireless communications" to develop timely internationally recognized telecom innovations. We should never again see days of the 19k-56k modem hand-wringing that went on with analog modems.
Finally, BG equipment can stop being sold as low cost entry level and just be part of the (A)BGN family of backwards compatability at "G" prices. | |
|
MadtownPremium
join:2008-04-26
Madera, CA | Trendnet with AT&T router I have a 2wire 2701HG-B wireless router with my AT&T plan of 3.0/512 and when I was using the wireless that came with the laptop, it was too short if you ask me. When I got the Trendnet TEW 641 (not sure if that's exact) I got better signal. In fact I can now sit out in the parking lot of Mcdonald's and get a good signal as of before I had to go inside just to pick it up.
The wireless (if it called something else, please let me know?) that came with the laptop was set up for 54mbps, and the Trendnet is set up for 300mbps. I just slide the Trendnet PC card into my laptop and than I just connect to a wireless router. I notice better signal or range with the Trendnet in my laptop. One of my neighbors had very low signal when using the laptop wireless, when I put in the Trendnet PC card in my laptop, their signal became very good. So I know I get better range with this Trendnet, even though my neighbors doesn't show up on there unless I locate my laptop closer to them, but to make sure it wasn't me, I took my laptop outside and see how far from my wireless network I can connect to, it went further than I'd expect. Not sure how my neighbor can have a very good signal and all of a sudden have a weak signal and I can still get a very good or excellent signal when I'm standing right at my neighbors place. | |
|
| | So what now Wounder if I will get an update fron linkys for my wireless gaming router. One can hope. | |
|
 HarleyYacYacoPremium
join:2001-10-13
Allendale, NJ
kudos:1 | Question is, for me at least . Is the firmware on the vendors units now going to change or just the newer ones.
I have Jan 08 on my Linksys Wrt160 and it works just dandy.
Lee
 | |
|
|
|
Guaranteed Obsolesce
Draft versions are a great way to induce consumers to replace their routers every six months. Replacement is necessary when earlier version router from a manufacture will not talk to a new version client card in N mode from the same manufacture. Time for Draft Q. I guess Apple learned from the router mob when they revise their iPhone on a regular basis.