So the other question is antennas; you could probably use MIMO with only 2 antennas, but you might only get insanely great speed instead of ludicrous speed.
I'm really looking forward to Apple creating a proprietary antenna port so that none of us can buy the affordable ones on the market and instead are required to buy the J. Ives designed beautiful white plastic covered antenna at three or four times the price. It would complete the sculpture of the new base station he'll design (also sold at four times the price of other solutions), making the combined structure resemble a miniature version of the Chrysler Building.
The name extreme or ludicrous would be a reflection as much of the pricing as of the performance.
I'm really looking forward to Apple creating a proprietary antenna port so that none of us can buy the affordable ones on the market and instead are required to buy the J. Ives designed beautiful white plastic covered antenna at three or four times the price.
Er, I was talking about PowerBooks/iBooks where the antennas are already built in. If you want to upgrade your existing PB to AirPort Insane, I think it's possible to use the existing antennas.
The name extreme or ludicrous would be a reflection as much of the pricing as of the performance.
well thats silly. Everything that is a new technology is expensive. Give it a little time and it will be cheap. all wireless routers use to be very expensive...not anymore
The Titanium and Aluminum PowerBooks (15" and 17") all have CardBus slots.
I guess I'll have to repeat myself. The original internal AirPort slot was PCMCIA. 802.11g cards are too fast for a PCMCIA slot, therefore an 802.11g (AE) card cannot go in an original internal AirPort slot.
i'd just like to point out that unless you have a dedicated T1 line or some ungodly home networking, you can't even reach those speeds. the fastest service available through corporate lines in minnesota is about 4 mbps. lets see... 54 mbps from airport extreme.... minus the possible 4.... ummm... 50 mbps that can't even be touched. why would you need to upgrade? consumers fail to realize that when something new like this comes out, they're not getting any faster speeds. they just buy buy buy because people say it can reach faster speeds, so they get suckered into paying 80 bucks for a new wireless router that they don't need. the only real advantage to upgrading is range, and frankly, unless you live in a freaking mansion, most of your neighbors can already access your AE connection. my sister and brother-in-law can stand out in front of their house and connect to their own wireless and 1 or 2 other neighbors. anyone think that might be a bad thing?
What people seem to be missing (including Nogee there) is that the faster speed won't necessarily sell itself to the masses; only a small group will buy into it. What the speed DOES mean however, is that companies like Apple, Microsoft, TiVo, etc. will then have an opportunity to sell customers home streaming products, audio, video, etc. as part of this networking hardware. If they are slick about it and integrate it with the wireless router, then they can steal a lot of router sales from the traditional players, adding $100-200 dollars to the product's value in the process. Also note, Apple already has an uncompressed HD codec in Pixlet, but it runs 25MB/s if I remember, which would require approximately 200Mb/s of dedicated bandwidth. Probably doable under n, but with limited range.
i'd just like to point out that unless you have a dedicated T1 line or some ungodly home networking, you can't even reach those speeds. the fastest service available through corporate lines in minnesota is about 4 mbps. lets see... 54 mbps from airport extreme.... minus the possible 4.... ummm... 50 mbps that can't even be touched. why would you need to upgrade? consumers fail to realize that when something new like this comes out, they're not getting any faster speeds. they just buy buy buy because people say it can reach faster speeds, so they get suckered into paying 80 bucks for a new wireless router that they don't need. the only real advantage to upgrading is range, and frankly, unless you live in a freaking mansion, most of your neighbors can already access your AE connection. my sister and brother-in-law can stand out in front of their house and connect to their own wireless and 1 or 2 other neighbors. anyone think that might be a bad thing?
not my fault you live in the boondocks.
my home connection in NY is 10mb/sec down. At school its much higher depending on network traffic.
That's besides the point though. 802.11g doesn't achieve anywhere near 54 mb/sec like you claim. 802.11n will likely be below its claimed speed. the increased speed will be beneficial for networks (file transfers, etc) and it will open up the possibilities for audio and video streaming around the house and elsewhere.
So lemme get this straight. They went from b, to g, and now n? Don't the people at the IEEE realize they're going to run out of letters if they skip so many?
So lemme get this straight. They went from b, to g, and now n? Don't the people at the IEEE realize they're going to run out of letters if they skip so many?
They didn't skip any:
a: 5GHz version
b: higher 11Mbps speed
c: something about bridging
d: other countries
e: quality of service
f: inter-access-point protocol
g: higher 54Mbps speed
h: dynamic frequency selection for 5GHz
i: security (WPA2)
j: Japan
k: radio resource management
l: not used (looks too much like a 1?)
m: maintenance
n: higher >100Mbps speed
And when they get to z they start over at aa, ab, etc. 802.3 (Ethernet) is up to 802.3ak last time I checked.
Comments
Originally posted by wmf
So the other question is antennas; you could probably use MIMO with only 2 antennas, but you might only get insanely great speed instead of ludicrous speed.
I'm really looking forward to Apple creating a proprietary antenna port so that none of us can buy the affordable ones on the market and instead are required to buy the J. Ives designed beautiful white plastic covered antenna at three or four times the price. It would complete the sculpture of the new base station he'll design (also sold at four times the price of other solutions), making the combined structure resemble a miniature version of the Chrysler Building.
The name extreme or ludicrous would be a reflection as much of the pricing as of the performance.
Originally posted by m01ety
That's ludicrous -- what about the PCMCIA cards offered by Belkin and Netgear and others? They work very well with 802.11g.
Those are CardBus, not PCMCIA.
Originally posted by vr6
I'm really looking forward to Apple creating a proprietary antenna port so that none of us can buy the affordable ones on the market and instead are required to buy the J. Ives designed beautiful white plastic covered antenna at three or four times the price.
Er, I was talking about PowerBooks/iBooks where the antennas are already built in. If you want to upgrade your existing PB to AirPort Insane, I think it's possible to use the existing antennas.
Originally posted by vr6
The name extreme or ludicrous would be a reflection as much of the pricing as of the performance.
well thats silly. Everything that is a new technology is expensive. Give it a little time and it will be cheap. all wireless routers use to be very expensive...not anymore
Originally posted by tonton
The Titanium and Aluminum PowerBooks (15" and 17") all have CardBus slots.
I guess I'll have to repeat myself. The original internal AirPort slot was PCMCIA. 802.11g cards are too fast for a PCMCIA slot, therefore an 802.11g (AE) card cannot go in an original internal AirPort slot.
Originally posted by exhibit_13
i'd just like to point out that unless you have a dedicated T1 line or some ungodly home networking, you can't even reach those speeds. the fastest service available through corporate lines in minnesota is about 4 mbps. lets see... 54 mbps from airport extreme.... minus the possible 4.... ummm... 50 mbps that can't even be touched. why would you need to upgrade? consumers fail to realize that when something new like this comes out, they're not getting any faster speeds. they just buy buy buy because people say it can reach faster speeds, so they get suckered into paying 80 bucks for a new wireless router that they don't need. the only real advantage to upgrading is range, and frankly, unless you live in a freaking mansion, most of your neighbors can already access your AE connection. my sister and brother-in-law can stand out in front of their house and connect to their own wireless and 1 or 2 other neighbors. anyone think that might be a bad thing?
not my fault you live in the boondocks.
my home connection in NY is 10mb/sec down. At school its much higher depending on network traffic.
That's besides the point though. 802.11g doesn't achieve anywhere near 54 mb/sec like you claim. 802.11n will likely be below its claimed speed. the increased speed will be beneficial for networks (file transfers, etc) and it will open up the possibilities for audio and video streaming around the house and elsewhere.
Originally posted by tlee650
So lemme get this straight. They went from b, to g, and now n? Don't the people at the IEEE realize they're going to run out of letters if they skip so many?
They didn't skip any:
a: 5GHz version
b: higher 11Mbps speed
c: something about bridging
d: other countries
e: quality of service
f: inter-access-point protocol
g: higher 54Mbps speed
h: dynamic frequency selection for 5GHz
i: security (WPA2)
j: Japan
k: radio resource management
l: not used (looks too much like a 1?)
m: maintenance
n: higher >100Mbps speed
And when they get to z they start over at aa, ab, etc. 802.3 (Ethernet) is up to 802.3ak last time I checked.
BTW, another vote for "ludicrous speed": http://www.computerworld.com/mobilet...,98014,00.html