Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Wireless Networking Hardware Technology

New WiFi Standards, Double the Data? 163

Posted by simoniker from the tin-can-and-piece-of-string dept.
morkeleb writes "According to the New York Times (free reg. req.), just when you thought it was safe to stock your home or office the 802.11x way, another possibility springs up. From Stanford and Bell Labs comes an approach using MIMO, which 'relies on taking advantage of huge amounts of computing power to send numbers of signals from closely spaced antennas', thereby enhancing range and throughput. Looks like Intel and Nokia are interested in the technology, as well as a number of highroller venture capitalist groups."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New WiFi Standards, Double the Data? More

New WiFi Standards, Double the Data?

Comments Filter:

  • Lame. (Score:1, Insightful)

    by tevenson ( 625386 )
    I just bought my 802.11g card/router and now this?!? Once you buy computer parts and accesories you should just cut yourself off from the rest of the world so you don't know what better/cheaper stuff has come out. Because I seriously almost get migraine headache when I realize something out now is 1/2 the price and 4x the performance.

    GAH.
    • It seems to me that digital wireless has so much room for improvement and so many possibilities for conflict that perhaps we should just freeze the standards for a while to let the technology sort itself out.

      Wonder how this compares to ultrawideband technologies? Those promised better, cheaper, simpler devices. And what about directional antenna technology? That would smooth things out considerably.
    • This is why I have a 5-port switch for every couch in my house -- I like wires they tend to stay in style longer...

      Not like wireless would be any good here... My renter told me there was probably no lead paint in the house but my WiFi card tends to disagree.

    • Re:Lame. (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Golias ( 176380 )
      What!? A new wireless technology is in the concept phase and seeking investors, meaning we might see a better wireless product on the market in five years or so!?!?

      What a fool I was to frivolously piss away that $200 on an Airport 802.11b hub, which runs at almost 10 times by DSL connection speed, a mere year ago! If only I had waited! Sure, it would mean I have had nothing for all of last year, and nothing for all of this year, and nothing for quite some time to come, but at least I would have had the

  • Google Link (Score:5, Informative)

    by error502 ( 694533 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @04:46PM (#6726113)
    Google has this article, too. [nytimes.com] No reg required.

  • Doubling the data rate isn't enough. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mcg1969 ( 237263 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @04:47PM (#6726114)
    It's not enough for Airgo to just double the data rate. Other companies are doing that.

    Fortunately, that's not all they're doing! As the article states, they're also greatly increasing the range and reliability as well... and they're not going to stop at just double the data rate, either :)

    I have had the honor of working with these folks, both briefly as a consultant for Airgo and with their previous work at Clarity Wireless/Cisco. They know what they are doing, and if anyone can innovate in an otherwise full and competitive market, they can!

    • Hmm. Sounds like the marketing plan from Sony...

      1. Create very cool but nevertheless proprietary standard for wide-spread technology.
      2. ?
      3. Profit!

      Seriously, although I think being a pioneer in this area is cool, woulnd't it have been better to work with other companies to form an open standard rather than roll out some new system that no one else is on board with?

      • So you'd prefer they follow this plan:

        1. Start small company with big ideas and a new very cool technology

        2. Partner with Sony and other industry giants to create an "open" standard

        3. File chapter 11 once you realize the big guys wont let a dime slip through their fingers edgewise.

        It's the way the world works. The plan you posted is the right one, with step 2 being "License tech out to people with the means to mass produce it"

  • Huh? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by PascalJedi ( 606478 )
    Proving Engineers are better at Math then English....

    A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,.... X

    What happened to half the alphabet?
    • the X was not an existing technology, but a denotation of the letter following the 802.11 standard. 802.11x could mean 802.11a, 802.11b, 802.11g or anything else.
    • The x is being used as a wild card. It probably would have made more sense to this audience if they used a "*" instead.

      Considering how x is constantly used as a variable (haha, constant variable, I love that idea) in mathematical situations, I guess you're half right.

      Matt Fahrenbacher

  • Woo! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Dark Lord Seth ( 584963 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @04:48PM (#6726132) Journal

    More standards! Now it makes even less sense to me and my good old cat5 cable which persistently fail to provide me with 100mbit/sec speed!

    • Even though the NYT article states the technology isn't compatable with current 802.11x standards, Airgo's website seems to imply that it is in fact backwards compatable [airgonetworks.com] with current tecnology. So who's right here?

      From the website... Full support for 802.11b/a/g standards and additional standards allows for an unprecedented level of backwards compatibility and performance at all data rates. Seems to me it is. Anyone know for sure?

    • Re:Woo! (Score:3, Funny)

      by sharkey ( 16670 )
      my good old cat5 cable which persistently fail to provide me with 100mbit/sec speed!

      Man, that sucks. Hell, my old 9600 baud modem can beat the tar out of 100 millibits per second.

  • aww damn (Score:2, Funny)

    by riotstarter ( 650328 )
    I just bought a wireless g router. I always get screwed. Like when they came out with the Metro after I just bought a Pinto.
    • Like when they came out with the Metro after I just bought a Pinto.

      You couldn't get screwed for either.
      A) The Backseat ain't big enough.
      B) Even the hookers laugh at these cars.
      • Why use the back seat in the Metro? The front seats are more than large enough. ;) And (if discussing the hatch-back models) if you fold down the rear seats, the "trunk" area is almost as large as a double bed.

        Yes, I do know all this from experience. ;)

    • I bought a LinkSys 802.11b WAP/router & a notebook card...$90 at $GiantElectronics store. Three days later, same stuff - Belkin brand - is advertised at $Computer store for $50. Taking Linksys stuff back to store 1, buying Belkin stuff at store 2, re-configuring for WIn2K, WIn98 & SuSE (triple-boot notebook) just ain't worth the $40. Still burns me, tho!

      • Actually I just bought a D-link 802.11b+ card and router, very happy with both. Good range, good speed, good price ($70 for card and router). I don't have a metro or pinto, that was a joke.

  • But what of the venture communists? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 18, 2003 @04:50PM (#6726154)
    ...as well as a number of highroller venture capitalist groups..."

    But what of the venture communists? Equal time, that is what I say. Venture capitalism is man exploiting man, and communism is the same but reversed.

  • Closely spaced antennas (Score:5, Funny)

    by Rosco P. Coltrane ( 209368 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @04:51PM (#6726163)
    MIMO, which 'relies on taking advantage of huge amounts of computing power to send numbers of signals from closely spaced antennas'

    If they're close enough, you can run an ethernet cable between the two, that's even cheaper.
    • ...signals from closely spaced antennas.
      The "closely spaced" antennas are on both the transmit and receive sides. This means you could have 4 closely spaced antennas transmiting and 3 antennas reciever. Of course the antennas can be used to both transmit and recieve.

    • no no no. "from closely spaced antennas" to distant transcievers.

      two, three, five or so antennas really close together, perhaps placed all over a laptop. then use all of them to talk to distant systems.

  • MIMO: Multiple In, Multiple Out (Score:4, Funny)

    by burgburgburg ( 574866 ) <splisken06&email,com> on Monday August 18, 2003 @04:51PM (#6726168)
    This has to be the single dirtiest-sounding technology I've come across yet. I like it!
  • Isn't it only for short distances?

    I already have the house set up with 2 airports and still get dead areas less than two rooma away from the access points.

    If this is geared for shorter distances, things like ceramic tiles in the bathroom, your granite countertop, springs in your couch and the your ventilation hood on the stove will get in the way of the signal.

    If this is geared for shorter distances, than 802.11, I can't see how it will be anything less than a failure.

    • RTFA (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      It says that it has a range 2 to 6 times greater than 802.11x.

      For god's sake! RTFA

      • I did - but the previous article stated that the range was less than 802.11b

        Soooo, unless you're going to litter your house with repeater antennas, where does that leave us?
        • as the previous guy and the subject say - RTFA.

          It supports MUCH GREATER RANGES. That's where it leaves us. Your two airports could be replaced by one of these puppies, and there'd be no gaps.

          sheesh. does it have to be this hard? :-P

  • Stop, I want to get on (Score:5, Interesting)

    by BobTheLawyer ( 692026 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @04:52PM (#6726178)
    This is getting silly - consumers aren't even close to adopting 802.11a and b in serious numbers.

    It's more important to have consistent standards that work and that everbody understands than to get additional speed that few people will need.

    • Re:Stop, I want to get on (Score:4, Interesting)

      by azav ( 469988 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @05:01PM (#6726272) Homepage Journal
      In San Francisco, I frequently can sniff up to 5 wireless access points in one location. There are 7 on one stretch of my block.

      2 years ago, I decided to be devious and drive around and map out any open wireless access points. In 2 hours, I stopped after finding 20.

    • BobTheLawyer writes:
      > This is getting silly - consumers aren't even close to adopting 802.11a and b in serious numbers.

      If you zoom in far enough ssid and bssid will be displayed: Wigle map of the US [wigle.net] and 802.11 access points.
    • Most people are looking at a package deal anyway. A card type and an access point that work together, and that's it. Doesn't matter where in the alphabet soup it is really, only throughput. For those big roaming networks (like Universities etc.), the techs will have sufficient knowledge.

      I can see lots of cool things I'd want to do with high-bandwidth wireless, and if you can't imagine any, well I think you're in a minority. When the wireless speeds reach 100Mbit+, we can start talking about stopping and st
    • It seems that the NYT article is in error. The press release from Airgo says that their solution is based on the 802.11 standard, and "supports all 802.11 a, b, and g modes and also extends rates to 108 Mbps" . The qoute is from their press release which is here.

      http://www.airgonetworks.com/news.html

      Enjoy.

    • Re:Stop, I want to get on (Score:5, Insightful)

      by pclminion ( 145572 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @06:09PM (#6727011)
      It's more important to have consistent standards that work and that everbody understands than to get additional speed that few people will need.

      No, it's better to spend a lot of time experimenting with different technologies, and determining the strengths and weaknesses of each, before settling on a single standard that could possibly lock us all in to a mediocre technology for decades to come (see Microsoft, x86 platform, etc.).

      WiFi hasn't been around that long. I'm willing to wait several more years before standardization. The last thing I want is for everyone to rush to a standard and pour time, money, and effort into it, when we don't even know what the other options are, yet.

      If 802.11* turns out to be pretty stupid compared to some of the newer tech, then won't we all feel dumb after investing thousands in wireless gear, and even dumber that we now have to restrict ourselves to equipment which is backward compatible with a deficient standard. I'm not saying this has happened, but obviously it could.

      Be patient and let people experiment with new tech, we'll all come out better for it in the end...

    • we have that standard, its got badass support under two dozen operating systems, and everyone and their mother has begun using it.

      if someone wants to try and create something better, jump start and entirely new system, so be it for us to try and talk them out of it. as long as its not being shoved down our throats - as long as every companies not going to STOP 802.11 products - who be it for us to not let someone try something.

      think of all the network externalities they have to overcome to succeed. if th
  • I am all for bigger, faster and all around more of just about anything but how about doing somthing about the reliability. I am constantly dropping signal with the router one floor below and directly below my TiBook (10 feet tops and the signal strength says near 100%). My father and one of my friends have similar problems. All different brands of WiFi routers and one other Airport and some PC client card for the client access cards. It sometimes is almost impossible to get any work done when I have line of
    • Do you use 2.4GHz telephones? That is what kills my connection 95% of the time. Either mine or the neighbor's (small apartment complex).
    • Increased reliability? Try having your cards associate at slower speed, such as 5.5mbps rather than 11. Or 1 or 2 mbps.
    • Well, as the article states, the range of this technology is waay greater than existing 802.whatever standards, so that's gotta help with reliability.

      This technology isn't just purely about the speed, but the range. It takes the emphasis off the signal strength and puts it on the computer, therefore we get better everything. :)
  • ...That probably won't amount to much. I don't see any real benefits. More range and bandwith are nice, but ubiquity is more important. I'd much rather see the spread of (secure) 802.11x. Also the fact that it "relies on taking advantage of huge amounts of computing power" makes be think it'll draw to much power. 802.11 products can hurt a laptops battery, and can cripple smaller devices. I hate to be a killjoy but this doesn't seem to offer much.

  • Forget home use, think larger (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cyberlotnet ( 182742 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @04:54PM (#6726197) Homepage Journal
    The article mentions longer distances "two to six times as far as current tech"
    This means 200-900 feet.. Even if you say 500 feet, that would be insane.. Imagine that + a pringle can...
    • I agree, this technology is definitely not for the home user. The reason? You'll need to buy new hardware to install so you can use this wireless signal. That means you won't get to simply point your Linksys WAP out the window and hook into the wireless tower down the street. Instead, you're going to need to install some kind of receiver, possibly a dish mounted on the exterior of your home.

      When I was living in Wellington, New Zealand last year, my wife and I looked into doing this (yes, there was an I

    • If you're getting the extra distance and speed from the special MIMO antenna set, why would you want to replace it with a pringles can? Or, if you're going to use a pringles can, why are you buying the more expensive tech?

  • Article text, fsck registering (Score:3, Informative)

    by dook43 ( 660162 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @04:55PM (#6726213)
    PALO ALTO, Calif., Aug. 17 -- Airgo Networks, a heavily financed Silicon Valley start-up, plans on Monday to introduce an alternative to the popular Wi-Fi wireless data standard for connecting to the Internet, capable of doubling Wi-Fi's already high speed and extending its range. Airgo's technology is just one example, industry executives said, of the continued emergence of new companies, undercutting recent fears that wireless technology innovation is slowing and is in danger of being dominated by a few large established concerns. "Just as the revolution starts to happen, some people are saying that it's over," said Craig Mathias, president of the Farpoint Group, a industry consulting firm in Ashland, Mass. "Clearly, we are in the early days of wireless data." Airgo's technology, known as multiple-in, multiple-out, or MIMO, relies on taking advantage of huge amounts of computing power to send numbers of signals from closely spaced antennas. By doing so, Airgo is able to squeeze in and out more data than conventional wireless data arrangements. But Airgo faces a big challenge in winning broad support for an approach that is not compatible with the existing Wi-Fi standards. The company said it hopes to create markets by seeking out consumer wireless equipment companies serving local area networks, hoping that in a hotly contested marketplace, a higher-speed, greater-range option will soon prove advantageous, even if it is not compatible with existing software. On Monday, Airgo will announce a chip set that extends the speed at which data can be delivered to a computer by wireless radio signal, to as much as 108 megabits a second. Current Wi-Fi standards are capable of data speeds ranging from 11 to 54 megabits a second. The company says the signal can be sent farther as well -- from two to six times as far as current Wi-Fi technology, which typically reaches only about 100 to 150 feet from a transmitter connected to the Internet. "We've created a new currency that is better range and better performance," Airgo's chief executive, Greg Raleigh, said. The industry is working to define a new generation of Wi-Fi that could take data rates to 200 megabits or even higher, and Mr. Raleigh said Airgo would propose its technology for the standard. In addition to computer communications applications, Mr. Raleigh said he expects new consumer uses for very high speed wireless, like data connections for HDTV television sets and other home appliances. Michael Kleeman, chief technology officer of Cometa Networks of San Francisco, which is installing Wi-Fi access points nationally, said: "People are beginning to realize that it is important to focus on the radio frequency side of the equation. Now, people are paying attention to antennas." Airgo's MIMO technology was pioneered at Stanford University, Bell Laboratories and other research centers. It is an example of the shift to what are known as smart antennas, an approach that is being widely adopted in the wireless networking world. Other companies are also striving to develop antenna technologies to improve wireless data service. These include Vivato, a wireless technology company that is using antennas to direct beams, and the leading chip maker Intel, which has acquired the intellectual property of another Silicon Valley MIMO company, IoSpan Wireless. Airgo, whose founders started and then sold Clarity Wireless to Cisco Systems in 1998, has so far raised a total of $52 million in venture capital from OVP Venture Partners, Sevin Rosen Funds, Nokia Venture Partners and Accel Partners.
  • While I certainly applaud the efforts of anyone working on increasing data rates and ranges of wireless communications, I also hope that some kind of compatibility standard emerges. I would hate to see wireless broadband go down the same road as mobile phones in the United States. I think everyone can identify with the frustration of several overlapping, redundant, and incompatible types of mobile networks.

  • Not backwards compatable? I don't care! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by peterdaly ( 123554 ) <petedaly.ix@netcom@com> on Monday August 18, 2003 @04:58PM (#6726249)
    I don't care! At those rates and ranges, if they can provide equipment at consumer market prices and linux drivers I'll buy their product.

    They may be a logical jump for "private" networks still on 802.11b. Skip G all together, which last I knew had little to know Linux support.

    Not only faster, but my whole house should be covered. Now w/ 11b, I have dead spots in the far reaches of my not so large house. 100m/b to boot!

    -Pete

  • dammit dammit dammit (Score:5, Funny)

    by hankaholic ( 32239 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @04:59PM (#6726256)
    just when you thought it was safe to stock your home or office the 802.11x way, another possibility springs up
    ... and I just dropped $80 on an access point/100Mb router. Had I seen this article, I _definitely_ would have waited for something which Bell Labs is working on in their spare time.

    Last time this happened, I'd just installed BSD when Bell Labs announced their work on Plan 9. Boy, was I left in the dust on that one!
  • does anyone out there have a good explanation of what the technology actually does? The article doesn't provide much information...

    I suspect Airgo will have a tough time of it. 802.11b is really, really cheap and fairly ubiquitous. g is backward-compatible, and no consumer broadband connection can take advantage.

    I suspect that the killer app for a standard faster than 802.11g will be a wifi DVR content server, and I don't think you'll see those rolled out in any significant way until Hollywood decides

    • According to their website [airgonetworks.com]

      "Using Airgo's unique multiple antenna system, the AGN100 extends existing Wi-Fi rates to 108 Mbps per channel while remaining compatible with all common Wi-Fi standards. In head-to-head testing, the AGN100 demonstrated range that was two to six times that of competing WLAN chipsets, resulting in an order-of-magnitude increase in the area covered by each access point."

      and

      "The chipset supports all 802.11 a, b, and g modes and also extends rates to 108 Mbps."

    • The idea behind MIMO is that wireless signal are orthgonal in space. Think about it this way:

      Lets say I have three transmit antennas, sending three signals (x,y, and z). I also have three (or more) receive antennas (1, 2, and 3).

      The first thing I do is train my receivers by having the transmitters transmit a known signal one at a time, such that when transmitter x is transmitting, at receiver 1 I receive a signal (a1*x), at receiver 2 I get (a2*x), and at receiver 3 I get (a3*x). When y transmits, I ge

  • Compatibility is king. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by xanderwilson ( 662093 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @05:03PM (#6726293) Homepage
    The new wi-fi "standard" can ben ten times as fast as "b" or "g" and I still wouldn't regret buying my Airport Extreme this year. I've got PCs and Macs and a printer all talking to each other quickly and wirelessly and I didn't have to upgrade a single thing I wasn't ready to upgrade (in terms of money or in terms of time--I can't count how many network cards--wireless and wired--caused system conflicts on my PCs and it took forever to get it working right. I'm not changing anything I don't have to until I have to). I got a performance boost (a more solid signal) without touching the network cards themselves.

    Alex.
  • Great, another company that says "hey we have a better way to do it and it is using our PROPRIETARY non-open standard." This one is going to die on the vine guys, I hope. I am not sure who keeps doing this, but non-open standards are in today's world not going to fly (and there are tons of examples most recently Rambus). Wait for 802.11Z to replace this... :)

  • Do you... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Creepy Crawler ( 680178 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @05:07PM (#6726323)
    Do you know what's soo great about standards?

    There's SOOOO many to choose from !

    (POOO! TANG!) Thank you thank you. I'll be here all night.

  • i think extending the range is the critical bit that would make or break many business plans, compared to the less important higher data speeds .. The leverage that you get from the increased data speeds is not as much as it is in the gains of distance.

    2 to six times increased range in radius means, 4 to 36 times in area coverage .. which is big enough to make currently dead plans alive and healthy. If I could get these sort of gains i.e. 4 to 36, in the potential of revenue generation with the same cost of initial deployment, I think the technology will be of very much interest to me ... just need to go back and crunch my numbers again

    • Increased range is great, but if you are covering 36 times the area somewhere like a collage campus I sure hope you can increase the total datarate the device can handle by more than 2x, cuz by the numbers that ends up being something like 15 times slower.

    • i think extending the range is the critical bit that would make or break many business plans

      Yeah... I know I would have upgraded from telephone lines to Fibre just for the increased distance, even if the speed stayed the same.
      </SARCASM>

      Seriously though... there are already plenty of wireless technologies that have incredible ranges, so no business is going to sink or swim based on how 802.11 works out. Wireless (microwave) cable TV has been around for a long long time, and we all know how much b

  • Maybe we could *all* be antennae! Running around like Rolie Polie Olie [harperchildrens.com], satisfied in the knowledge that you have enabled your neighbor to frag someone at blazing speeds.

  • 802.11x Clarification (Score:5, Informative)

    by WC as Kato ( 675505 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @05:19PM (#6726423)

    According to this Infoworld article [infoworld.com], Airgo Networks is working on enhancing 802.11a. This is not a new version of 802.11.

  • Looks like Intel and Nokia are interested in the technology, as well as a number of highroller venture capitalist groups.

    As it stands now with wireless products being dirt cheap and easy to deploy, companies have to come up with something that they can cash in on. Will this technology have a real world advantage to the average Joe over existing wireless solutions? Sure but at what cost?

    higher-speed, greater-range option will soon prove advantageous, even if it is not compatible with existing software
  • as well as a number of highroller venture capitalist groups.

    I wonder if they'll figure out a way to make a (drumroll, please) P-R-O-F-I-T with any of the companies they're likely to bankroll.

    Companies built around a single technology in search of a profitable business model. It's gonna be just like back in the old days of '99!

  • Longer distances and legalities (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sh0rtie ( 455432 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @05:40PM (#6726680)

    how do they propose doing that with power limits already heavily regulated ? omni directional hi-gain antennas are incredibly difficult beasts especially when you get past 1 wavelength (as apposed to 1/4, 5/8th etc) sure they could go the yagi route but then its directional torch like beams which don't really help for walkabouts

    Then we move onto the interference aspect, power levels and emitted radiation are heavily regulated for a reason (fire,medics,military,rds,taxis,radio,ham,tv) who pay heavy fees to use the band, will the FCC/DTI come down hard on this or relax the regs?, there is also tremendous scope for abuse if thats the case (think starbuks paid wifi jamming/overiding mr nice citizens free community wifi)
    what about differing countries regulations of airwaves frequencies (some countries the band that wifi is on is regulated and licensed (military/satellite)) is there a worldwide agreement that wifi bands are unlicensed ?
    this rush into wireless has plenty of legal complications (just like CB/walkie talkies) (ie: Italy can have 1000 watt+ cb's while the UK can only have 4W) all this talk of standards just seems a bit premature, anyone clear this up for us ?

  • There doesn't seem to be much in the way of details. My hunch is that this is a diversity antenna [google.com]. I'm guessing that it does bit by bit comparison from 2 or more frontends.

  • Incorrect terminology (Score:3, Informative)

    by GigsVT ( 208848 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @05:50PM (#6726829) Journal
    Don't say 802.11x when you mean 802.11*. 802.11x is a wireless security standard. As far as I can tell, this article has nothing to do with 802.11x. I see this error a lot.
  • [Slightly off topic]

    Anyone out there have any experiences (good or bad) with using a PCI or USB WiFi adapter with linux? My AP is 802.11b, so I don't care about cards any faster than that... just need to know if I can get wireless on my Linux based PVR running mythtv.

  • How it works (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 18, 2003 @06:04PM (#6726969)
    MIMO uses multiple antennas spaced more than half a wavelength apart on both transmitter and receiver. By doing so the signal recevied at each antenna experiences independent multipath fading. By using this information it is possible to send an independent data stream to each antenna on the same channel, i.e N antennas = N-times the datarate.

    This is all done by linear algebra and matrix inversions which is probably the origin of the "taking advantage of huge amounts of computing power" claims in the articel. For more info check out this paper [ifi.uio.no]
  • US Robotics is claiming 100mbit speeds with their 802.11g products. Which is 5 times 802.11g's rated speed of 20mbit.

    Anybody done any benchmarks with one of these networks? I doubt you'd ever get 100mbit, but I'd consider it a success if it pulled 40-50mbit.

    • Re:US Robotics (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Wesley Felter ( 138342 )
      Let's compare apples to apples here.

      802.11g: 54Mbps theoretical, 25 Mbps actual
      USR: 100Mbps theoretical, ? Mbps actual

      I'm more interested in the Atheros turbo mode which claims 90 Mbps actual throughput.
  • What Cringely will do with a couple of pringle can yagis [pbs.org] and this technology - he could probably reach Chicago!

  • So long as the "WEP" option is ON out of the box.. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    In 3 square miles north of my house, I've nailed 384 access points. 35 of them had WEP enabled. The rest... SSID "linksys" or "default".

    It gets scarey when you find that ratio in a commercial / shopping district... and there's nothing you can do, because if you warn people why they shouldn't use their credit cards there, you go to jail.
  • Presumably this technology "triangulates" (or quadradulates, pentagonates, what have you) upon its target. An intelligent antenna array.

    Presumably the range advantage would be much less when using directional antennas? The antenna's are already directional, right, so there's less to make up for with fancy sync'ing software tricks.

    Myren
  • SURGEON GENERAL SUPPORTS NEW WIRE TECHNOLOGY

    NEW YORK - Over the past century, the health of humans has been
    increasingly endagered by the radiation in the evironment. Ever since
    we have had networks, we have had radiation, and in ever
    increasing amounts.

    Since the high amount of radiation in our environment has been
    identified as the primary cause of death in modern society (radiation
    is the cause of all cancers and mutations which are responsible for
    41% of all deaths today), more and more voices are
  • 802.16a, or metropolitan networks would seem to be the future of wireless anyway. So this seems only like a stopgap kind of measure, much like DLinks proprietary 802.11b boosted speeds. Anyone who buys into proprietary solutions like this deserves what they get....

Slashdot Top Deals

New York... when civilization falls apart, remember, we were way ahead of you. - David Letterman

Close