Re: Something that worked right

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Jones, John (US)
>
> There's no real reason to make new b gear.  802.11g is almost 5x faster
> and is backwards compatible.  Also, as near as I can tell b only
> supports WEP security which is practically useless; g supports WPA which
> is far better.

No doubt.  I was just hoping to find a $10 bargain-bin card for my laptop.
As it is, for $20 I now have the first block towards a WPA-secured network.


> 802.11n is still in draft form but no one expects any significant
> changes to the spec between now & final-form (expected IIRC in 2008).
> 802.11n can go up to 6x g speeds, hitting a potential 300Mbps and making
> it directly competitive with wired LAN speeds.  It should also have
> better range and average stronger signal strengths.  I don't see any
> particular issue with buying "pre-N" equipment now except the minor
> price premium; a firmware update should bring pre-N to actual spec.
> Intel's Centrino wireless chip will be adding n support sometime this
> year (ahead of the final spec approval).

There's a ton of both G and "pre-N" stuff out there.  There are also a
number of varieties of "multi-band", which purports to get multiple G-rate
speeds (108 being the most common).

I figured G speed is good enough for my laptop, especially for $20, with
typical N cards ranging from $80-$100.  I haven't decided whether the
premium of N is really required for my house.

Here's an amusing thing: it's actually cheaper to get a wireless router and
disable the routing features than it is to get a wireless access point.
Gotta love the economics of supply and demand.

Anyway, now I can start the decision making process.  G or N?  D-Link,
Netgear or Linksys, or an "off-brand"?  WPA or WPA2?  Decisions, decisions.

Joe