A faster Wi-Fi standard appears to be about a year away, after a task group unanimously approved a proposal for an update to the 802.11g standard.
Faster Wi-Fi Standard Gets Draft Approval
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
the best part of 802.11n IMO (not mentioned in this article) is that traffic control overhead data isn’t counted when quoting transfer speed.
BTW, does anybody know when the first draft standard complient adapters will be commercialised?
Any companies with a GPL driver yet?
I don’t want WiFi, I don’t want to have cancer.
http://www.google.com/search?q=microwaves+cancer
No thanks.
Edited 2006-01-20 19:46
You better not leave your house then.
http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=exhaust+fumes+ca…
We all die, eventually.
We all die, eventually.
Not me, I’m going live for… o_]__/
Live forever or die trying…
Better put on that tin-foil hat, then!
Radio waves are everywhere you look. You can’t even begin to see (no pun intended, haha) how many transmissions of various frequencies there are at any given point in time at any given location.
> Better put on that tin-foil hat, then!
I already have one on. And I don’t have cancer. Proof of concept.
The city I live in has started an effort to make sure that no bears infiltrate the town. Since starting this program (and coincidentally, long before that), there have been absolutely no bear sightings!
And you KNOW we’re going to do the same for WiFi!
Sounds like typical American/European Union bureaucratic decisions.
Um you havne’t heard then have you Tinfoil hats have been proven to enhance some microwaves.
Yeah that’s why it has turned into such a joke.
Actually, no. Aluminum foil will enhance the signal, while tin foil most certainly will attenuate. I guess your misconception comes from the fact that people erroneously call aluminum foil ‘tin foil’.
McKinney said there is a lack of convincing and consistent evidence of any effect of exposure to radio frequency fields on the risk of cancer.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10925501/
What spectrum are they considering?
What spectrum are they considering?
ZX-Spectrum?
(dismiss, me)
It’s not currently available on the IEEE site, but it’s probably the same as the others (2.4GHz and 5GHz).
As for those worrying about cancer, the power throughput is limited at 1W. Unless you wear your AP like a crown or you ground antennas directly to your head, it’s nothing to really worry about. Air pollution is a more dangerous threat.
I read the article, but I’m too lazy to read the draft standard. Now my understanding is that 802.11b and 802.11g both operate at 2.4GHz and 802.11a operates at 5.8GHz.
The article says “Products with 802.11n chips will be able to work with older 802.11a/b/g products at their slower speeds.”
I thought that b/g and a were fundamentally incompatible because of the frequency they operate at. Is that incorrect?
What frequency does 802.11n operate at?
“Products with 802.11n chips will be able to work with older 802.11a/b/g products at their slower speeds.”
Any wifi chip complying with the standards will support the previous drafts. In other words, a 802.11n device will be able to connect to a 802.11a/b/g AP (at their respective throughput, not at 802.11n throughput).
Even though they are not operating at the same frequencies, 802.11a devices can change their broadcast spectrum and connect to 802.11b/g APs.