U.S. Robotics Doubles Wi-Fi Speeds

[Jason Dunn]

<a href="http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,94506,tk,dn041602X,00.asp">http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,94506,tk,dn041602X,00.asp</a><br /><br />This is excellent news! Better range, more speed, nearly the same price - and backwards compatible with current 802.11b standards. I think I'm love...<br /><br />"U.S. Robotics (USR) has boosted the speed of its latest range of wireless LAN products for small businesses to 22 megabits per second, while retaining compatibility with existing 2.4-GHz systems built to the IEEE 802.11b standard, the company has announced. <br /><br />USR's 22-mbps products will all be available in June, the company said. The 22-mbps Wireless Access Point will have a suggested retail price of $200; the 22-mbps Wireless Access PC Card, $100; and the 22-mbps Wireless Access PCI Adapter Card, $120. <br /><br />That's a premium of about $20 over the 11-mbps cards already on the market, acknowledges Juan Lopez, USR's networking product line manager. In some cases, the price is the same for an 11-mbps card, but "you're not only getting faster speed, you're getting a stronger radio, better range," he said."<br /><br />...Older gear can still benefit from some of the other performance improvements offered by the new range. Thanks to a more powerful radio and some other tweaks, the new products offer 30 percent greater linear range, or about 70 percent better area coverage, than existing systems, Lopez said." Source: <a href="http://www.pocketmatrix.com">Chris Edwards</a>.

[jeffmckean]

That's awesome! Is that what is supposed to be '802.11g' at some point when they define the backwards compatible higher-speed 802.11 standard?

[dochall]

I can't decide whether this is actually good news or not. Sure from a sad git techie standpoint it's faster and the range increase is welcome but I fear that it could simply confuse the market, even if it is fully backwardly compatible.

The wireless networking market was confusing before the emergence of 802.11b as a standard. If we're not careful we could see the same confusion again and have a lot of people who could use WiFi shying away because there is just so many figures/TLAs floating around and it's safter to not do anything rather than risk wasting money.

X2 anybody?

[st63z]

IIRC, isn't this using TI's almost-rejected PBCC 802.11g runner-up (as opposed to Intersil's slightly more popular OFDM 802.11g)? I haven't read up on the latest going-ons, but last I heard, TI narrowly lost the fight and is going their own way to market.

Is it possible IEEE actually ratified a compromise standard from both sides?

I'm still more gung-ho over .11a myself... True in time the band will also get more crowded, and higher bands don't travel as well (and of course there's the backward compatibility thorn). But moving out of the ubiquitous microwave/oven and BT and cordless phone territory is too good to pass up (and as it is .11a delivers more bandwidth per given distance, and more throughput per watt of power, than .11b).

[Jason Dunn]

I was gung-ho over .11a, but the compatibility with all the .11b gear everyone has is too sweet to pass up. .11g offers the same benefit, so frequency problems or not, I think this is the path the general industry will go.

[chris234]

Actually, I think .11g's "backward compatibility" is somewhat overhyped. Yes, you'll be able to get interfaces that will support both .11b and .11g, but on the infrastructure side, unless you've bought VERY recent gear, you're looking at ripping out current APs and cards anyway. The cards won't be upgradable, and only the newest APs from the big names (Cisco, Avaya/Agere, and such) have bus speeds that can support higher bandwidths (I think Enterasys was one of the first with a newer AP, Avaya/Agere is also now shipping). Something to keep in mind. Personally, I'm expecting to have to support a, b, and g.

[Jason Dunn]

Hmm - good point Chris. I should have known better than to expect the industry to be nice to my bank account. :wink:

[Will T Smith]

I am shocked that any networking company would roll out a new standard at this point without addressing Wi-Fi's lame encryption protocols. This is like doubling the speed of a money counter that empties into the trash.

More range = greater exposure to threats.

When you combine a Microsoft OS with an open/unprotected pipe, you're asking for serious trouble. Imagine wireless viruses hopping from one network to another, one device to another. Imagine infected devices wandering into your access region and spreading computer virus' and trojans by PROXIMITY.

I've seen some VPN/wireless AP solutions out their but those are just for corporate markets. 802.11x protocols are absoluetly competely unsecure. Any computer connected over Wi-Fi and is NOT protected by a firewall is a sitting duck to all types of malicious intrusion. Increased range and speed only make the target bigger.

The computing community at large should reject the introduction of capability without prudence. Tell 3Com that faster is not needed, private and secure are.

[cbolvin]

This is a mistake by USR and TI.

Lucent tried this when 802.11b was nearing ratification. They tried to get their own High Rate encoding mechanism to be ratified as the new HR standard. But when the 802.11 committee rejected it, they came out with it on their own anyway. They called it the Turbo Bronze card. Trouble was, it was incompatible over 2MBps and could not be updated. The result was anyone who bought them wound up with basically useless cards after the standard was finalized.

Unless they make the card upgradeable to 802.11g anyone who buys these will wind up in the same boat as those who bought the Turbo Bronze" cards...