PDA

View Full Version : Wireless 802.11a



panter
2006-03-09, 19:25
Hello all, my first post here.

Quick question for Slim Devices: Is there any plan to add hardware support for 802.11a?

802.11a is the future! :-)

Mark Lanctot
2006-03-09, 21:50
Hello all, my first post here.

Quick question for Slim Devices: Is there any plan to add hardware support for 802.11a?

802.11a is the future! :-)

Umm...what? :-)

I thought 802.11a was in its death throes. While it is more reliable than 802.11b (more stable connection by all accounts) it can't achieve the speed of 802.11g.

I'd think 802.11n would be the future, no?

Kevin O. Lepard
2006-03-09, 22:30
>I'd think 802.11n would be the future, no?

Nah, WiMAX. That's the future.....


Kevin
--
Kevin O. Lepard

Happiness is being 100% Microsoft free.

panter
2006-03-11, 07:55
I thought 802.11a was in its death throes. While it is more reliable thant 802.11b (more stable connection by all accounts) it can't achieve the speed of 802.11g.

That is NOT correct. Have a look at the attachment from 3Com.

Anyway, 802.11a is available now and is relative unexpensive. 802.11n and Wimax are not.

Mark Lanctot
2006-03-11, 09:21
OK, I stand corrected. I had heard that it was only marginally faster than 802.11b.

It also avoids the highly congested 2.4 GHz spectrum.

However, the equipment seems to be harder to find and is more expensive than 802.11g via the sources I usually use.

panter
2006-03-11, 09:32
However, the equipment seems to be harder to find..

That is correct but still no reason for Slim Dev not to implemend hardware support.
There are a lot of 802.11a users. :-)

Mark Lanctot
2006-03-11, 09:52
You may wish to file an enhancement request at http://bugs.slimdevices.com/. It may not be my cup of tea, but if enough users vote for it, you may see it implemented. :-)

No offence, but by the time 802.11a can be implemented in a future product, 802.11n will probably be here. There may be a lot of 802.11a users, but there are far more 802.11g users, so a dual band card would have to be used. An 802.11a/g card is more expensive than an 802.11g card - an 802.11a/g Squeezebox would have to be more expensive. From a personal standpoint, I would not pay extra for 802.11a compliance as I have no intention of switching and I'm probably not alone.

802.11a would address a lot of the interference issues reported here though, I agree, but most users aren't even aware of its existence.

Once the bugs get worked out of 802.11n I will probably switch for the extra throughput for networking, but that will be 2008 at least.

Bradley
2006-03-11, 12:01
I've been using 802.11a with Squeezeboxes for over two years. Yes, it works and works very well, today!

I use these...
http://tinyurl.com/7mfwb

..plugged into WIRED squeezeboxes. Let's me run 108MB turbo (dual channel) WEP mode to anywhere I need to.

The Squeezeboxes (both SB3's and SB1's) work flawlessly -- no dropouts, skips, hangs, etc.

*Bradley

MrC
2006-03-11, 12:42
Have a look at the attachment from 3Com.
Let's talk about something in its death throes.



Anyway, 802.11a is available now and is relative unexpensive. 802.11n and Wimax are not.

But 802.11a is *not* available now in the slim hardware, os, or support infrastructure!

Indeed 802.11a is here, but as the "Betamax" of the networking protocols, it is a technology that has not, and will not, achieve broad, mainstream acceptance. Changing chipsets and adding additional development and support costs to support a marginal technology is not a profit-making strategy.

Gregory P. Smith
2006-03-20, 02:23
On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 08:32:57AM -0800, panter wrote:
>
> Mark Lanctot Wrote:
> > However, the equipment seems to be harder to find..
>
> That is correct but still no reason for Slim Dev not to implemend
> hardware support.
> There are a lot of 802.11a users. :-)

An extra $5-10/unit in hardware costs is reason enough given that most
people do not use 11a.