PDA

View Full Version : 802.11n Devices



bgriffis
2008-12-23, 10:55
Can anyone comment on future support for 802.11n? Specifically I am referring to any new devices planned that will include 5 GHz 802.11n WiFi.

I'd like to buy a Squeezebox for the kitchen, but the problem is that when the microwave is turned on there is a lot of interference on the 2.4 GHz band.

Another benefit of true 802.11n support is that I could configure my 802.11n network for the Greenfield mode of operation such that my other 802.11n devices can achieve highest throughput.

Another alternative that would be great would be if Logitech offered an upgrade module (i.e. a new mini-PCI card) that would allow me to upgrade devices to 802.11n.

I'd like to buy another Squeezebox but I don't want to get stuck with a bunch of 802.11g equipment. I'd like everything on my network to be 802.11n within 18 months.

Brad

pfarrell
2008-12-23, 11:04
bgriffis wrote:
> Can anyone comment on future support for 802.11n?

SlimDevices/Logitech never comment on future products.

> I'd like everything on my network to be
> 802.11n within 18 months.

Do you think that the spec will be real by then?
And of course, 11p will be stared as soon as 11n is final.

--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

CatBus
2008-12-23, 12:35
You'll need to wait 11 months or so before it's even possible to make an 802.11n device, and that's if the ratification process stays on schedule. However if you start shopping 18 months from now, I'd say you're likely to find 802.11n devices on the market, possibly even some from SlimDevices.

I sincerely hope SlimDevices doesn't join the crowd of manufacturers claiming to support 802.11n before it's possible to truthfully make such a statement.

chrisla
2008-12-23, 12:52
802.11a is also 5Ghz. I think the squeezebox does that? Streaming MP3s
does not take much bandwidth. Wonder if it would work?

-Chris

On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 11:35 AM, CatBus
<CatBus.3kvzon1230061201 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> You'll need to wait 11 months or so before it's even possible to make an
> 802.11n device, and that's if the ratification process stays on
> schedule. However if you start shopping 18 months from now, I'd say
> you're likely to find 802.11n devices on the market, possibly even some
> from SlimDevices.
>
> I sincerely hope SlimDevices doesn't join the crowd of manufacturers
> claiming to support 802.11n before it's possible to truthfully make
> such a statement.
>
>
> --
> CatBus
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> CatBus's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7461
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=57042
>
>

iPhone
2008-12-23, 14:00
You'll need to wait 11 months or so before it's even possible to make an 802.11n device, and that's if the ratification process stays on schedule. However if you start shopping 18 months from now, I'd say you're likely to find 802.11n devices on the market, possibly even some from SlimDevices.

I sincerely hope SlimDevices doesn't join the crowd of manufacturers claiming to support 802.11n before it's possible to truthfully make such a statement.

Slim Devices has made it more then clear on this Forum that they Do Not Intend to go to "N" anytime soon or in the near future. Could that change tomorrow, sure.

Past reasons for not moving to "N":
There is not a standardized official specification at this time.
It would add an unnecessary expense to unit cost.
Most importantly, its not really needed for what the Squeezeboxes do at this time.

CatBus
2008-12-23, 14:33
Most importantly, its not really needed for what the Squeezeboxes do at this time.

I disagree here. Sure, if bandwidth were the only consideration, they don't even need to use 802.11g. But there's range considerations too. Considering that they've got new portable devices (Controller, Boom) and users are already fighting with range issues within the confines of their own houses (see comments in bug#6085), it would be an improvement, at least in some cases. And it'd probably be a noticeable improvement for the original poster too.

Maybe not enough to justify the per-unit cost, but it'd be an improvement. If I were SlimDevices it certainly wouldn't be my biggest priority, but it'd still be on the list. If the list included technologies that do not yet exist, such as 802.11n...

peter
2008-12-23, 23:48
CatBus wrote:
> iPhone;375006 Wrote:
>
>> Most importantly, its not really needed for what the Squeezeboxes do at
>> this time.
>>
>
> I disagree here. Sure, if bandwidth were the only consideration, they
> don't even need to use 802.11g. But there's range considerations too.
> Considering that they've got new portable devices (Controller, Boom) and
> users are already fighting with range issues within the confines of
> their own houses (see comments in bug#6085), it would be an
> improvement, at least in some cases. And it'd probably be a noticeable
> improvement for the original poster too.
>

Bandwidth is certainly an issue when streaming flacs to multiple SB's
over the same wireless network. Even more so when the server is also
wirelessly connected. I try to do everything wired.

> Maybe not enough to justify the per-unit cost, but it'd be an
> improvement. If I were SlimDevices it certainly wouldn't be my biggest
> priority, but it'd still be on the list. If the list included
> technologies that do not yet exist, such as 802.11n...
>

They're probably already testing a number of cards. However in the light
of wifi problems of the past I can imagine they're not eager to jump
into an unfinished N standard.

Regards,
Peter

funkstar
2008-12-24, 04:21
802.11a is also 5Ghz. I think the squeezebox does that? Streaming MP3s
does not take much bandwidth. Wonder if it would work?
No, 802.11b and 802.11g only.

pablolie
2008-12-26, 19:05
Slim Devices has made it more then clear on this Forum that they Do Not Intend to go to "N" anytime soon or in the near future. Could that change tomorrow, sure.

Past reasons for not moving to "N":
There is not a standardized official specification at this time.
It would add an unnecessary expense to unit cost.
Most importantly, its not really needed for what the Squeezeboxes do at this time.

The standard is not finalized, but it seems pretty finalized. Vendors that claim 802.11n support clearly say it's "draft", and supposedly unlikely to change very much (which is unfortunate, since supposedly as soon as your neighbor upgrades to 802.11n, it will interefere with the 802.11g/b bands, forcing adoption of 802.11n...).

But on the other hand, while I agree that bandwidth is not a bottleneck for music transmission, it may help response time of slim client devices. But then again I also assume that the bottleneck then quickly becomes the processing power on said slim client. By all means, though, I think a product like the Controller could potentially benefit from additional bandwidth.

Mitch Harding
2008-12-26, 22:54
It would also be beneficial to folks using their Slim Devices are wireless
bridges.

On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 8:05 PM, pablolie <
pablolie.3l21qn1230343801 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:

>
> iPhone;375006 Wrote:
> > Slim Devices has made it more then clear on this Forum that they *Do Not
> > Intend* to go to "N" anytime soon or in the near future. Could that
> > change tomorrow, sure.
> >
> > Past reasons for not moving to "N":
> > There is not a standardized official specification at this time.
> > It would add an unnecessary expense to unit cost.
> > Most importantly, its not really needed for what the Squeezeboxes do at
> > this time.
>
> The standard is not finalized, but it seems pretty finalized. Vendors
> that claim 802.11n support clearly say it's "draft", and supposedly
> unlikely to change very much (which is unfortunate, since supposedly as
> soon as your neighbor upgrades to 802.11n, it will interefere with the
> 802.11g/b bands, forcing adoption of 802.11n...).
>
> But on the other hand, while I agree that bandwidth is not a bottleneck
> for music transmission, it may help response time of slim client
> devices. But then again I also assume that the bottleneck then quickly
> becomes the processing power on said slim client. By all means, though,
> I think a product like the Controller could potentially benefit from
> additional bandwidth.
>
>
> --
> pablolie
>
> ...pablo
> Server: 3.3 GHz Intel E8600 Core 2 Duo (8GB) - Vista Ultimate 64 &
> Ubuntu 8.10 64
> Sources: SB3 (4), SB Boom (2), Duet, Accuphase DP65v CD
> Amplifier: Accuphase E306v
> Loudspeakers: Ceeroy 3-way tuned by Darmstadt Psychoacoustics Lab
> Headphones: Grado SR-1
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> pablolie's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3816
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=57042
>
>

bgriffis
2008-12-30, 10:50
Thanks for all your replies. There were some other good reasons given for why 802.11n (or "Draft N" currently) should be added to devices.

Summary of Benefits
* 5 GHz operation avoids interference from microwaves, phones, etc.
* Gives ability for people to use "Greenfield" mode for increased throughput (i.e. all N network)
* Increased range from MIMO technology
* Better throughput for people using their SB as a wireless bridge

Recommendation
* In order to keep costs down while still offering these benefits to those who want/need it, the best scenario would be if Logitech offered a replacement mini-PCI Wifi to support 802.11n. I'm sure they could sell this device at a nice profit and everyone would be happy.

Side note
* Some people seem to be against using this technology because "it's not a finished spec." Everything I've read indicates that current hardware will be firmware upgradeable to be compliant with the final 802.11n spec. Note that although the spec is not yet ratified, there are still quality controls in place. The Wifi Alliance does interoperability testing and has a "Draft N" certification process. The "Draft N" equipment has been available for quite some time and seems to have matured quite a bit. I too was wary of this certification early on, but now that I see how long the 802.11n spec is dragging on I think it was a smart move by the Wifi Alliance in creating this intermediate certification. I'm sure lots of great inputs have made their way into the final spec as a result of all the real-world usage that has resulted. Also, people who need the range/throughput of 802.11n have gotten access to it years sooner.

CatBus
2008-12-30, 11:02
Everything I've read indicates that current hardware will be firmware upgradeable to be compliant with the final 802.11n spec

Everything I've read says this too. But the spec is being written by those who stand to profit more if the final spec is NOT firmware upgradable from existing products (because they can sell us another one!). Consumer electronics has a long, ugly history of completely unneccessary incompatibilities being foisted on consumers to shore up profit margins. 802.11n may be an exception, maybe not.

pfarrell
2008-12-30, 11:19
CatBus wrote:
> bgriffis;377323 Wrote:
>> Everything I've read indicates that current hardware will be firmware
>> upgradeable to be compliant with the final 802.11n spec
>
> Everything I've read says this too. But the spec is being written by
> those who stand to profit more if the final spec is NOT firmware
> upgradable from existing products (because they can sell us another
> one!). Consumer electronics has a long, ugly history of completely
> unneccessary incompatibilities being foisted on consumers to shore up
> profit margins. 802.11n may be an exception, maybe not.

As the great philosopher Yogi Berra said, It aint' over 'til its over.

There are folks arguing, with good cause, that 11n should more strongly
deprecate the 2.4gHz band, keep it only for legacy interaction. This
would be a good thing, IMHO, but its contentious.

The important point today is that since its not final, there are not
tons of small, power efficient, inexpensive chips to handle it. Its not
mass market ready -- today its for early adopters.

The only fact here is that SlimDevices/Logitech never comments on future
products.

My prediction, and I'm a user/customer, not an insider, is that there
will be nothing about 11n until Mouser and DigiKey have lots of
commercially ready products, in stock.

All the discussion on the forums of the world isn't going to change that.

--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

funkstar
2009-01-02, 07:11
Recommendation
* In order to keep costs down while still offering these benefits to those who want/need it, the best scenario would be if Logitech offered a replacement mini-PCI Wifi to support 802.11n. I'm sure they could sell this device at a nice profit and everyone would be happy.
Also remember that a 802.11n card will need a new set of drivers. There is already a lack of flash memory in the SB2/3/Boom/Reciever/Transporter, adding this code would probably not be possible. That just leaves the Controller as the only one with enough flash memory space. And it uses an embeded wireless chip not a seperate card. Because of the realtime nature of the devices, modular firmware is not possible according to Sean Adams.

Future product will include 802.11n. Sometime. Eventually. Maybe :)

Osamede
2009-08-31, 01:23
I've been looking at buying an "N" router for almost a year now and could not conclude that any of them were finished products or worth the time over a godo G router.

Real N is supposed to be 3-radio devices with 3 antennas. Try finding those on the market. Basically you cant.

This does need to wait until the N standard is complete - and until manufactuers actually make real N routers and access points. I applaud Logitech for refusing to throw a half-finished product in this thing.

Anyone who wants N and G for now should just add a extra access point if they really want to waste their money.

bernt
2009-08-31, 01:46
802.11g devices works better with a MIMO AP\Router.

Not for speed but for range and signal strength.

If you have dropouts it's probably because of weak signal strength or interference, not bandwidth.

I replaced my 802.11g router with a N router with 3 antennas and that made a huge difference

SuperQ
2009-09-01, 13:44
802.11g devices works better with a MIMO AP\Router.

Not for speed but for range and signal strength.

If you have dropouts it's probably because of weak signal strength or interference, not bandwidth.

I replaced my 802.11g router with a N router with 3 antennas and that made a huge difference

I can very much confirm this. I switched from a basic 11g router to a dual-band-N draft (airport extreme simultaneous-dual-band). I used to get a lot of reconnects with my Squeezebox Controller. Now it works flawlessly.