PDA

View Full Version : Refreshed hardware this year for N networks?



Evan55
2009-03-19, 20:45
Ive recently discovered the Squeezebox Duet and fell in love with it (well, on paper anyway) but I have just moved over to an entirely N network, and Id really rather not run a separate G network too.
Since the new Linksys/Cisco and some of other audio streamers now run on N networks, any rumors that Squeezebox will be updating their hardware to support N networks? (maybe with some new features thrown in too? :) )

pfarrell
2009-03-19, 20:53
Evan55 wrote:
> any rumors that Squeezebox will be updating their
> hardware to support N networks?

SlimDevices/Logitech never comments on future products.

But I would not expect them to support N until its actually released as
a spec. So far, its only a draft. And for some reason, getting it
officially voted in as a standard is taking years.

seanadams
2009-03-19, 21:27
Duet, and g devices in general, play just fine with n. You won't have issues as with b+g.

peter
2009-03-19, 23:13
Pat Farrell wrote:
> Evan55 wrote:
>
>> any rumors that Squeezebox will be updating their
>> hardware to support N networks?
>>
>
> SlimDevices/Logitech never comments on future products.
>
> But I would not expect them to support N until its actually released as
> a spec. So far, its only a draft. And for some reason, getting it
> officially voted in as a standard is taking years
That holier than thou attitude could be very damaging to business. I
figure LT/SD are smarter that that.

X.

pfarrell
2009-03-19, 23:27
Peter wrote:
> That holier than thou attitude could be very damaging to business. I
> figure LT/SD are smarter that that.

What justifies your insulting attitude?

Its not a spec. The router vendors are selling it, and selling NICs to
go with it. And perhaps the final version will match. If not, what does
a vendor do with all the deployed units that can't be made to match the
spec.

When Linksys, Netgear, Trendnet, and D-Link start selling units that
they guarantee will interoperate, then it becomes a different story.

I love standards, there are so many of them to chose from.

Goodsounds
2009-03-20, 00:03
SlimDevices/Logitech never comments on future products.

Every time I see someone make that comment in these forums it makes me smile. Because it's not unusual with technology products and companies.

Doing anything other than that would be unusual, in my experience.

Companies rarely announce products too much in advance. Especially hardware products. Lots of planning is involved. The announcement of new products can kill sales of current products. Done wrong, the consequence can be to completely crater revenue for some period of time and get stuck with an oversupply of inventory customers don't want to buy. Very bad news when such things happen.

So, no more pushing and shoving, it's not because of anyone's attitude one way or the other.

Nonreality
2009-03-20, 01:14
I've been using a N router with my SB3 for over a year now and I've never had a problem with the setup. Not one. It's been a great combo, rock solid.

funkstar
2009-03-20, 01:50
Ive recently discovered the Squeezebox Duet and fell in love with it (well, on paper anyway) but I have just moved over to an entirely N network, and Id really rather not run a separate G network too.
Since the new Linksys/Cisco and some of other audio streamers now run on N networks, any rumors that Squeezebox will be updating their hardware to support N networks? (maybe with some new features thrown in too? :) )
I'm currently running two hardware players over my N network and they work just fine in G mode. Shame about my Nintendo DS which makes the whole network shut down, transfers drop to a handful of bytes a second.

You don't need a seperate network for G devices. 802.11n has been designed specifically to work will with legacy devices, it actually gives signal strength and range improvements for existing hardware.

servies
2009-03-20, 04:10
You're all perfectly right in your comments that (draft) N routers perfectly work with G devices and that the Squeezebox family also works perfectly with draft N networks...
But that's not the point... At the moment you have mixed G and (draft) N devices you're practically running 2 separate wireless networks.
If you have hardly any connection between you Squeezebox device and a G router because of walls, distance etc. you probably will have hardly any connection between your Squeezebox device and a (draft) N router.
When the Squeezebox gets an upgrade with a (draft) N wireless card you can disable the G type network and be N only...

rolski
2009-03-20, 04:18
Slightly confused :-

I have a router that I can switch to n-only, or b+g. I would prefer to use n for my laptop & other devices, but whenever I've tried n my Duet Controller can't find the network (Receiver is hard-wired).

Are you saying that if a WLAN is set to n only, it is still legacy-compatible with g devices i.e. if I switch to n only, should my Controller work ok ?

servies
2009-03-20, 04:44
Slightly confused :-

I have a router that I can switch to n-only, or b+g. I would prefer to use n for my laptop & other devices, but whenever I've tried n my Duet Controller can't find the network (Receiver is hard-wired).

Are you saying that if a WLAN is set to n only, it is still legacy-compatible with g devices i.e. if I switch to n only, should my Controller work ok ?
If you set your router to N only the controller won't be able to connect. It's not the N protocol that's backwards compatible, it's your router that's backwards compatible... Your router can facilitate a G and a N wireless network at the same time.

rolski
2009-03-20, 05:29
Your router can facilitate a G and a N wireless network at the same time.
Actually, according to the options available, it can do B, G, B+G and N, but no other combinations.
As my attempts with N have failed I would assume the the backwards-compatibility with G is simply not programmed / implemented correctly, so I'm stuck with B+G....
It's a Deutsche Telekom T-Online Speedport W 920V, fyi.

servies
2009-03-20, 05:53
Actually, according to the options available, it can do B, G, B+G and N, but no other combinations.
As my attempts with N have failed I would assume the the backwards-compatibility with G is simply not programmed / implemented correctly, so I'm stuck with B+G....
It's a Deutsche Telekom T-Online Speedport W 920V, fyi.

Oops, my mistake, it should have read:

Normally your router can facilitate a G and a N wireless network simultaneously at the same time.
Apparantly the one you have doesn't...

peter
2009-03-20, 08:57
Pat Farrell wrote:
> Peter wrote:
>
>> That holier than thou attitude could be very damaging to business. I
>> figure LT/SD are smarter that that.
>>
>
> What justifies your insulting attitude?
>
Your unrealistic opinion.
What's insulting about it?

Read: If SD would adopt/continue this holier that thou attitude. You're
not SD are you?

> Its not a spec. The router vendors are selling it, and selling NICs to
> go with it. And perhaps the final version will match. If not, what does
> a vendor do with all the deployed units that can't be made to match the
> spec.
>
> When Linksys, Netgear, Trendnet, and D-Link start selling units that
> they guarantee will interoperate, then it becomes a different story.
>
> I love standards, there are so many of them to chose from.
>

The plain fact is that buyers will consider a media streamer that does
not support pre-N outdated. In fact they're already doing so, see the
starting post. If the competition is offering pre-N devices, any
sensible business will have to do the same.

Regards,
Peter

Goodsounds
2009-03-20, 09:24
The plain fact is that buyers will consider a media streamer that does
not support pre-N outdated. In fact they're already doing so, see the
starting post. If the competition is offering pre-N devices, any
sensible business will have to do the same.



I'm with pfarell on this one Peter, I think you're wrong.

If you asked most people what kind of network they have at home, most would say "a wifi network", or "a PC network", "an internet network", etc. You get the picture.

The broad market, to whom these products are intended, don't know or care about the technology so long as it works. G works with the various pre-N approaches, end of story. There's no reason for the company to guess or anticipate where the standard gets resolved. Buyers don't care. The original poster is thinking too hard about things he has limited understanding of ("I'd rather not run a separate G...) like many people around here

If this were a product line intended solely for geeks, the company would have failed long ago.

seanadams
2009-03-20, 09:30
You're all perfectly right in your comments that (draft) N routers perfectly work with G devices and that the Squeezebox family also works perfectly with draft N networks...

I'm not sure you actually got what I was saying.


But that's not the point... At the moment you have mixed G and (draft) N devices you're practically running 2 separate wireless networks.

What do you mean?


If you have hardly any connection between you Squeezebox device and a G router because of walls, distance etc. you probably will have hardly any connection between your Squeezebox device and a (draft) N router.

If you're suggesting that a N router is no better than a G router as far as G clients are concerned, you are wrong! In fact G clients do benefit from the multipath reception capabilities of an N access point.


When the Squeezebox gets an upgrade with a (draft) N wireless card you can disable the G type network and be N only...

Sorry but you really have this wrong. You are under the misconception that G devices slow down N devices, in the way that B devices slow down G devices. It is simply not true. You should test it if you don't believe me. Do a file transfer between to an N device across your wireless LAN, then turn off all your G devices and do it again.

peter
2009-03-20, 09:49
Goodsounds wrote:
> peter;408392 Wrote:
>
>> The plain fact is that buyers will consider a media streamer that does
>>
>> not support pre-N outdated. In fact they're already doing so, see the
>> starting post. If the competition is offering pre-N devices, any
>> sensible business will have to do the same.
>>
>>
>>
>
> I'm with pfarell on this one Peter, I think you're wrong.
>
> If you asked most people what kind of network they have at home, most
> would say "a wifi network", or "a PC network", "an internet network",
> etc. You get the picture.
>

Sure, I get it. But if they see the boxes on the shelf and one has Fast
N! And the other has Slow g! on it, they'll know which one has the
advantage. Especially when the salesman says, this one has a faster
wireless network! Also when the CNet comparison lists G-only support as
a negative. Well, you get my point ;)

> The broad market, to whom these products are intended, don't know or
> care about the technology so long as it works. G works with the various
> pre-N approaches, end of story. There's no reason for the company to
> guess or anticipate where the standard gets resolved. Buyers don't
> care. The original poster is thinking too hard about things he has
> limited understanding of ("I'd rather not run a separate G...) like
> many people around here
>
> If this were a product intended solely for geeks, the company would
> have failed long ago.
>

You don't see many companies shipping B-devices these days, do you?

Regards,
Peter

peter
2009-03-20, 09:55
seanadams wrote:
> servies;408287 Wrote:
>
>> You're all perfectly right in your comments that (draft) N routers
>> perfectly work with G devices and that the Squeezebox family also works
>> perfectly with draft N networks...
>>
>
> I'm not sure you actually got what I was saying.
>
>
>> But that's not the point... At the moment you have mixed G and (draft) N
>> devices you're practically running 2 separate wireless networks.
>>
>
> What do you mean?
>
>
>> If you have hardly any connection between you Squeezebox device and a G
>> router because of walls, distance etc. you probably will have hardly
>> any connection between your Squeezebox device and a (draft) N router.
>>
>
> If you're suggesting that a N router is no better than a G router as
> far as G clients are concerned, you are wrong! In fact G clients do
> benefit from the multipath reception capabilities of an N access
> point.
>
>
>> When the Squeezebox gets an upgrade with a (draft) N wireless card you
>> can disable the G type network and be N only...
>>
>
> Sorry but you really have this wrong. You are under the misconception
> that G devices slow down N devices, in the way that B devices slow down
> G devices. It is simply not true. You should test it if you don't
> believe me. Do a file transfer between to an N device across your
> wireless LAN, then turn off all your G devices and do it again.
>
MyD-link 633 seems to think there's some advantage to be had in using
N-only mode:

"If all of the wireless devices you want to connect with this router can
connect in the same transmission mode, you can improve performance
slightly by choosing the appropriate "Only" mode. If you have some
devices that use a different transmission mode, choose the appropriate
"Mixed" mode."

Also using a mixed mode precludes you from using the 5 Ghz N-mode, and
as Wikipedia says:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless-N#Deployment_Strategies
"To achieve maximum throughput a pure 802.11n 5 GHz network is recommended."

So there seem to be some disadvantages.
I don't worry about them and run a mixed network in which my SB's and
server are wired.

Regards,
Peter

seanadams
2009-03-20, 09:58
You don't see many companies shipping B-devices these days, do you?


Sigh... No, because B is bad and B is dead. There is no reason to use B.

G, on the other hand, is quite alive and well, and has significant advantages over N in portable devices. Lower power consumption, fewer antennas, and lower cost due to smaller silicon area and fewer components.

Furthermore, there is no benefit to higher throughput, as far as a music streamer is concerned - 20Mbps actual throughput is no better than 10Mbps when you're streaming at a maximum of 0.75Mbps. And there is not much to be gained in terms of range, beyond what is gained by having an N AP.

The iPhone 3g does not have 802.11n. Was it just beyond the capabilities of a $100B company, or could there be another reason?

seanadams
2009-03-20, 10:09
MyD-link 633 seems to think there's some advantage to be had in using
N-only mode:

"If all of the wireless devices you want to connect with this router can
connect in the same transmission mode, you can improve performance
slightly by choosing the appropriate "Only" mode. If you have some
devices that use a different transmission mode, choose the appropriate
"Mixed" mode."

Also using a mixed mode precludes you from using the 5 Ghz N-mode, and
as Wikipedia says:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless-N#Deployment_Strategies
"To achieve maximum throughput a pure 802.11n 5 GHz network is recommended."

So there seem to be some disadvantages.
I don't worry about them and run a mixed network in which my SB's and
server are wired.

Regards,
Peter

They are wrong - or at least, they're not saying what you think they're saying. Again, you're citing an entrenched idea that is a holdover from the days of 802.11b, which actually did NOT interoperate well with g.

B devices DO slow down all devices on a G network, just by being connected to the AP, even if they are idle. (not exactly to 802.11b speeds, but by about half).

This is simply NOT TRUE of G devices on an N network.

I am not surprised that a consumer network company that wants you to upgrade all your NICs would continue to say it.

I really think you should test this. Its very easy. I have.

pfarrell
2009-03-20, 10:16
Goodsounds wrote:
> Every time I see someone make that comment in these forums it makes me
> smile. Because it's not unusual with technology products and companies.
>
> Doing anything other than that would be unusual, in my experience.

Smart companies have been doing it for a long time, although at things
like technical conferences, you can usually pick up hints, say the
Intel/Microsoft Hardware conference.

Dumb companies watched Osborn Computers die because of blabbing about
how great the new product would be, killing sales of the old one, and
got smarter.

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

pfarrell
2009-03-20, 10:19
Peter wrote:
> Sure, I get it. But if they see the boxes on the shelf and one has Fast
> N! And the other has Slow g! on it, they'll know which one has the
> advantage.

You are streaming audio. Uncompressed wav/pcm is 1.5 megabits/second. No
problem for a good 11b link, no problem for any 11g link.

There is zero advantage of "speed" using 11n.

Don't fall into the marketing spin.

The 11b slowing down 11g was a problem, but its not applicable in this
discussion.

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

funkstar
2009-03-20, 10:49
There is zero advantage of "speed" using 11n.

Don't fall into the marketing spin.
Peter does have a point though. Even if he doesn't fall for the marketing spin, others probably will, and this is bad for the Squeeze community over all.

perhaps a sticker on the box stating it is "Compatible with N network (using G compatability mode)" is all it would need :D

peter
2009-03-20, 11:32
seanadams wrote:
> peter;408421 Wrote:
>
>> MyD-link 633 seems to think there's some advantage to be had in using
>> N-only mode:
>>
>> "If all of the wireless devices you want to connect with this router
>> can
>> connect in the same transmission mode, you can improve performance
>> slightly by choosing the appropriate "Only" mode. If you have some
>> devices that use a different transmission mode, choose the appropriate
>>
>> "Mixed" mode."
>>
>> Also using a mixed mode precludes you from using the 5 Ghz N-mode, and
>>
>> as Wikipedia says:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless-N#Deployment_Strategies
>> "To achieve maximum throughput a pure 802.11n 5 GHz network is
>> recommended."
>>
>> So there seem to be some disadvantages.
>> I don't worry about them and run a mixed network in which my SB's and
>> server are wired.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Peter
>>
>
> They are wrong. Again, that thinking is a holdover from the days of
> 802.11b, which actually did NOT interoperate well with g.
>
> B devices DO slow down all devices on a G network, just by being
> connected to the AP, even if they are idle. (not exactly to 802.11b
> speeds, but much slower).
>
> This is simply NOT TRUE of G devices on an N network.
>
I believe it's not the same as the B-G issue.

> I am not surprised that some guy editing wikipedia, or a consumer
> network company that wants you to upgrade all your NICs would continue
> to say it.
>
> I really think you should test this. Its very easy. I have.

Yeah, you have a multi-million dollar company and a financial stake in
the outcome ;)

I have 12 wifi networks within range of my laptop using the same
wavelength. Surely, using 5 Ghz
in such an environment is an advantage?

Regards,
Peter

peter
2009-03-20, 11:35
funkstar wrote:
> pfarrell;408437 Wrote:
>
>> There is zero advantage of "speed" using 11n.
>>
>> Don't fall into the marketing spin.
>>
> Peter does have a point though. Even if he doesn't fall for the
> marketing spin, others probably will, and this is bad for the Squeeze
> community over all.
>
> perhaps a sticker on the box stating it is "Compatible with N network
> (using G compatability mode)" is all it would need :D

Exactly. I'm a network nerd. I don't fall for the marketing. But it
*will* hurt sales, because others aren't as sophisticated as me. ;)

Regards,
Peter

peter
2009-03-20, 11:41
seanadams wrote:
> peter;408414 Wrote:
>
>> You don't see many companies shipping B-devices these days, do you?
>>
>>
>
> Sigh... No, because B is bad and B is dead. There is no reason to use
> B.
>

When I bought my SB1 it was still very much alive.
Now my SB1 is still working fine but I can't use it on my G network :(
I sure wish I'd bought a G SB1 then, I could still use it ;)

An N-SB would probably last me longer.

> G, on the other hand, is quite alive and well, and has significant
> advantages over N in portable devices. Lower power consumption, fewer
> antennas, and lower cost due to smaller silicon area and fewer
> components.
>
> Furthermore, there is no benefit to higher throughput, as far as a
> music streamer is concerned - 20Mbps actual throughput is no better
> than 10Mbps when you're streaming at a maximum of 0.75Mbps. And there
> is not much to be gained in terms of range, beyond what is gained by
> having an N AP.
>
> The iPhone 3g does not have 802.11n. Was it just beyond the
> capabilities of a $100B company, or could there be another reason?
>

It's a tiny low power device. N-support would probably cost them dearly
(you don't seem to be able to run an N router over Poe either).
Apple does sell Airports and Airport Express with N-support. Why? Simply
because people want them. And, as I believe they say in your country:
The customer is always right ;)

Regards,
Peter

seanadams
2009-03-20, 11:54
I have 12 wifi networks within range of my laptop using the same
wavelength. Surely, using 5 Ghz
in such an environment is an advantage?


5GHz is not a panacea, and it's unlikely that you're even running the "all 5GHz" environment that you're imagining. Those laptops are probably on the 2.4GHz band if they're in another room from the AP. As I said, you should just test it - it would only take a few minutes. We're going in circles at this point.

seanadams
2009-03-20, 12:07
When I bought my SB1 it was still very much alive.
Now my SB1 is still working fine but I can't use it on my G network :(
I sure wish I'd bought a G SB1 then, I could still use it ;)

Not really. G was available by then, and the B/G interoperability issues were generally understood. Even during the production lifetime of SB1, 802.11g modules had become cheaper than 802.11b, but the difficulty of interfacing 802.11g modules in an embedded system required us to completely re-architect (with SB2) to support them.

SB1 might have stayed in production a lot longer if B hadn't died so abruptly. As it happened, it gave us some very strong motivation to get SB2 out the door - we actually reached the point where we could no longer source the 802.11b modules, and would have otherwise had no wireless product for a while.

gharris999
2009-03-20, 12:53
Sigh... No, because B is bad and B is dead. There is no reason to use B.

G, on the other hand, is quite alive and well, and has significant advantages over N in portable devices. Lower power consumption, fewer antennas, and lower cost due to smaller silicon area and fewer components.

Furthermore, there is no benefit to higher throughput, as far as a music streamer is concerned - 20Mbps actual throughput is no better than 10Mbps when you're streaming at a maximum of 0.75Mbps. And there is not much to be gained in terms of range, beyond what is gained by having an N AP.

The iPhone 3g does not have 802.11n. Was it just beyond the capabilities of a $100B company, or could there be another reason?
Sean: I'm sorry to say this, but you're totally wrong. Apple is a 89.901B company. ;)

Evan55
2009-03-20, 13:21
Duet, and g devices in general, play just fine with n. You won't have issues as with b+g.

I'm currently running two hardware players over my N network and they work just fine in G mode. You don't need a seperate network for G devices. 802.11n has been designed specifically to work will with legacy devices, it actually gives signal strength and range improvements for existing hardware.



Logging onto an N network with a G device in mixed mode will "work" but it brings the speed of the entire network down. (with the exception of expensive routers that have separate N and G radios and hence networks)
I transfer lots of large files across my network to my HTPC so lowering transfer speeds is something I want to avoid.

Which is why my original question was if anyone heard any rumors about an N squeezebox, not if squeezebox works with an N network ;)

Evan55
2009-03-20, 13:25
Peter wrote:
> That holier than thou attitude could be very damaging to business. I
> figure LT/SD are smarter that that.


Its not a spec. The router vendors are selling it, and selling NICs to
go with it. And perhaps the final version will match. If not, what does
a vendor do with all the deployed units that can't be made to match the
spec.

When Linksys, Netgear, Trendnet, and D-Link start selling units that
they guarantee will interoperate, then it becomes a different story.

thats really not true. Draft 1.0 and Draft 2.0 have been specs. Draft 2.0 hardware is required to be compatible with Draft 1.0, and N final is required to be compatible with D1.0 and D2.0 Each spec has been additive in nature so the previous Drafts are fully compatible just not with as many features (for example draft 1.0 had no 5ghz band but draft 2.0 does)
so there is very little risk in releasing N hardware (especially when your competitors are!)

"pre-N" on the other hand is what you are referring to, where manufactures guessed on the spec, but those havent been sold in a few years (and most have been firmware updated to draft anyway)

Evan55
2009-03-20, 13:27
but anyway, back to the original question.

what have Squeezebox's product cycles typically been? Do they generally release new products/refreshes annually? I see the duet was released almost a year ago.

seanadams
2009-03-20, 13:37
Logging onto an N network with a G device in mixed mode will "work" but it brings the speed of the entire network down. (with the exception of expensive routers that have separate N and G radios and hence networks)

Wrong. Test it.

Evan55
2009-03-20, 13:47
Wrong. Test it.

my arrogant internet friend, you are the wrong one.
I researched benchmarks and reviews on N routers before buying and I tested it when I got my routers.
Mine went from 80mb/s in N to 25 mb/s in mixed mode, with jived with the online reviewer benchmarks.

now if you can manage to pull your foot out of your mouth, perhaps you can contribute to the original question of the thread?

servies
2009-03-20, 13:55
I'm not sure you actually got what I was saying.
But I did.

What do you mean?
Very simple: The G network is not the same 'physical' (mind the quotes) as the N network.


If you're suggesting that a N router is no better than a G router as far as G clients are concerned, you are wrong! In fact G clients do benefit from the multipath reception capabilities of an N access point.
Oh, sure it does benefit, but compare it to a N network and the gain in usable range isn't that great...


Sorry but you really have this wrong. You are under the misconception that G devices slow down N devices, in the way that B devices slow down G devices. It is simply not true. You should test it if you don't believe me. Do a file transfer between to an N device across your wireless LAN, then turn off all your G devices and do it again.
Ehh... I see no point where I say that a G device slows down a N device and I know that's not the case... I just said it out of pure simplicity: if you have all N devices why would you still enable the G network?...
Hmmm, I never thought about my smartphone...

seanadams
2009-03-20, 13:58
my arrogant internet friend, you are the wrong one.
I researched benchmarks and reviews on N routers before buying and I tested it when I got my routers.
Mine went from 80mb/s in N to 25 mb/s in mixed mode, with jived with the online reviewer benchmarks.

now if you can manage to pull your foot out of your mouth, perhaps you can contribute to the original question of the thread?

What exactly was your mixed mode? Was that G/N only, or B/G/N? There's a _big_ difference... Mixed mode supporting 'B' backward compatibility requires a kludgy handshaking mechanism to ensure that the airwaves are clear when the faster radios want to talk. G/N does not do this, because the higher rate signalling is encapsulated with a preamble that the G radios can understand.

I have personally tested both B/G interoperability, and also G/N. I did not get the same results as you, and perhaps that gives us something interesting to discuss now. I apologize for incorrectly assuming that you hadn't tested it.

peter
2009-03-20, 14:09
Evan55 wrote:
> seanadams;408519 Wrote:
>
>> Wrong. Test it.
>>
>
> my arrogant internet friend, you are the wrong one.
>

I may occasionally disagree with him, but Sean definitely does not come
across as arrogant in this forum. Perhaps he's different IRL... ;)

> I researched benchmarks and reviews on N routers before buying and I
> tested it when I got my routers.
> Mine went from 80mb/s in N to 25 mb/s in mixed mode, with jived with
> the online reviewer benchmarks.
>
> now if you can manage to pull your foot out of your mouth, perhaps you
> can contribute to the original question of the thread?
>

He has been for a while now...
Let's keep it courteous.

Regards,
Peter

pfarrell
2009-03-20, 14:11
Evan55 wrote:
> seanadams;408519 Wrote:
>> Wrong. Test it.
>
> my arrogant internet friend, you are the wrong one.

Are you out of your mind? Sean is the head engineer who designed the
whole Slim Devices line.

I've never seen him be arrogant, and rarely has he been wrong.

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

seanadams
2009-03-20, 14:12
Evan55 wrote:
> seanadams;408519 Wrote:
>
>> Wrong. Test it.
>>
>
> my arrogant internet friend, you are the wrong one.
>

I may occasionally disagree with him, but Sean definitely does not come
across as arrogant in this forum. Perhaps he's different IRL... ;)
[color=blue]

Meh... it was snippy, I admit. Comes from reading the audiophile forum for too many years. :)

Evan55
2009-03-20, 14:25
What exactly was your mixed mode? Was that G/N only, or B/G/N? There's a _big_ difference... Mixed mode supporting 'B' backward compatibility requires a kludgy handshaking mechanism to ensure that the airwaves are clear when the faster radios want to talk. G/N does not do this, because the higher rate signalling is encapsulated with a preamble that the G radios can understand.

I have personally tested both B/G interoperability, and also G/N. I did not get the same results as you, and perhaps that gives us something interesting to discuss now. I apologize for incorrectly assuming that you hadn't tested it.

definately no B enabled, not to mention B wouldnt support WPA security anyway.
perhaps it is a deficiency of my router (and other draft 1 routers?) and not the standard, but regardless since this is the hardware (or firmware?) I have I would like to keep it N if possible.
I have several G routers also that I could set up separate networks so its not a huge deal, more just wondering if squeezebox is going to release an N version to make my life easier.
it looks to me like there were a couple years between each Squeezebox hardware version, so maybe they dont typically do yearly refreshes? (especially considering since I hear the Duet firmware has been an ongoing development...)

Goodsounds
2009-03-20, 15:35
... not to mention B wouldnt support WPA security anyway...
My router is set for WPA in mixed B/G mode (needed because I have a B device).

If the experts say that slows down throughput, I'll assume that's the case, but it works just fine for my purposes. Light duty, normally fewer than 5 PC users at the same time, plus just 2 SB3s streaming FLAC. No problems at all.

funkstar
2009-03-20, 16:51
but anyway, back to the original question.

what have Squeezebox's product cycles typically been? Do they generally release new products/refreshes annually? I see the duet was released almost a year ago.
There is no pattern.

You can see all the release dates for all models here: http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/HardwareComparison

The first four are a linear progresion of the line, eveything after the SB3 or calssic has been additions to the product lineup.

dsdreamer
2009-03-21, 05:37
Wrong. Test it.

IIRC, greenfield preamble cannot be implemented by legacy stations, but is typically used in the case of "pure 11n" mode settings in routers and APs, and has better throughput because it is shorter than mixed mode or legacy preambles.

It's been a while since I followed the progress of 11n at all closely, but I know greenfield preamble was optional, so depending on your particular equipment, going to pure 11n mode may not have invoked greenfield preamble. But that also shows the weakness of doing a test on a sub-set of the gear available and claiming that anyone who gets different results is "wrong".

Of course, I may also be wrong if they took greenfield preamble out of the spec by now. But as far as I know the WiFi Alliance is still testing for it, if implemented.


Cordially,

--dsdreamer.