What is Digg?55 Comments
- flernk, on 10/12/2007, -2/+55If Wi-Fi dies, it will be because companies charge too much for access which is too limited. A large-scale wireless connection will become a necessity in time, but as it stands, individual companies are too concerned with turning a profit to offer the public anything even resembling that future dream.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20And what about if that 'comfy spot where you don't need to move around' is in the backyard? Or sitting in your car outside someone's place who has an unsecured access point??
- oriondr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Yeah, wireless WANs are the next big thing, just like cars are going electric and walking got replaced by segways.
- lustre, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Hey, just not having to hard-wire your house is a BIG reason that close-range WiFi is and I hope continues to be significant.
Of course, there are a lot of new things happening and one of the cooler ones in the radio world is near-field communications. - merreborn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Cell internet has pretty lowsy pings -- in the 100+ millisecond range. It also requires more power, and is lower bandwidth. These all make it lousy for LAN activities -- file transfer and LAN gaming.
New WAN technology will never completely kill the LAN. It's physically impossible to do everything with a WAN link as fast as you can with a LAN link. The path from one node, to the nearest WAN router, back to a node 4 feet from you will always be much longer than a direct connection would be. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13This entire article is absurd. These are two different technologies with different uses. Wi-Fi is generally used for shorter range coverage, while WiMAX and EDGE are for much larger coverage areas. They are also designed for different markets; Wi-Fi for consumers and WiMAX/EDGE for ISPs.
Can I access my LAN with WiMAX/EDGE? No (Not directly without VPN)
Can I access my internet connection from the other end of town with Wi-Fi? No (And if you could, just imagine the spectrum pollution problems.
I remember similar articles being written in the past saying Wi-Fi was going to kill Bluetooth. While they may have some overlap, they are different technologies designed for different purposes. It's like saying the apple is going to die because they invented a better orange. - cliffzdude, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Huge assumptions:
1. Cell tech will become as fast and latency will be equal to wire/fiber
2. Security won't be an issue
3. We'll tech our way out of frequency limitations
4. Weather won't ever-ever be an issue (I for one don't want to lose my internet pipe in Florida during daily summertime showers)
5. This tool actually said: ""The reason we're so excited at Airgo is that it's the next big step from Airgo,"" - cwestpha, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I think the death of Wi-Fi would be firmly placed at the feed of the companies that make products for them. Wi-Fi is a standard, not a product to bend to your will just to make a quick buck.
If you want to blaim someone for the current problems of the standard, thank all of those Pre-n and Draft N companies. They are beating their money train so much they are alianating their clients. - Dolomite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I am still waiting for my Robot butler and having a turkey dinner in a pill. Oh yeah.. a silver jumpsuit and jet pack would be nice too.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Can it be sent down the tubes to clear out the gaming chips??
- Dolomite, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7so basically your saying it wont be obsolete?
- mulling, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Yeah, wifi is so 2005. The new hotness is a giant rats nest of ethernet and other miscellaneous wires, the bigger the better. Mine is like the size of one of those yoga balls.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I LIKE PONIES
- Murdats, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5or what if you have a DS or a wii, or a pda you really dont want to have to plug in each time you get home to do anything with it
- Paperclip1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5BANNED.
- geekee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5WiMax is 802.16
- PhantomZmoove, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I thought I was so cool 7 years ago when I put 2 LAN ports in each room of my house. Now by the time I sell it, no one will be using wired anymore. (sigh) Oh well, at least *I* got some good use out of them.
- mediaphile, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3so the 802.11n wi-fi standard makes wi-fi irrelevant by being better than wi-fi? huh?
- daRoach, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Once broadband wireless internet--offered through cell phone providers--service gets cheaper and starts to cover more area I don't see any need for Wi-Fi. As it stands, monthly charges for this type of service can be from $70 - $250 and areas are limited.
- Thex1138, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The CSIRO Australia is demonstrating 6gb transfer rates via Wi-Fi...I don't think it's headed for the grave quite yet...
http://www.csiro.au/csiro/content/standard/ps2kj.html - mediaphile, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@glafira:
why have one comfy spot when i can use the internet in any comfy spot in or around my house?
also, why be limited to a comfy spot near my house when i can have broadband internet on the uncomfortable subway train?
all i can think of when reading your comment is the guy in the south park WoW episode. i'm pretty sure he found his comfy spot too. - crexor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2ethernet is still a viable solution to many things, 100% secure, as long as someone doesnt break into your house, along with gigabit ethernet(even though this is only theoretical speed, and actual throughput may differ), but regardless ethernet is perfect for many "mission critical" applications when you dont want to worry about someone turning the microwave on, and your signal dropping/etc.
- dpsteyn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Here in the caribbean (Curacao) the whole island is covered with both 3G CDMA and WiMax..no one even really bothers with the dsl, why would you if you can just sit on the beach and get an instant 1Mbit connection. Ya its not as fast as I was used to in North America but it's getting better and the range is far better than the spotty Wi-Fi networks around.
- bbear, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I have broadband wireless internet with Verizon and the latency sucks. The data rate is also 50 times slower than 802.11g and 100+ times slower than 802.11n. On top of this Verizon puts a hard limit on how much data you can download in a month. Go over 5GB and they terminate your account.
- implementor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's apples and oranges. WiFi is a local network; WiMax, cellular internet, etc. are all wide-area networks. Local networks will always have their uses inside homes, businesses, etc.
- geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2In the utopia of the wimax world your printer would have to talk to a tower in order to talk to your computer.
Yes, it's absurd. wimax will not replace wifi , they can both coexist believe it or not. - Hardcase, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1While I get your point, if I was sitting on the beach, it wouldn't be with a computer. I'm just saying...
- moet, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wifi is goin no where.
To many ppl and companies have integrated it into their systems - jm1234567890, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Next gen cellular technology will support packet data better and achieve lower pings.
- Grayfox777, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wi-fi dying? I don't think so...at least not anytime soon.
- Dolomite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Kinda timely that he says this days after being acquired by Qualcomm (CDMA technology). Looks like some major suck up to the VP's to me.
- ishmal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't this it's dead at all. But what he is talking about is true. A WiFi node or card is no longer a major purchase like it was a few years ago. And it shouldn't be! We certainly don't want to go back to $250 home AP's, and $150 cards.
But, IMHO, WiFi is still in its infancy. The combination of WiMax backbones and WiFi local access points in the future will mean ubiquitous Net access. These citywide WiFi rollouts will be so much cheaper when it becomes easy for them to put nodes anywhere, without needing to run a wire to each one, or even constructing a Mesh. - blackb0x, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1merre: look up mesh networks. There is no reason for a PC to talk to a router just to get to another PC on the same LAN (subnet). Why not let the PCs talk directly to each other? They both have wireless and both are on the same subnet. Going through a middleman is nothing but a waste of time and bandwidth.
- mbeast, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1All I know is that I have a wireless printer/scanner and it is one of the best pieces of equipment I have ever owned. It is really nice to not have it tied to a computer or a router/switch/hub.
- noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1When I think WiFi I think the wide area stuff, having whole cities under a wireless umbrella. I love wireless and there are plenty of home systems that make networking a dream... I have one. The big stuff just isn't there yet.
The Zune linked in because I was thinking of the larger networks... or does the ZUne broadcast its own WiFi.. havent paid it much mind.
Anyway, no 802.11 won't go anywhere until something better comes along. - ddosterschill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1what a poor ***** article
- uncoolcentral, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I can't wait for SOMETHING... and I think that something will be .n
I recently did the research for satellite internet service and was discouraged enough to write about it... http://dand.net/satellite-internet.htm - IMustBeEmo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I was hoping for worldwide Wi-Fi sometime in the future.
Personally I don't think it will die. - raabco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Short answer:
No.
Long answer:
HHHAAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLL NNNNNNAAAAAAAWWWWW!
(props to grape soda no sleep for 5 days Wii guy) - yaosio, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wi-Fi == any wireless technology. TRY AGAIN LOL
- mediaphile, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1blaim < blame
alian < alien - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1wtf did does ZUNE have to do with this? I am not defending it; in fact, the Wifi on the Zune is a joke.
That doesn't make sense. - atezun, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3"Why not let the PCs talk directly to each other? They both have wireless and both are on the same subnet. Going through a middleman is nothing but a waste of time and bandwidth."
Isn't this what a token-ring network does? - otaku13, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0IT is what i do and that article didnt make any sense, lol, i think he just took the latest buzzwords he could digg up and threw them into an article :)
- nazadus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I paid $140 for a wireless access point (netgear) because I just want a damn WAP. I don't want a router or switch (mostly because tech support people, like those at D-Link are filled with idiots who don't understand the tech and thinks that the route rMUST be on the internet or else the wireless won't work). It's also a bad ass little thing.
Now, I'll move on to my main point:
Wireless rules because you don't have to run wires.
For small companies and home owners, it ***** rules. Period. It's not going away unless the manufacterers get stupid, which is unlikely.
Now, as for those that actually move... I don't know how well mine works as I never really move AND type at the same time...
Perhaps you just bought a cheap piece?
BTW get the one with 7 antennas... I can walk to my leasing office and still access the net with 40% signal. - noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3I just don't think they've done a good job making Wi-Fi attractive. I mean, in theory it is great but when was the last time you could go from point a to point b and never lose a Wi-Fi signal? Hell, it's probably easier to ask when the last time you even picked up a Wi-Fi signal was.
This doesn't bode well for Zune either.
Face it though, we're not going to come up with anything good so long as a company has to make money off of it. Anyone know why rural areas don't have broadband yet? Because the net providers don't feel like running a cable out 10 miles to 100 customers when they can go down the street and get 100,000. Electricity faced the same problem. - aphexmandelbrot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I hated it when 802.11g came out and eliminated all a/b products.
Everyone in the world actually threw them in the trash at once. We all had punch after.
New technology =/= end of previous technology. - iandanger, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I don't think most people will switch over to using broadband from their phones, people want to be connected to their home networks, and that means WiFi.
I don't need more range, hell 802.11N is faster than my cable internet (especially with all the torrents my step father uses to eat up the bandwidth). - QuincySama, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0FYI
Bell Canada and Roggers are all ready building towers for this and is currently being sold as a Wireless broadband access.
If memory serve me correct
Corrention it's the WiMAX network, isn't that 802.11n - geekee, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2In the near future, a WiMax card in your laptop or desktop will talk directly with a tower. No need for a local wireless router.
-
Show 51 - 55 of 55 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is