Apple Hiring for Wireless 802.11ac System Test Engineers

[MacRumors]

Adding to existing rumors that Apple is planning to add high speed 802.11ac wireless networking to its lineup later in 2013, AppleBitch notes that Apple has posted a job listing for a System Test Engineer with expertise with 802.11ac network environments.

System Test Engineer - Wi-Fi (802.11)

System Test Engineering is looking for an experienced test engineer with excellent problem solving and communications skills. In this role, you will be testing, automating, leading, and working closely with the entire cross-functional team to ensure quality for Macintosh products.

- Technical knowledge of WiFi (802.11a,b,g, ac) and Ethernet network environments

802.11ac should roughly triple the speeds seen with the current 802.11n standard, supporting up to 450 Mbps on one antenna and up to 1.3 Gbps when used with three antennas as on Apple's latest Macs.

There is no indication of when Apple will begin introducing the new standard into existing products.

Article Link: Apple Hiring for Wireless 802.11ac System Test Engineers

[mattopotamus]

could someone put those speeds in laymen terms? Would an average user notice any difference when surfing the web?

[Prof.]

Originally Posted by mattopotamus

could someone put those speeds in laymen terms? Would an average user notice any different when surfing the web?

Surfing the web will probably stay the same. However, downloading and uploading...

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by mattopotamus

could someone put those speeds in laymen terms? Would an average user notice any different when surfing the web?

Only if your ISP's link is more than the current 802.11n speeds of 150/300/450/600 mbps.

Which it probably isn't.

----------

Originally Posted by Prof.

Surfing the web will probably stay the same. However, downloading and uploading...

No, downloading and uploading either, unless again, you're one of the few lucky guys to get an Internet connection at more than the 802.11n bandwidth ratings.

This is for home networking improvements. Your ISP is most probably your current bottleneck to the Internet.

[skate71290]

YES In Layman's terms this will not improve the speed of web browsing, but it will seriously improve Home Sharing (and related uses) when streaming to multiple devices simultaneously and streaming high bit-rate (high quality) and high resolution videos please include QoS when this is incorporated into your router product line!

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by skate71290

YES In Layman's terms this will not improve the speed of web browsing, but it will seriously improve Home Sharing (and related uses) when streaming to multiple devices simultaneously and streaming high bit-rate (high quality) and high resolution videos please include QoS when this is incorporated into your router product line!

Multiple streams is right. A Blu-ray disc's bitrate is what ? 40 mbps ? 50 mbps ?

This is more for network backups/transfer of large files in your home, basically replacing your Gigabit Ethernet.

[Neodym]

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

This is more for network backups/transfer of large files in your home, basically replacing your Gigabit Ethernet.

While I appreciate the improved signal coverage coming with wireless "ac" at least as much as the higher speeds, I try to have my devices (computers, NAS, printer, AppleTV etc.) on cabled Ethernet whenever possible, as the 2.4GHz band is already overcrowded and the 5GHz band is catching up already.

I somehow doubt "ac" can be a real substitute for Gigabit Ethernet, unless one lives pretty lonesome without neighbors crowding the wireless bands from all sides.

I also dislike transmitting too much private information over wireless, as it can be tapped much easier than cabled communication - WPA2 notwithstanding.

Not to mention that cabled will probably allow for decent priced 10Gbit components by the time "ac" is widely adopted...

[stridemat]

Originally Posted by skate71290

YES In Layman's terms this will not improve the speed of web browsing, but it will seriously improve Home Sharing (and related uses) when streaming to multiple devices simultaneously and streaming high bit-rate (high quality) and high resolution videos please include QoS when this is incorporated into your router product line!

That's what I am looking forward too! My wireless N network seems to take ages to copy HD files to my NAS box. If I buy a new Mac and a new router then this would solve my problems. Time to speak to the boss about potential future purchases...

[Builddesign]

http://support.google.com/fiber/bin/...6953&ctx=topic

I want to see what fiber optic will bring.

[iRCL]

What's all this "Likely" weasel word crap? Name a single ISP who has a commercial line even purely downstream above 150-600mbps. Nobody asking about whether or not it will affect them at home has that kind of connection, so give them the right answer.

The answer is no, this isn't going to improve your Internet experience one bit

[Kaibelf]

Originally Posted by iRCL

What's all this "Likely" weasel word crap? Name a single ISP who has a commercial line even purely downstream above 150-600mbps. Nobody asking about whether or not it will affect them at home has that kind of connection, so give them the right answer.

The answer is no, this isn't going to improve your Internet experience one bit

http://fiber.google.com/about/

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by iRCL

What's all this "Likely" weasel word crap? Name a single ISP who has a commercial line even purely downstream above 150-600mbps. Nobody asking about whether or not it will affect them at home has that kind of connection, so give them the right answer.

The answer is no, this isn't going to improve your Internet experience one bit

I want to make no assumptions about people's internet connection. There is 1 Gbps connections offered by ISPs (Google Fiber) to some limited number of markets.

Of course, if you don't know, you most likely don't have a 1 Gbps connection to the Internet, but again, let's not make assumptions. Likely is not a weasel word, it's simply indicating that the responses applies to the vast majority, but not the totality of users.

[powers74]

Originally Posted by iRCL

What's all this "Likely" weasel word crap? Name a single ISP who has a commercial line even purely downstream above 150-600mbps. Nobody asking about whether or not it will affect them at home has that kind of connection, so give them the right answer.

The answer is no, this isn't going to improve your Internet experience one bit

"Our packages start at 50 Mbps, delivering super-fast performance for everything you do online. And we built our network so it will easily meet your bandwidth demands in the future--even up to 1,000 Mbps!"

https://epbfi.com/internet/

So, 'Nooga does if you want to pay for it.

[Nermal]

Originally Posted by iRCL

What's all this "Likely" weasel word crap? Name a single ISP who has a commercial line even purely downstream above 150-600mbps.

Over here, Gen-i and FX both offer 1 Gb/s services.

Having said that, most residential users won't be seeing more than 100 Mb/s any time soon.

[nickn]

Originally Posted by iRCL

What's all this "Likely" weasel word crap? Name a single ISP who has a commercial line even purely downstream above 150-600mbps. Nobody asking about whether or not it will affect them at home has that kind of connection, so give them the right answer.

The answer is no, this isn't going to improve your Internet experience one bit

In 2005, the Hong Kong ISP HKBN, started offering gigabit fiber service for $26 a month. By 2012, 85% of homes in Hong Kong had subscribed to the service. For businesses, even earlier in 2004, competing ISP Cyberport started installing 10Gigabit fiber lines. Notice, i'm not just naming a single ISP, i'm naming an entire country that could benefit from this technology...

[kcmac]

Originally Posted by iRCL

What's all this "Likely" weasel word crap? Name a single ISP who has a commercial line even purely downstream above 150-600mbps. Nobody asking about whether or not it will affect them at home has that kind of connection, so give them the right answer.

The answer is no, this isn't going to improve your Internet experience one bit

Google Fiber, Kansas City? !!!!!

[CyBeRino]

Originally Posted by iRCL

What's all this "Likely" weasel word crap? Name a single ISP who has a commercial line even purely downstream above 150-600mbps. Nobody asking about whether or not it will affect them at home has that kind of connection, so give them the right answer.

The answer is no, this isn't going to improve your Internet experience one bit

As usual when an American says "name one blah", the answer lies in looking outside the US.

Here in .nl, it is common to be able to get 500Mbps service (capped on a gigE line rate) where fiber optical connections are available. In south korea, gigabit connections are common.

And then of course 802.11 technology is not limited to only people's home networks. This stuff is used just as much in businesses all over the world.

----------

Originally Posted by danvdr

Is this fast enough that Apple could make a monitor that doesn't require a physical connection to the computer?

No, unless one were to use image compression which would be a bad idea.

----------

Originally Posted by Peace

Wireless speed has nothing to do with graphics rendering on a display via a video card.

It is if your intention is to remove the cable carrying the graphics signal from the video card to the screen.

[Vizin]

.

[fastlanephil]

Originally Posted by Builddesign

http://support.google.com/fiber/bin/...6953&ctx=topic

I want to see what fiber optic will bring.

I've had fiber at my house for several years when our local PUD began a fiber back bone project in selected areas with your choice of a local ISP retailer. It was originally 12Mbps download speed and is now 20 Mbps download speed. The upload speed seems to be about 2Mbps. I had Comcast at another residence which showed 24 Mbps download speed but I think that was their "Boost" speed which is not sustainable.

It's running me about $72 total per month which includes a VOIP business line but not long distance calling. A residential VOIP would be $10 less per month.

[Mad Mac Maniac]

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

Your ISP is most probably your current bottleneck to the Internet.

This is kinda what I was assuming. It'll be like getting a super duper wide hose, but your faucet size/water pressure stay the same... you aren't getting any more water out.

[topmounter]

Originally Posted by Mad Mac Maniac

This is kinda what I was assuming. It'll be like getting a super duper wide hose, but your faucet size/water pressure stay the same... you aren't getting any more water out.

Nowadays the bottleneck on 1:1 transfers seems to be the traffic management done on the server/CDN/data center side of things. I don't seem to have any trouble saturating my 25Mbps Internet connection, but it takes multiple discrete transfers to do so typically.

[ckeck]

No, downloading and uploading either, unless again, you're one of the few lucky guys to get an Internet connection at more than the 802.11n bandwidth ratings.

This is for home networking improvements. Your ISP is most probably your current bottleneck to the Internet.

This...will help a lot with your internal network if you transfer a lot between computers or a home NAS for example. 802.11ac may also have a broader range/penetration and handle other signal noise better.

[blackhand1001]

I'd like to see what the real speeds end up being cause even with N wireless file transfers are still slower than they would be on fast ethernet (100mbps) and way slower than gigabit. The real rates are never anywhere close to what they say in the specs.

[jessica.]

This seems to only serve a purpose if you're one of the many who stream digital content on your home network. I can see this being pretty awesome for that. My ISP isn't going to allow those speeds for upload/downloading, ever.

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by blackhand1001

I'd like to see what the real speeds end up being cause even with N wireless file transfers are still slower than they would be on fast ethernet (100mbps) and way slower than gigabit. The real rates are never anywhere close to what they say in the specs.

On my base 150 mbps 802.11n wireless (I have a 20$ AP), I get about 8 MB/sec transfer, vs 10 MB/sec transfer over 100 Mbps Ethernet to my NAS.

So it's not as bad as you make it out to be.