Apple Reportedly Strikes Deal with Broadcom to Add 802.11ac Gigabit Wi-Fi to 2013 Macs

[Mr. Dee]

This will be a good year, as someone said, Haswell plus 802.11ac should be awesome upgrade. Then again, Apple might use this as an excuse to remove the RJ-45 port (Ethernet). Which I would not like happen. Well, they could remove it on the rev b 21 inch and still keep it on the 27 inch.

[TimUSCA]

Originally Posted by troop231

Sweet, this should actually make Safari snappier

Actually, no. Current 802.11n speeds are vastly faster than your internet. These faster wifi speeds will only help internal data transfers such as Time Machine backups and AirPlay connectivity.

[Thunderhawks]

Originally Posted by troop231

Sweet, this should actually make Safari snappier

Talk about hitting the G spot for users!

----------

Originally Posted by Mr. Dee

This will be a good year, as someone said, Haswell plus 802.11ac should be awesome upgrade. Then again, Apple might use this as an excuse to remove the RJ-45 port (Ethernet). Which I would not like happen. Well, they could remove it on the rev b 21 inch and still keep it on the 27 inch.

Or make us buy a $ 45 ETHERNET adapter plug that hooks up into Thunderbolt.

[discuit]

Originally Posted by Quu

The 5G here stands for 5th generation. And it is.

1st Generation = 802.11a
2nd Generation = 802.11b
3rd Generation = 802.11g
4th Generation = 802.11n
5th Generation = 802.11ac

Didn't 802.11a come out after 802.11b? Or at least devices that could use it did.

Also, I don't understand why the latest one is called "ac", couldn't they just use a single unused letter and avoid confusion with 802.11a?

[paradox22]

I'm glad to see 802.11ac make its way to the mac. I can't wait to see it implemented as the new standard. Now I just need to get a new mac, pay for higher internet speeds, and a router that supports 802.11ac. [Sighs]. I can never win!

[hachre]

I hope they will give the Express a gigabit port finally.

[coolspot18]

Originally Posted by troop231

Sweet, this should actually make Safari snappier

That has more to do with latency than with raw bandwidth (which is more than adequate already).

Wait till 802.11ad comes out... It's expected to have 7gbit data rates.

[hachre]

Originally Posted by Sjhonny

Don't get your hopes up. That 1.3 Gb/s is only theoretical. Real life ~ 150 Mb/s (18 MB/s)

comparison to n: Netgear promo video

I have 25 MB/s with n so I doubt that.

[carlgo]

Originally Posted by TimUSCA

Actually, no. Current 802.11n speeds are vastly faster than your internet. These faster wifi speeds will only help internal data transfers such as Time Machine backups and AirPlay connectivity.

So, the carriers are remain the real bottleneck in all of this. We get a rousing 1.3mbs on the local ISP.

[coolspot18]

Originally Posted by carlgo

So, the carriers are remain the real bottleneck in all of this. We get a rousing 1.3mbs on the local ISP.

Yes, is that surprising? My house is wired for Gigabit, but my internet connection is only 45mbps

[jowie]

Originally Posted by gingaman

Just after I ordered mine!

So you would've been happy to wait a year for the next generation? There's always something better just over the horizon. You wouldn't have ordered one unless you thought it was worth it.

[coolspot18]

Originally Posted by Mr. Dee

Apple might use this as an excuse to remove the RJ-45 port (Ethernet). Which I would not like happen. Well, they could remove it on the rev b 21 inch and still keep it on the 27 inch.

Yeah, I won't be surprised if Apple did... but it would reinforce once again the iMac is turning into an iToy...

[audio_inside]

Doesn't mean much to upgrade wireless bandwidth on only one node of your LAN without addressing the whole wireless ecosystem of Macs, Airports and iDevices. #meh

[Hattig]

What's the point when the ISPs are so crap at providing a reliable bitrate?

I'd prefer a more robust signal myself, than faster bitrates that might make a NAS faster but not the internet.

[Quu]

Originally Posted by discuit

Didn't 802.11a come out after 802.11b? Or at least devices that could use it did.

Also, I don't understand why the latest one is called "ac", couldn't they just use a single unused letter and avoid confusion with 802.11a?

I should note that 802.11a and 802.11b were technically created at the same time, the specifications were made public on the same day. But 802.11a came first (as the a implies) then 802.11b then 802.11g. The problem with 802.11a was manufacturers found it difficult to create reliable 5GHz radios which 802.11a used exclusively. So the 802.11b specification became much more popular as it used 2.4GHz and by the time 802.11a radio production was commercially viable 802.11g debuted utilizing the same 2.4GHz spectrum as previous 802.11b devices making it backwards compatible without requiring a second radio.

So basically 802.11a never really saw wide adoption due to that and many folks here would not have had any 802.11a compatible devices until 5GHz 802.11n showed up as manufacturers decided what the heck we already have a 5GHz radio for 802.11n built in, might as-well make it backwards compatible with the 802.11a specification while we're at it.

[Michael73]

That will be nice for my new 2013 MacPro

[jowie]

I'm guessing this means they'll also be updating the AirPort Extreme and Time Capsule...

[unplugme71]

Apple needs to update their Airport Extreme with this and USB 3.0 so transfers are faster. Time Machine backups are just so slow with the USB 2.0 interface.

[KramRevilo]

I believe the 5G in the original quote refers to 5 GHz ... which is the only spectrum where 802.11ac operates (as opposed to 2.4 & 5 GHz for 802.11n). Comments about G meaning 'generation' are meaningless (but fun to read).

[adildacoolset]

Originally Posted by Quu

The 5G here stands for 5th generation. And it is.

1st Generation = 802.11a
2nd Generation = 802.11b
3rd Generation = 802.11g
4th Generation = 802.11n
5th Generation = 802.11ac

They are not as you seem to believe relying on the 3G/4G moniker from mobile phone devices to indicate the speed of 802.11ac

When 802.11n first launched it was referred to as 4th Generation WiFi. And even quite recently I purchased an 802.11n card which said exactly that on the box.



You would need a new router to make use of the 802.11ac specification as it uses a new radio.

Ok thanks for that

[JHankwitz]

Originally Posted by basesloaded190

This time the "G" has actual meaning and not just marketing.

I always thought the 'G' meant it related to telephone data, not WiFi. Mixing the two could become very confusing.

[Quu]

Originally Posted by KramRevilo

I believe the 5G in the original quote refers to 5 GHz ... which is the only spectrum where 802.11ac operates (as opposed to 2.4 & 5 GHz for 802.11n). Comments about G meaning 'generation' are meaningless (but fun to read).

Actually this is false and it really does mean 5th Generation Wireless.

From Broadcoms own website.

But I did find your post quite fun to read

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by discuit

Didn't 802.11a come out after 802.11b? Or at least devices that could use it did.

The a specification came before the b specification. The 802.11a products came later.

Originally Posted by discuit

Also, I don't understand why the latest one is called "ac", couldn't they just use a single unused letter and avoid confusion with 802.11a?

There are no single unused letters in the 802.11 standard. See :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_80...and_amendments

[Woodcrest64]

Originally Posted by stepshows

Now if only the Restaurants and airports would dare to be so bold...

Yeah you are correct. Its going to be a while till that standard is picked up by the majority. Heck, even wireless N is rarely seen where I am in terms of cafes and etc. Its usually 802.11G in most cases that I see used in public places.

I'm still glad about Apple looking into 802.11ac of course. Most of the benefit will come with in home large file transfers though of course.

'Most' peoples in home internet speeds don't even come close to wireless N's limits.

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by coolspot18

Yes, is that surprising? My house is wired for Gigabit, but my internet connection is only 45mbps

Because carrying increased bandwidth over long distances becomes exponentially expensive.