108mbps Airport products!

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by Jibreel, Feb 7, 2004.

  1. Jibreel macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    #1
    When do some people here think we will see 108mbps Airport products!

    I just got a Netgear WGT624 and realized i can not even use there 108mbps PCMA card becuase i have a 12" powerbook that does not have a pcma slot for it :(

    So i got the airport Xtream card but that is 54mbpc:mad:

    Is there a chance before i can not return this to get a 108mbps xtreame card soon?:confused:
     
  2. bbarnhart macrumors 6502a

    bbarnhart

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2002
    Location:
    Stilwell, Kansas
    #2
    I didn't know anyone was shipping 108 mbps products. I didn't even know those were in the pipeline.

    The NetGear website claims that this router is compatible with 802.11g networks, so if you buy an Apple card it should work with your router.
     
  3. Jibreel thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    #3
    It does

    But its not worth keeping a Netgear 108mbps wifi router if apple is still 54mbps for 2 years on, that is what i am asking, will there be a possibilty for apple to ketchup rather then lag behind for profits from parts?

    And while D-link, Linksys and Netgear are allready in the ballpark at 108/140mbps
     
  4. SiliconAddict macrumors 603

    SiliconAddict

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #4
    Many of these wireless vendors offer proprietary high speed implementations that may be fast but aren't even compatible from one brand to another. (e.g. Linksys's high speed stuff isn't compatible with D-Link's or Netgear's.) Fact of the matter is that there is nothing right now faster then 802.11G or A. It's a foregone conclusion Apple isn't going to support a proprietary standard.
     
  5. Versello macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2003
    #5
    Re: 108mbps Airport products!

    108Mbps is just 802.11g operating in full-duplex. It's the same as 802.11b operting in full-duplex (D-Link products support 802.11b full-duplex). It isn't really the next-step up. People say that will be 802.11i.
     
  6. MoparShaha macrumors 68000

    MoparShaha

    Joined:
    May 15, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #6
    First of all, do you really need that kind of speed? Anything over a few Mbs is only useful for networking. Secondly, it says 108 Mbs, but you're not even going to get close to that speed. You'll be lucky to even get 60 Mbs. If you really need a fast network speed, you should really be using ethernet. Lastly, I don't like all these proprietary standards these WiFi companies are coming out with. Wait until a new, IEEE ratified standard comes out.
     
  7. tomf87 macrumors 65816

    tomf87

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
    #7
    Re: Re: 108mbps Airport products!

    Not so... The NetGear docs state that they use two channels from the frequency and bond them together, similar to the way a 112k ISDN line works or bonding two modem lines together to form one faster pipe.

    802.11i is addressing the security within wireless networks, not speed.
     
  8. Westside guy macrumors 601

    Westside guy

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Location:
    The soggy side of the Pacific NW
    #8
    Okay, Apple (and for that matter, any other 802.11g manufacturer that sticks to the published standards) is not lagging behind here. The whole point of standards is to allow interoperation.

    You know all the people here who get pissed at Microsoft? It's because Microsoft doesn't stick to standards. They'll say they're using a standard - for example, Kerberos or XML - but they add on ("embrace and extend") their own proprietary stuff so you have to go with an all-Microsoft end-to-end solution. Same sort of monkeying around when it comes to "Windows IE-only" Web sites, which use proprietary Microsoft Active-X tools.

    Same thing with Netgear's 108mbps system - does it work with D-Link's 108mbps products? Not unless they're both buying the same proprietary chipset from a single vendor. If you don't use an all-Netgear (or all-D-link) solution, you'll only get 54mbps speeds. On a related note, D-Link offers an 802.11b "extension" that provides 44mbps speeds; and it only works with other D-Link products. Want to use a non-D-link wireless card? Their support pages tell you to turn off 44mbps mode.
     
  9. Jibreel thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    #9
    Thanks guys, it makes sense

    I will get the WGR614 with a antenna, have a pro install the 602's point access antenna base (detachable) and i bet my warantee is no good if they notice it ;)

    But then i will get what i assumed the WGT624 was gonna do, and that is have a better and stronger signal, which was the naive thing on my part.

    But i can not thank you all enough ;)
     
  10. TEG macrumors 604

    TEG

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2002
    Location:
    Langley, Washington
    #10
    Re: Re: Re: 108mbps Airport products!

    That is what "Full-Duplex" means. Using existing infrastructure, you get double signal. Just like 100Base-TX networks will run at 200 MB/s (or is it mb/s) with compatible switches and Routers.

    TEG
     
  11. Santiago macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2002
    Location:
    Mountain View, California
    #11
    Re: Re: Re: Re: 108mbps Airport products!

    No it isn't. Full-duplex and half-duplex are old terms with very precise meanings. Full-duplex means both parties can transmit to each other simultaneously. Half-duplex means that the medium is only capable of supporting communications in a single direction at a time, with the parties alternating who talks and who listens if they desire bidirectional communication.
     
  12. Jibreel thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    #12
    Oh lord have mercy... :confused:

    I need guidance spiritually now, and i just took a asperane...

    I have a WGT624v2, olitec-sx200, a speed touch home pro router/modem, and a usb fishy looking speed touch modem--> all waiting to be returned,

    i feel like i should donate the results for the efforts of testing, the WGT614 rocked, it was here before and i got the WGT624v2 now after returning that.

    The WGT624v2 needs to be reset everytime i get a new dynamic ip from my isp, its a v2!
    Its not even a black face but dark grey and says v2 on the bottom of it.


    So please tell me, is it a good idea to keep this WGT624v2 or go back to the WGR614,
    please say "no" guys, if that is the true answer cuase i use a 54mbps airport Xtreame card aka standard 802.11g, really ,
    i just requested the WGR614 over night expresss here.

    Peace

    Antenna hacks are out there too guys ;)

    http://membres.lycos.fr/cybermatos/WGT624/

    http://membres.lycos.fr/cybermatos/WGT624/arriere.jpg

    http://membres.lycos.fr/cybermatos/WGT624/face.jpg

    http://membres.lycos.fr/cybermatos/WGT624/interieur.jpg
     
  13. tomf87 macrumors 65816

    tomf87

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
    #13
    Re: Re: Re: Re: 108mbps Airport products!

    I disagree, because full duplex is defined as a standard, and the 108Mbps wireless solution provided by each manufacturer is not standard in any way. One manufacturer's solution will not work with another manufacturer's hardware. In addition, the 108Mbps solution provided by NetGear bonds the two lines together, but doesn't change the duplex of the line.

    It's simlar to using a 10Mb or 100Mb hub. Both run at half duplex but differing speeds. An increase in speed doesn't necessarily mean a change in duplex.
     
  14. mainstreetmark macrumors 68020

    mainstreetmark

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Location:
    Saint Augustine, FL
    #14
    I'd happily settle for a nice 11MBPS connection if they could manage to significantly extend the range. Even at 11, it's still about 10 times as fast as I'm going to get info down off the internet.

    And yes, all these "faster than 54" companies are not sticking to the wifi standard. Their stuff all works with all the other companies (hense, being able to claim "wifi"), but has a special mode just for them to use with their own stuff.

    I doubt any consumer has transferred anything at 108Mbps. I wish they'd publish averages instead of theoretical maxes.
     
  15. MoparShaha macrumors 68000

    MoparShaha

    Joined:
    May 15, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #15
    Agreed. This is one of my biggest complaints with WiFi.
     
  16. Jibreel thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    #16
    So please tell me, is it a good idea to keep this WGT624v2 or go back to the WGR614,


    i just requested the WGR614 over night expresss here.

    Now this v2 614 has problems with my ispo modem and i went on hours trying to find out why until i started to post on a netgear server and discovered it was incompatible ;/

    We have a PB 12" here with a extreame card in it as well as a G4 dual tower.

    Please tell me if the future of the WGT-624 is hopeless or worth keeping,
    if its gonna be(tooo long) like a year before we get the most of it with the pB12" or if its worth keeping becuase it hasautomatic software update and betetr stability.

    Thanks so much
     
  17. JFreak macrumors 68040

    JFreak

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    Tampere, Finland
    #17
    it is always a good idea to stick to the standards. otherwise it will be like this (sad story, really):

    "there's a wireless mouse that has a bluetooth logo on it. the package contains a mouse and a bluetooth dongle. one plugs the dongle in the computer and mouse is alive. then one tries to pair the mouse to another computer which has standard bluetooth built in. (i'm talking about apple laptops here). guess what? the mouse is not able to communicate with the laptop without the dongle. and i'm talking about microsoft's mouse now - they have decided that it's good to send a proprietary signal between mouse and dongle via bluetooth. the wireless transmission is made according to bluetooth spec, hence the bluetooth logo, but if there's not a microsoft device in both ends, the communication fails."

    who wants that kind of compatibility? what's the point in building bluetooth into computers if there's a need of some specific bluetooth dongle to make devices work?
     

Share This Page