no.
most of the improvements will be limited to LAN.
e.g. when you airplay will be smoother. Transferring files between computers will be faster.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Hiring for Wireless 802.11ac System Test Engineers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
no.
most of the improvements will be limited to LAN.
e.g. when you airplay will be smoother. Transferring files between computers will be faster.
I clicked around for a while and it refuses to let you select internet only. I set up a house in CA to 30mbps for $40 a month internet only. It has unlimited free (3.50/mo taxes) ooma VoIP, Roku TV (other boxes later), and of course internet itself. In conversation with technical the provisioning is the same for 30 and 100 mbps so the guaranteed access is not real, as I expected and believe. I had cable internet in another CA location and at times my speed was astounding. Download porn now and fast! Or in my case rocket videos.
Ok.
The sooner this is available the better. It will be useful for many things - 3d streaming to the Apple TV, wifi security cameras if you have several of them etc. ;-)
Download speeds are fully disconnected from display speeds or network speeds.
Downloading is capturing content or streaming live content.
Network allows displaying out sized content (4K) or live content on 4 or more room screens. Both require store forward at some point and peak speeds if "too many" people are viewing live content. Ie. Superbowl or, end of the world coverage.
Wouldn't it be cool if we had a single processor and storage medium being a traffic cop for all of that? I for one am willing to see my live content (unless I opt out) with a 10-40+ second delay.
Just market leader Rocketman
Apple TV defined.
Downloading is capturing content or streaming live content.
Network allows displaying out sized content (4K) or live content on 4 or more room screens. Both require store forward at some point and peak speeds if "too many" people are viewing live content. Ie. Superbowl or, end of the world coverage.
Wouldn't it be cool if we had a single processor and storage medium being a traffic cop for all of that? I for one am willing to see my live content (unless I opt out) with a 10-40+ second delay.
Just market leader Rocketman
Apple TV defined.
Range
I'm more interested in whether wireless ac will extend the range (with sustained levels of connectivity) over the current n specification at 5GHz. I currently have a time capsule running dual mode n/g wireless. I live in a railroad apparment in NYC. The rooms at the front of the house, where the t/capsule is, get plenty fast connectivity (the t/c is hard wired to a DOCSIS modem which provides a 50Mbps internet connection via Time Warner Cable). However, I have to plug an Airport Express in to the hallway as a repeater/bridge just to get a connection on the wireless g network, and that connection is pretty slow...and there's no connection on the wireless n portion.
Hoping with this new ac standard I can ditch the g network and the Airport Express repeater, and have adequately fast connectivity from the rear to the front of the appartment. So, if anyone has any insights into how the range/wall penetration of ac compares with that of n, please weigh in, thanks.
I'm more interested in whether wireless ac will extend the range (with sustained levels of connectivity) over the current n specification at 5GHz. I currently have a time capsule running dual mode n/g wireless. I live in a railroad apparment in NYC. The rooms at the front of the house, where the t/capsule is, get plenty fast connectivity (the t/c is hard wired to a DOCSIS modem which provides a 50Mbps internet connection via Time Warner Cable). However, I have to plug an Airport Express in to the hallway as a repeater/bridge just to get a connection on the wireless g network, and that connection is pretty slow...and there's no connection on the wireless n portion.
Hoping with this new ac standard I can ditch the g network and the Airport Express repeater, and have adequately fast connectivity from the rear to the front of the appartment. So, if anyone has any insights into how the range/wall penetration of ac compares with that of n, please weigh in, thanks.
That's gonna be useful at Hogwarts!
yup, and at Beauxbatons Academy of Magic soon enough. Currently upgrading infrastructure to support IP-Magic
Been holding off on getting a Macbook Air. The only thing I don't like about them now are the slow wireless backups, the battery life, and the GPU not quite there yet to fully support hardware acceleration in my Adobe apps. If they come with 802.11ac and the Haswell rumored improvements to battery life and GPU I'm sold.
Jersey City
Verizon FiOS
300 Mbit down/65Mbit up
I had to run gigabit ethernet to my iMac because only "theoretical" 802.11n got anywhere close to fast enough. Practical n broadband usually falls in the 75-125Mbit range.
If an ac router can consistently hold 400-500Mbit connections, I am in. total upgrade time.
Verizon FiOS
300 Mbit down/65Mbit up
I had to run gigabit ethernet to my iMac because only "theoretical" 802.11n got anywhere close to fast enough. Practical n broadband usually falls in the 75-125Mbit range.
If an ac router can consistently hold 400-500Mbit connections, I am in. total upgrade time.
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.
More importantly, speed at range should be significantly better than 802.11n
I for one am looking forward to this, I can only get 2mbps from the back of my apartment, and my internet is heaps faster
I for one am looking forward to this, I can only get 2mbps from the back of my apartment, and my internet is heaps faster
Just wanted to add something, in case it hasn't been said already...
When mixing device types (i.e. B, G and N devices) it is best to have a separate network (with diff. SSID) for each device class. They can daisy chain nicely with the WAN port of one router going to the cable modem, another WAN port of a router going into a LAN port of the first one, etc. Assuming, of course, you want to get to the Internet... NAT will probably block off the devices (of different types) from sharing things on the same network, i.e. Bonjour, Plex Media Server, etc..
This is because if (for example) a Wireless G device is put on a Wireless N network, the speed of ALL devices will drop to the lowest common denominator, so you won't be able to get the full benefit out of your Wireless N router. The same goes for B devices on a G network.
This is probably (anyone with more specific info, be sure to chime in) the case with 802.11ac, so even if you get your shiny new airport extreme, it may not be time to retire the old hardware quite yet.
When mixing device types (i.e. B, G and N devices) it is best to have a separate network (with diff. SSID) for each device class. They can daisy chain nicely with the WAN port of one router going to the cable modem, another WAN port of a router going into a LAN port of the first one, etc. Assuming, of course, you want to get to the Internet... NAT will probably block off the devices (of different types) from sharing things on the same network, i.e. Bonjour, Plex Media Server, etc..
This is because if (for example) a Wireless G device is put on a Wireless N network, the speed of ALL devices will drop to the lowest common denominator, so you won't be able to get the full benefit out of your Wireless N router. The same goes for B devices on a G network.
This is probably (anyone with more specific info, be sure to chime in) the case with 802.11ac, so even if you get your shiny new airport extreme, it may not be time to retire the old hardware quite yet.
Love it. Please add USB3 to Airport Extreme!
I hear the discussion on real world numbers vs marketing, and the internet bottlenecks... My question is whether the real world 802.11ac is considerably faster than the real world 802.11n? If so, I see a ton of value in it: faster transfers between computers, fast access to a WiFi RAID array or expansion drive without being plugged in at my desk, less lag/latency when streaming media to a future Apple TV or other Airplay device, fast wireless backup to a USB3 (assuming it's added) hard drive connected to an Airport, ...
I hear the discussion on real world numbers vs marketing, and the internet bottlenecks... My question is whether the real world 802.11ac is considerably faster than the real world 802.11n? If so, I see a ton of value in it: faster transfers between computers, fast access to a WiFi RAID array or expansion drive without being plugged in at my desk, less lag/latency when streaming media to a future Apple TV or other Airplay device, fast wireless backup to a USB3 (assuming it's added) hard drive connected to an Airport, ...
AppleBitch? Nice name.
What's the difference between hot chocolate and hot cocoa?My reply was a little late since another couple of posts snuck in while I discussed hot chocolate with my 4 year old
This will go great with the recent fiber announcements in Seattle recently. I will have to upgrade all my hardware though
They are looking for RF engineer. People who understand how to test an RF system (link budget analysis, etc).
They are looking for RF engineer. People who understand how to test an RF system (link budget analysis, etc).
100M+ is very popular in Asia....ok, may be just Japan, Korean and Hong Kong.
Well, if iOS can use BitTorrent that may be useful.
The only thing I can do with 100M+ fully (except BitTorrent) is download drivers from somewhere like Intel, M$...
You know that only these huge company can/need to provide a fast server.
But why should I download these thing with my iPad/iPhone?!
Yes. Still the bottleneck is on the web server.
Well, if iOS can use BitTorrent that may be useful.
The only thing I can do with 100M+ fully (except BitTorrent) is download drivers from somewhere like Intel, M$...
You know that only these huge company can/need to provide a fast server.
But why should I download these thing with my iPad/iPhone?!
Yes. Still the bottleneck is on the web server.
What's the difference between hot chocolate and hot cocoa?
It's the same ... but different.