Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Wi-Fi 9:Return of the Last Jedi (Written and Produced by JJ Abrams)

Wifi 6.... no, WiFi 10, no that's what they'll be expecting, wait WiFI VI, yeah!
WiFi VI spaniel
WiFi VI dingo
WiFi VI hyena
WiFi VI coyote
WiFi VI fox
WiFi VI wolf
WiFi VI um, ah!, timber wolf!
WiFi VI terrier... darn it we used 'wolf' too soon and all the other canines are less cool...
WiFi (just WiFi now)... er... that cool fishing spot that everybody out of state and/or not really into fishing will think is a Top Gun reference...
WiFi That big hill just outside of town
WiFi That even bigger hill a few miles to the east of it...
WiFi That place with beginning with an M, you know, do you spell it with an 'h' or a 'j'? No, I think that's a drink. Speaking of which...

No further notes have been discovered.
 
I'm not sure the public is ready to be talking about WiFi version numbers.

Most of the time, since routers are backward-compatible with older devices, you're right -- but when we do have to talk specifics we have very opaque terminology with all this a, b, ac, g stuff.
 
I don't mind this naming scheme which make it easier to differentiate. The alpha designation didn't make much sense but it should have been in order.


I agree with you. I have the latest modem/router from Verizon and they state improved signal at distance of up to 325 ft. I would go outside my house and no further than 30 ft away and I don't get full bars. Even when I am inside and less than 20 ft, my signal may fluctuate.
I’ve recently switched to Fios too and I find the WiFi from their modem/router to be worse than what I had before. Have you just lived with it or did you buy a mesh system or anything else?
 
I'm not entirely sure how this makes that much difference. Yes, it's easier to say Wi-Fi 6 rather than 802.11ax but it doesn't really help the user to understand the differences. It's the same problem with an easier name.

And it will be train wreck whilst this naming convention is switched....we'll still have old and new, imagine this for users, they'll be as confused as hell!
Users are confused by almost everything. I think it's best to not worry about it. I'll keep calling it 802.11ax.

For users: Wi-Fi, faster Wi-Fi. That's really all they care about in the real-world. Is the new stuff better than what they have, and do they need it. If you can answer that, call it whatever you want.
 
The first question I'd ask is why you're looking to switch in the first place. I have an almost identical wired/wireless Apple setup (1x AC, 4x N) in my house and I just can't find a good reason to change anything even though I'm using 'old' technology. Hard wiring the Apple routers creates a pretty good impression of a mesh network, and I just don't do anything that needs more speed.

Do none of the mesh options have base units with Ethernet ports? Do any of them support being hardwired?

Worst case, you could always use a wireless bridge to connect the Ethernet devices to the wireless network, but I always view wireless as inferior to wired anyway, so you'd kind of be going backwards.
All of mine are AC bought used on eBay. I don’t guess I will switch for a while but I keep reading people say mesh and so I ask the question. Would it be better for me in some way? I did almost go Ubiquiti before AirPort AC but decided to stick with what was working before.

Edit: All of mine are WiFi-5. Ha
 
The first question I'd ask is why you're looking to switch in the first place. I have an almost identical wired/wireless Apple setup (1x AC, 4x N) in my house and I just can't find a good reason to change anything even though I'm using 'old' technology. Hard wiring the Apple routers creates a pretty good impression of a mesh network, and I just don't do anything that needs more speed.

Do none of the mesh options have base units with Ethernet ports? Do any of them support being hardwired?

Worst case, you could always use a wireless bridge to connect the Ethernet devices to the wireless network, but I always view wireless as inferior to wired anyway, so you'd kind of be going backwards.

I use a Linksys Velop system at home that replaced my two Airport Extremes. With my airport network, my phone would hold onto the connection to the one I first connected to, despite standing 10 feet from the other one. With mesh, at least it appears to jump from one to the next fairly quickly.

The Velop mesh units each have two Ethernet ports on them and I have them hard wired into my switch. They can either run with a wired, or wireless backhaul. Keep in mind that Linksys put out a firmware update right before Thanksgiving the other year that broke wired backhaul so people were freaking out that their Wi-Fi stopped working, when in actuality, if you unplugged the Ethernet, they would work again. It took a week for Linksys to pull that firmware and revert units to the older firmware, and months to issue a newer one with the fix AND wired backhaul support. So if you go with Linksys, I’d disable auto-updates. Also, be sure to set them all up in the same room and make sure they’re all up to date before placing them where you want them.

During that lovely time where I thought my Velop system had died, I purchased an Eero Pro system to replace them, and while the setup IS actually only a few minutes, which was definitely not my experience with the Velop or Netgear Orbi, the performance of them was nowhere near the performance of my Velop system. While my Velop gets over 200Mbps outside my house, which has plaster walls, concrete, and brick, the Eero system only got something like 60Mpbs. The other issue with the Eero was that the one I had in my bedroom had a high pitched noise coming from it when the LED was on. Thankfully, it had a setting to turn that off. Needless to say, I returned them after I discovered what the issue was with the Velop.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tooloud10
Anybody know where the increased outdoor range comes from? Just more gain from longer integration, or is there something else at work? Does longer symbol duration mean lower data rate? Or is it trading off something else?
 
Having two different names and naming conventions for the exact same standards is somehow less confusing? To me it only seems more confusing.

It's similar to having two standards of measurement. The sooner you take the plunge, the sooner the confusion is over.

My only fear is that of unintended consequences.
With IEEE in charge of the WiFi spec 802.11ac, for example - everything is clearly spelled out and controlled.
Who determines what WiFi 6 is? Who controls and has ultimate responsibility for specifications, compliance and "compatibility" (which are NOT synonyms).

I hope we don't wind up with companies telling us that they have 4G/5G/6G that isn't even CLOSE to the specification; and the major carriers are the greatest offenders. I doubt anyone that is sporting a "5G" Connection is getting anywhere the specs. The simulation predicts 490 Mbit/s median speeds for a common configuration of 3.5 GHz 5G Massive MIMO. It predicts a 1.4 Gbit/s median speed for a configuration using 28 GHz millimeter waves.

And with 5G still unmet, we are hearing that 6G is just "around the corner". The fact is that 5G is more of a marketing ploy rather than a hard set of specifications.

Didn't help that during the 4G era, especially, that the various companies leaned on whatever consortium it is that handles cell tech to let them call the faster but still not 4g stuff 4g
 
I’ve recently switched to Fios too and I find the WiFi from their modem/router to be worse than what I had before. Have you just lived with it or did you buy a mesh system or anything else?
I just deal with it since I don't use wifi outside of the house that often plus I bought the modem/router. BTW, if you having poor signals, call Verizon and let them know. I told them the signal strength was not that good within the house and they did something on their to end, maybe made some adjustment to the modem, and it improved the signal. The modem I have is the Quantum Gateway for FIOS. Hope this helps.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Mac'nCheese
802.11.ax or Wi-Fi 6 is alot faster then the current 802.11ac. I just wonder when it going to be implemented. I have to do research on this since Apple is still using the "ac" standard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sean4000
I support this wholeheartedly... Having to do tech support for family and friends is tedious with the technobabble. This just makes a lot of sense.
LOL. Like that will help. “Mom do you have WiFi 5 or 6?”... “huh?!?”
 
  • Like
Reactions: Analog Kid
"802.11ax will be known as "Wi-Fi 6," making it easier for Wi-Fi users to understand the difference between 802.11ax, 802.11ac, and 802.11n."

It will ? Everyone knows the current standards already. All that's being done is "masking" these by a number and calling it "easier" when its actually not. Since everyone will need to now look it up to understand what the numbers represent.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Val-kyrie
"802.11ax will be known as "Wi-Fi 6," making it easier for Wi-Fi users to understand the difference between 802.11ax, 802.11ac, and 802.11n."

It will ? Everyone knows the current standards already. All that's being done is "masking" these by a number and calling it "easier" when its actually not. Since everyone will need to now look it up to understand what the numbers represent.
The current names are known but it's pretty much almost the opposite of something that is known by even close to everyone.
 
Having two different names and naming conventions for the exact same standards is somehow less confusing? To me it only seems more confusing.
It’s like a real name and a nickname. We use them just fine, aren’t we?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.