So, how will they distinguish 2.4 GHz 802.11n from 5 GHz 802.11n? "Wifi 3.1 / 3.2?"
And how will Wave 1 802.11ac be distinguished from Wave 2 802.11ac? "Wifi 5.1 / 5.2?"
And how will the number of spatial streams, MIMO streams, and MU-MIMO streams be distinguished? More numbers after the generation?
There's a lot more to a wireless standard than can be compressed into a single number. Unless this gives the industry the impetus to release complete standards, and stop this horrid Wave 1 / Wave 2 crap. It's okay if there's a 5-year gap between generations.
[[So, how will they distinguish 2.4 GHz 802.11n from 5 GHz 802.11n? "Wifi 3.1 / 3.2?"]]
You're overthinking it. Today, "802.11.ac" is just as uninformative as "Wifi 5" when it comes to the technical nuances you're talking about. But it's a hell of a lot easier to parse "Wifi 5" than the alphabet soup it's replacing.
This just reminds me that I need to replace my router. It was a first gen AC router, and even with adding more and more AC devices to the network over the years it pretty much always negotiates to an N connection :( Next time; Mesh network! Gotta get some of that ubiquity goodness in my home
That said it still won't help tear away some of the confusion with some (what is now) "Wi-Fi 4" tech.
So many cheap laptops shipped with single stream "Wireless N" Wi-Fi that was 1x1:1, so the max link rate was a pathetic 72Mbps.
Unless you're doing some really high end stuff (large file transfers, 4K video streaming, or a ton of clients), the difference between a Wi-Fi 4 3x3 450Mbps connection and a Wi-Fi 5/6 3x3 is probably negligible.
Whereas a 72Mbps vs 300Mbps link rate is going to have some significant real-world usability differences - yet both are bundled up under the same standard: "Wi-Fi 4".
There's probably no good solution to making all of these things consumer friendly yet convey all the relevant information. Going forward, (I'll be optimistic) hardware vendors won't be putting out too many wireless solutions that "check the box" for "yup it has Wi-Fi" but perform so badly - so I don't see this being a problem as old "Wi-Fi 4" client and infrastructure gear starts getting phased out.
Yup, I've got one of those single stream N laptops that tops out at 72Mbps. HP skimped on the second antenna when they built the first generation Stream 11. It gets the job done, but a second antenna like the later generation laptops are equipped with would be useful. I might buy and add one myself since the system is very far out of warranty and easy to take apart.
Anyway, though the new standard is a good change, it doesn't take into account the many ways that OEMs will cut corners to save small amounts of money on a per unit basis.
Seems like ad would not really be what most people believe that WIFI should be and more like a shupercharged bluethooth, as it has very little range beyound a single room. Also, not directly backwards compatible with preceeding WIFI modes.
Indeed, this makes versions such as ad really hard to name. Wifi ad is not directly your home network as n or ac is. ad is 60GHz for physically close appliciations, like wireless laptop docking etc. It is newer and more advanced than Wifi 5, but it is not a replacement for it, more like an extension? Maybe you could call it wifi 5 service pack 1? I don't know. Maybe this naming scheme is better, but the best will always be to just know what you are buying instead of relying on numbers.
Much better than the a, b, g, n, ac, ax progression. Will look nice besides 5g, Bluethooth 5, etc on the spec sheetsand make comparisons easier as long as they keep equating a bigger number with more speed/better.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
19 Comments
Back to Article
FreckledTrout - Wednesday, October 3, 2018 - link
The 2x2 configuration chart has some typos "1.69 Mbps over 160MHz".Kamus - Tuesday, October 9, 2018 - link
ax rolls of the tongue better.phoenix_rizzen - Wednesday, October 3, 2018 - link
So, how will they distinguish 2.4 GHz 802.11n from 5 GHz 802.11n? "Wifi 3.1 / 3.2?"And how will Wave 1 802.11ac be distinguished from Wave 2 802.11ac? "Wifi 5.1 / 5.2?"
And how will the number of spatial streams, MIMO streams, and MU-MIMO streams be distinguished? More numbers after the generation?
There's a lot more to a wireless standard than can be compressed into a single number. Unless this gives the industry the impetus to release complete standards, and stop this horrid Wave 1 / Wave 2 crap. It's okay if there's a 5-year gap between generations.
phoenix_rizzen - Wednesday, October 3, 2018 - link
Sorry, 802.11n should be Wifi 4 above.Glaurung - Wednesday, October 3, 2018 - link
[[So, how will they distinguish 2.4 GHz 802.11n from 5 GHz 802.11n? "Wifi 3.1 / 3.2?"]]You're overthinking it. Today, "802.11.ac" is just as uninformative as "Wifi 5" when it comes to the technical nuances you're talking about. But it's a hell of a lot easier to parse "Wifi 5" than the alphabet soup it's replacing.
MrSpadge - Thursday, October 4, 2018 - link
+1nathanddrews - Thursday, October 4, 2018 - link
+2This is a very good thing, I just hope that the stick with it.
CaedenV - Wednesday, October 3, 2018 - link
This just reminds me that I need to replace my router. It was a first gen AC router, and even with adding more and more AC devices to the network over the years it pretty much always negotiates to an N connection :(Next time; Mesh network! Gotta get some of that ubiquity goodness in my home
A5 - Thursday, October 4, 2018 - link
The UBNT stuff works a lot better if you already ethernet drops all over the place. If not, something like Orbi or eero is better for most consumers.fred666 - Wednesday, October 3, 2018 - link
So are 802.11a, b and g WiFI 1, 2 and 3?Ryan Smith - Wednesday, October 3, 2018 - link
Officially, no. However they started with Wi-Fi 4 at 802.11n for a reason.MrCommunistGen - Wednesday, October 3, 2018 - link
I'd have to say that overall I'm a fan of this.That said it still won't help tear away some of the confusion with some (what is now) "Wi-Fi 4" tech.
So many cheap laptops shipped with single stream "Wireless N" Wi-Fi that was 1x1:1, so the max link rate was a pathetic 72Mbps.
Unless you're doing some really high end stuff (large file transfers, 4K video streaming, or a ton of clients), the difference between a Wi-Fi 4 3x3 450Mbps connection and a Wi-Fi 5/6 3x3 is probably negligible.
Whereas a 72Mbps vs 300Mbps link rate is going to have some significant real-world usability differences - yet both are bundled up under the same standard: "Wi-Fi 4".
There's probably no good solution to making all of these things consumer friendly yet convey all the relevant information. Going forward, (I'll be optimistic) hardware vendors won't be putting out too many wireless solutions that "check the box" for "yup it has Wi-Fi" but perform so badly - so I don't see this being a problem as old "Wi-Fi 4" client and infrastructure gear starts getting phased out.
PeachNCream - Thursday, October 4, 2018 - link
Yup, I've got one of those single stream N laptops that tops out at 72Mbps. HP skimped on the second antenna when they built the first generation Stream 11. It gets the job done, but a second antenna like the later generation laptops are equipped with would be useful. I might buy and add one myself since the system is very far out of warranty and easy to take apart.Anyway, though the new standard is a good change, it doesn't take into account the many ways that OEMs will cut corners to save small amounts of money on a per unit basis.
nicolaim - Wednesday, October 3, 2018 - link
What about 802.11ad?The last line of the table is missing something.
valinor89 - Thursday, October 4, 2018 - link
Seems like ad would not really be what most people believe that WIFI should be and more like a shupercharged bluethooth, as it has very little range beyound a single room.Also, not directly backwards compatible with preceeding WIFI modes.
valinor89 - Thursday, October 4, 2018 - link
Never mind, seems that backwards support is included in the standard.tmnvnbl - Thursday, October 4, 2018 - link
Indeed, this makes versions such as ad really hard to name. Wifi ad is not directly your home network as n or ac is. ad is 60GHz for physically close appliciations, like wireless laptop docking etc. It is newer and more advanced than Wifi 5, but it is not a replacement for it, more like an extension? Maybe you could call it wifi 5 service pack 1?I don't know. Maybe this naming scheme is better, but the best will always be to just know what you are buying instead of relying on numbers.
valinor89 - Thursday, October 4, 2018 - link
Much better than the a, b, g, n, ac, ax progression. Will look nice besides 5g, Bluethooth 5, etc on the spec sheetsand make comparisons easier as long as they keep equating a bigger number with more speed/better.FreckledTrout - Friday, October 5, 2018 - link
LOl and 6 is bigger than 5 so must be faster which in this case works out with Wifi 6 vs 5g.