View Single Post

Old 04-13-2009, 10:32 PM   #11
dieKatze88
STANLEY FUBAR
 
dieKatze88's Avatar
 
dieKatze88 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 2,597
Marketplace Rating: 4
Send a message via PM  to dieKatze88
dieKatze88 dieKatze88
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by helix eternal View Post
802.11 and 802.16 are both wireless broadband networking standards, 802.3 is Ethernet. From what I know from experience and all I've read, 802.11 has nothing to do with Ethernet. You can definitely have an 802.11 wireless network set up without any Ethernet involved. You can connect to an Ethernet network with 802.11 wireless but it is not required.
802.11 Is technically not Wireless Ethernet, however, lets look at this another way, Its gotten so bad that the entire networking industry has started calling it that, While 802.11 defines no spectrum it should be used over (no good IEEE standard does) it does define what 802.11 should be used for: Local Area Networks. It's not meant to be a broadband technology (however, some cities and ISPs are incorrectly using it as such and fucking things up for everybody else) and probably in no serious way, never will be.

The "Wireless Ethernet" term comes from the term "Ethernet" becoming a synonym to "Local Area Network" because there was a time (read: 1980s and early 90s) when Ethernet was not your only choice for Local Area Networks. As such, 802.11 is commonly labeled "Wireless Ethernet" due to its compatible frame type and plug-and-play natures.

As for WiMax, that technology is a goddamn failure. While Yes, Broadband internet, true, but commercially viable, false. 802.16 failed in Australia 2 years ago when they found that Speed versus distance had problems unsurprisingly similar to Wifi. In other countries, Wimax is having a hard time taking off compared to 3.5g networks, where you can be nearly guaranteed great coverage and great data rates. I have 1 bar on my HSDPA phone and can still hit 3.6mb/s Downstream and 700kb/s upstream with a 200ms latency, Wimax will never be able to do that in a commercial installation on the high frequencies it's being subscribed to, also, pitched as a successor to the CDMA-2000 technology, but ignored by the largest CDMA-2000 operators (read: Most Importantly, Verizon Wireless in the United States) in favor of moving to the 4g evolution of the GSM Technology, LTE, complete with a low 700mhz band to boot. Imagine having 4g signal, with 100mb/s both ways while moving 60mph, everywhere in the United States. Thats what the partnership between Verizon Wireless and AT&T Wireless is going to create in the next 3 years. With the corporate dropout of support on WiMax, don't expect it to stick too much longer.
__________________
Excel has no secret mod powers.
  Reply With Quote