Does this ridiculous number of antennas even do anything or is it just marketing wank?
memes
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
Technically, it does provide better connection speeds by enabling the router to avoid channel hopping, so it can talk to multiple devices (or the same devices if it has multiple antennae) at the same time. This is part of the recent wifi6 and wifi7 standards so more and more devices will start to gain speeds using this technique
Realistically computers have at best 2 antennae and this is largely marketing wank.
Though if you have multiple devices all trying to connect to wifi, like even a phone for example, then a computer having two antenna that it can actually use 100% of the time still sounds valuable to me.
Lord Sauron would like a word.
It does. Wifi uses MIMO (Multi-in, multi-out) to run multiple concurrent data streams over the same channel width, which overcomes individual channel bandwidth limitations (there's only so much radio frequency space to go around). Each stream having its own antenna, and having larger antennas, gives stronger signal/noise ratios, less retransmitted packets, and overall better connections.
A lot of those high end "gaming" routers are often oversold though.... MIMO improves throughput if you have an Internet link it can saturate; realistically even a midrange 2x2 802.11AC router will provide more wifi bandwidth than your internet does. And for gaming, they do nothing to improve latency no matter how many streams you run, as wifi's inherent delay (5-15ms) is pretty much a fixed quantity due to its radio broadcast time-sharing nature. The meme is correct. A $6 ethernet cable beats any and all wifi routers and client adapters, and always will.
I'm a network professional with a specialty in wireless.
Yeah, beam forming and mimo are the main reasons for antenna diversity. There's also more radio chains in those units typically, and more radio chains can provide better speeds if you have client devices that can take advantage of the extra radio chains (both sides need to have the same, increased number of radio chains to see an increase).
The antennas are fairly small/thin pieces of wire that are not very long, so the antennas don't need to look like that, but the quantity is useful.
tell that to the $800 of copper running through my walls.
Hay $800 worth of copper, I found a 1000ft roll of shielded pure copper for $2.11 because someone misplaced the decimal point I know because it was listed for $2.1199 every thing was automated through amazon so they just shipped free shipping to, thank for listening $800 worth of copper, your the best.
Wireless tech has improved greatly over the last 20 years. Speed, latency, bandwidth, stability…all generally excellent. 15 years ago I wouldn’t have wanted to use a wireless mouse or LAN connection. Now? NBD. They just work. Still have issues with poor signal in some areas, but mesh range boosters take care of that pretty easily.
Wireless peripheral devices, sure, but if I'm streaming 4K with HD sound then I still want copper.
But what if you're gaming downstairs and the router is upstairs and then you have to go upstairs for pizza rolls so you take your gaming laptop upstairs and you're eating right next to the router and so you're just plugged in and then what if you forgot to turn off the oven and your girlfriend is yelling at you "You're going to start a fire! Why can't you remember to turn off the oven? What's wrong with you?" and then you go back downstairs to finish gaming?
*Excluding running ethernet cables to every room through the attic, down the walls to wall jacks. Also the cost of the jacks, and the various switches needed for several rooms. And the contractor to do it all.
But hey for like $600 I have cat6a in basically every room so
And the contractor to do it all.
Why wouldn’t you do it yourself?
Disabled, so physically cannot do it, or I would.
Like, in an old house its a massive pain in the ass to run that, but still firmly in DIY territory.
Ethernet is obviously better but running ethernet around your home can be a pain in the arse
A pain in the arse you only need to do once, and you can hire someone to do it for you for basically the same cost as a couple of the high end wireless routers, so in like 5 years, you break even.
Also, how much have you spent on your computer (s), phone(s), tablet(s), and all your other internet connected devices, and you won't spend like $500 on something that can run all that stuff simultaneously? Pouring literally thousands of dollars on connected devices, but most won't pay more than they would for a toaster, to get them on the internet, then pay out the wahzoo for gigabit internet that your crummy d-link router can't handle, and you wonder why all your fancy gadgets run like shit.... It's a lot like buying a Ferrari to drive on dirt/gravel roads.
My PC, laptop, work laptop, are all wired using gigabit. But my laptop on wifi reach 1200Mbps so it's faster than cable!
Faster than gigabit, but not 2.5 gigabit. Your cables likely support the speed, just your ports and switching hardware are capped at gigabit.
It's not extremely expensive, but unless you move around a lot of big files, you're probably getting very diminished returns, even spending less than twice as much for 2.5x speeds.
Impressive, I lose half my speed with the router around the corner.
Nah, wifi is pretty good today. I just dont like the consumer devices like the router shown here. Recently redid my wireless and went with a non wifi router, a poe switch and a few access points, connected through ethernet. I wouldnt dream of going back to the conventional one wifi router. Still use wired for stationary devices I can reach with a cable though.. TV, AV, consoles, PC are all wired.
To be honest, I think a lot of Lemmy users are old and yearn for the older technologies simply because they have been more familiar with them than newer ones. They would have used the first gen of a technology, which may not be efficient, and dismiss it altogether, without realising that subsequent generations of that technology improves over time.
I have had that realisation of cognitive bias when I had Bluetooth headphones back in early 2010s. The wireless connection isn't great and gets cut off every now and then. I dismissed the technology as less efficient than wired earphones. It was over the years with the popularity of airpods that I gave wireless earphones another chance. And honestly, the Bluetooth connectivity vastly improved than I expected and I would not go back to using wired earphones again on regular basis because I don't have to deal with the wires getting tangled or yanked. I only use wired ones as backup if my wireless earphones went missing or broke.
Sorry to say this to OP, but it seems that you're being an old man yelling at the clouds. Look, I'm also old and I admit I have had that moment of yelling at the clouds too. We will have that more moments as we age.
I have a similar setup to @PieMePlenty@lemmy.world in regards to my home network and I wouldn't dream of removing my wifi network. I still consider wired to be superior though it rarely matters at those latencies.
My Windows laptop on wifi:
My Fedora on wired network:
Wifi 7 is insanely fast to the point where it can easily be just as good as wired ethernet and can even beat a lot of the wired standards except the few latest ones. It's a good choice for devices where running a cable wouldn't be very practical, but you need wired level speed and reliability.
wired level speed and ~~reliability.~~
While WiFi is a lot better nowadays I've never seen it reach the reliability of wired networks.
wired will always be better, faster, more reliable, and cheaper
I remember watching a video from Linus demonstrating a WiFi router. I don't remember if it was WiFi 6 or 7, but any obstacle could cause connection drops.
I don't know if things have improved since then, but I usually bond WiFi and PowerLine for rooms that Ethernet cannot reach.
Let's see that ethernet cable do orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing...
Dude I just bought 4 refurbished Linksys MX4200 (tri-band) access points for $80 (total), put on OpenWRT, and built a mesh system. I'm incredibly happy with the result, especially for the price. And, I've got wireless bridges all through the house so I can keep some things off the forwarding channels and only in the back haul.
It's not wired, but it's close enough and doesn't require me drilling through all my walls running cable or carving out a space in the house for all of it to coalesce.
Granted, I'm in an area with not a lot of wireless interference...I work in enterprise networking and I've had a lot of issues with remote workers on wireless networks that weren't capable of handling the volume of data that the users were uploading. Sometimes just because there's too much interference...but a lot of the time it's because of misconfiguration (either out of ignorance or because the good features, like multicast-to-unicast, are missing), or printer drivers that spam the wireless with multicast whenever the printer is offline (which I've seen a surprising amount of times).
If you're on wireless...multicast is bad, mmmkay? Only "one" device can talk at a time on wireless (barring MIMO shenanigans), and when it's multicast traffic...it has to get sent at the lowest compatible rates. A lot of routers set this to 6Mbps or even 1Mbps by default. So your nice fancy "1200Mbps" wireless has to slow down a crawl every time your Roku wants to tell Alexa that it's there. Which is surprisingly often. Scale up for all the internet-of-crap stuff people have and it's a miracle their wireless works at all.
Oh and I've found people with extenders they don't know about. Ring Chime? Apparently it functions as an 802.11n (only) extender. Huge bottleneck right there. And then it can only be as good as the signal it gets from the next access point.
Until the clip breaks off...
You could have 30 clips break and it would still be cheaper.
Wireless data links should be the exclusive domain of temporary, nomadic and/or sacrificial applications.
If the channel is permanent, static, or critical; as much of the path as practicable should be provisioned with constrained energy transmission.
I spend a lot more money on good Ethernet switches. But at least that works and is easier to manage than Wifi.
Yeah this kinda overlooks a lot of the issues with like… getting a cable somewhere