Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A deep dive into why Wi-Fi kind of sucks

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 242 posts

Re: A deep dive into why Wi-Fi kind of sucks

#81

Post by zaroth »

Pxtl wrote: post #41
willidiots wrote: post #9

I build public Wi-Fi networks, you've probably used one of them. AMA if you have Wi-Fi questions. To say it "sucks" is a bit harsh. It's delivering multiple hundreds of Mbps to you via an unlicensed contention-based medium. The air interface is like sending packets over a noisy Ethernet hub; it's impressive it works as well as it does. That said, this article's a good primer on some of the protocol's fundamental chal…

Once you're connected wifi is great. It's the long connection negotiation and the slow reconnection process if it gets interrupted or you switch networks that's infuriating. I get upwards of a minute of downtime when I switch from my router to my AP at home.

Virtually none of the handoff delay is actually due to L1 or L2. The PHY handoff itself can happen in less than 10ms, and with Pre-Auth that handoff is actually happening before you even leave one AP for another.

Re: A deep dive into why Wi-Fi kind of sucks

#82

Post by SomeStupidPoint »

woah wrote: post #61
SomeStupidPoint wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, isn't that true and why almost all of our electronics plug in?

One difference is you don't see people going around on forums saying "batteries suck because you have to charge them"

Sure you do: look at forums on portable tools with both battery and cord versions.

The charging time (and necessary backups for continuous use), weight, and low power provided all are cited as weaknesses of batteries.

The only advantages batteries have is increased portability and ability to provide power without existing infrastructure. Which is why we see batteries primarily limited to highly portable devices and backup systems (because they can store power more stably than capacitors).

Wifi sucks for anything that doesn't need to move or have issues preventing cabling (eg, infeasible to run a line through walls, but you can get signal). Batteries suck for anything that doesn't need to move a lot or an independent source of limited power.

Re: A deep dive into why Wi-Fi kind of sucks

#83

Post by kozak »

bennofs wrote: post #55
willidiots wrote: post #9

I build public Wi-Fi networks, you've probably used one of them. AMA if you have Wi-Fi questions. To say it "sucks" is a bit harsh. It's delivering multiple hundreds of Mbps to you via an unlicensed contention-based medium. The air interface is like sending packets over a noisy Ethernet hub; it's impressive it works as well as it does. That said, this article's a good primer on some of the protocol's fundamental chal…

I've got a weird problem at my home where WiFi connection on my laptop gets really bad as soon as some particular other laptop connects to the WiFi. Reconnecting fixes the issue. Any idea what might cause this or how to gather more information on potential causes?

Try to switch your router to 802.11n-only mode (no compatibility with b and g).

Re: A deep dive into why Wi-Fi kind of sucks

#84

Post by massysett »

employee8000 wrote: post #47

If it's a mess then as a consumer they're doing a great job hiding it from me. I have 20 devices connected to my wifi and everything is running particularly smoothly. I did get frustrated at my 802.11n 4 years ago and dropped $250 for the best ac wifi router on the market and have had no complaints since then. Sure it could be more efficient from a technical standpoint but that's not something I'm interested in and I…

Same here. I have a Roku sitting literally four inches from my router and I haven't hooked it up by wire because I've been too lazy to go get a patch cable (where "go get" means to my basement, not to the store.) I know wired would be faster but wireless has long been fast enough for me not to care.

Re: A deep dive into why Wi-Fi kind of sucks

#85

Post by digler999 »

willidiots wrote: post #9

I build public Wi-Fi networks, you've probably used one of them. AMA if you have Wi-Fi questions. To say it "sucks" is a bit harsh. It's delivering multiple hundreds of Mbps to you via an unlicensed contention-based medium. The air interface is like sending packets over a noisy Ethernet hub; it's impressive it works as well as it does. That said, this article's a good primer on some of the protocol's fundamental chal…

why does authentication take so damn long ? Why can't it happen in a blink of an eye ?

Re: A deep dive into why Wi-Fi kind of sucks

#86

Post by douche »

bsenftner wrote: post #10

My day to day happiness quotient shot up the day I ditched my wireless wifi and ran Ethernet cables through my spaces. I'd realized I was constantly noticing wifi issues, and an apple mbp I use for email seems to drop wifi every half hour. But no longer, with them all wired up! Realizing there are USB3 to Ethernet gadgets really hits home how our modern technology is market-driven-dumb and anti-consumer: all modern l…

> all modern laptops don't even have Ethernet ports anymore!

Surely things haven't gotten this insane outside the iFruitbasket? If so I'm going to have to stock up on upgradeable refurbished laptops...

Re: A deep dive into why Wi-Fi kind of sucks

#87

Post by coin »

nerdbaggy wrote: post #5

As somebody who deploys high density wifi for a living I can agree that WiFi sucks. 5Ghz is already super crowded and it's only getting worse. The new LTE over 5Ghz is going to kill 5Ghz I think once it becomes deployed. Some of the cameras in arena run on 80mhz 5Ghz frequency that hop around and can't be channel planned. They are the worst.

There is a huge difference between MHz and mHz

Re: A deep dive into why Wi-Fi kind of sucks

#88

Post by coin »

extra88 wrote: post #60
Klathmon wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to live about 1/4 mile away from any other houses, and I never got why people always complained about wifi. In my experience it always worked well, was fairly fullproof, and had fast enough speeds that it was never an issue. 2 years ago I moved into a condo that has 25 wifi APs within range of me right now. Now I get it. Getting one of the high-end tri-band routers as you said did help, but it's still a diffic…

I never heard of a tri-band router before. It's a misnomer because there is no third band, it just means it can handle 2.4GHz but will use two channels of 5GHz at once. There have been other routers in the past that used more than one channel but it sounds very selfish to use in a dense apartment/condo living situation.

Good point, they should be called simultaneous tri channel.

Re: A deep dive into why Wi-Fi kind of sucks

#89

Post by amelius »

The article doesn't seem to speak about directivity. Sending a narrow, directed beam of information could reduce contention issues, and reduce power requirements. But you'd need a more advanced antenna (probably an array), more advanced signal processing, and smarter software.

Re: A deep dive into why Wi-Fi kind of sucks

#90

Post by LogicX »

willidiots wrote: post #9

I build public Wi-Fi networks, you've probably used one of them. AMA if you have Wi-Fi questions. To say it "sucks" is a bit harsh. It's delivering multiple hundreds of Mbps to you via an unlicensed contention-based medium. The air interface is like sending packets over a noisy Ethernet hub; it's impressive it works as well as it does. That said, this article's a good primer on some of the protocol's fundamental chal…

You should put contact info in your profile.
Post reply on HN