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

EE is working with Qualcomm to add Wi-Fi 7 to consumer broadband hubs

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 124 posts

Re: EE is working with Qualcomm to add Wi-Fi 7 to consumer broadband hubs

#21

Post by throw0101c »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #15
throw0101c wrote: post #12

The home upgrade that most folks need is a symmetrical fibre optic of some kind, with open-access [1] and either municipal [2] or non-profit at OSI Layer 1/2, with competition at OSI Layer 3. I think at this point 100Mbps would be the minimum, with diminishing returns once you start getting above 1Gbps (but available with XG(S)-PON(G.98(0)7)/NG-PON2(G.989)/HSP(G.9804) and 802.3ca). It was technically possible to wire…

The internet is designed for average people to suck down content, rather than create content. It's why I get 1gbps down but 35mbps up.

The Internet is designed for whatever we decide to design it for. The fact that most use cases are currently download-heavy does not mean other types of application could not be created if more bandwidth was available for upload.

If you told people about streaming >1080p video folks with 9600bps modems back in the day would have thought you were nuts. Certainly there's probably a point of diminishing returns, but why not give as many people 'too much' bandwidth and see if folks think of creative ways to use it?

Re: EE is working with Qualcomm to add Wi-Fi 7 to consumer broadband hubs

#22

Post by pzo »

ac29 wrote: post #16
pzo wrote: post #6

> Wi-Fi 6's comparable maximum rate is 9.6Gbps. There is no consumer problem of today, no domestic use case imaginable, where 50Gbps works where 10 will not. iphone has just 2x2 MIMO antena so even with WiFi 6 can get only max 2.4Gbps (1.2Gbps per antena - someone correct me if I'm wrong). And those are only max speed in labs in perfect conditions. So there is definitely use case for WiFi 7 in consumer devices e.g. V…

>Higher bandwidth should also make connection more robust Nope. Higher bandwidth could mean two things: Larger channel size: larger channels have a higher noise floor and are are therefore less robust Faster throughput: Faster throughput generally means larger channels (as above) or various techniques to get more bits/Hz (such as more complex modulation), both of which are less robust

I was more thinking if there is some frame collision and have a lot of data to send then overall robustness latency should be reduced? Similar like in a bus even if they travel at the same speed if you miss your bus or bus is full you have to wait. On the other hand if the bus is bigger with more sits or bus scheduled more frequent it's less likely you will have to wait. Also if bus breaks there is another one not far away behind to pickup passengers from broken bus.

Re: EE is working with Qualcomm to add Wi-Fi 7 to consumer broadband hubs

#23

Post by secondcoming »

agloe_dreams wrote: post #9

What annoys me is this: I have a TMobile iPhone 15 Pro and three Erro Pro 6 units, all with wired backhaul. Over the wire, my fast.com results repeatedly reach ~1.2 Gigs. Over Wifi, from a foot away, my results are around 650Mbps. The local church recently had T-Mobile install a 5G antenna array around it. I'm about two blocks away. Over 5G, I get 1.4Gigs down, though my walls, through an entire house between us. But…

I use a 5G router. I get about 600mbps from it over Ethernet, and 300mbps over Wifi

Re: EE is working with Qualcomm to add Wi-Fi 7 to consumer broadband hubs

#24

Post by [deleted] »

pzo wrote: post #6

> Wi-Fi 6's comparable maximum rate is 9.6Gbps. There is no consumer problem of today, no domestic use case imaginable, where 50Gbps works where 10 will not. iphone has just 2x2 MIMO antena so even with WiFi 6 can get only max 2.4Gbps (1.2Gbps per antena - someone correct me if I'm wrong). And those are only max speed in labs in perfect conditions. So there is definitely use case for WiFi 7 in consumer devices e.g. V…

[deleted]

Re: EE is working with Qualcomm to add Wi-Fi 7 to consumer broadband hubs

#25

Post by pzo »

danaris wrote: post #17
pzo wrote: post #6

> Wi-Fi 6's comparable maximum rate is 9.6Gbps. There is no consumer problem of today, no domestic use case imaginable, where 50Gbps works where 10 will not. iphone has just 2x2 MIMO antena so even with WiFi 6 can get only max 2.4Gbps (1.2Gbps per antena - someone correct me if I'm wrong). And those are only max speed in labs in perfect conditions. So there is definitely use case for WiFi 7 in consumer devices e.g. V…

I'm honestly struggling to come up with a use case for a single iPhone to need more than 300 megabytes per second (2.4Gbps) of bandwidth at any given time. (Noting that 8K video, in fairly un-optimized scenarios, appears to need about 96Mbps—just 12 megabytes per second, or 4% of that "low" bandwidth.) What are you doing, streaming raw, uncompressed video from multiple sources to a single iPhone? If you've got that m…

for iPhones maybe not but for drones or AR devices if you want to stream 4k at 60fps or 120fps then there is a lot of data to send. You could use iPhone as Drone payload for doing some site/construction inspection etc. Same with drones - they can fly very fast so would be nice to stream at 4k@120fps. Drones or iphones can/have many camera including lidar, depthmap (trudepth)

Re: EE is working with Qualcomm to add Wi-Fi 7 to consumer broadband hubs

#26

Post by corn13read2 »

Generally I disagree with this sentiment. Do not wait to make a pipe bigger because it is full. We had this issue with phone lines and then CAT5 and CAT still sucks because commercial equipment is so expensive. How can the world innovate in-home technology when it's not cheap and ubiquitous.

I can definitely imagine things I can do with that in-house, not just for me but for other adopters.

Re: EE is working with Qualcomm to add Wi-Fi 7 to consumer broadband hubs

#27

Post by rjsw »

throw0101c wrote: post #12

The home upgrade that most folks need is a symmetrical fibre optic of some kind, with open-access [1] and either municipal [2] or non-profit at OSI Layer 1/2, with competition at OSI Layer 3. I think at this point 100Mbps would be the minimum, with diminishing returns once you start getting above 1Gbps (but available with XG(S)-PON(G.98(0)7)/NG-PON2(G.989)/HSP(G.9804) and 802.3ca). It was technically possible to wire…

I got 500Mb/s symmetrical fibre installed last month. Not seeing much faster transfer rates from individual servers, I'm guessing most do some traffic shaping.

Edit: mistyped G instead of M.

Re: EE is working with Qualcomm to add Wi-Fi 7 to consumer broadband hubs

#28

Post by ilyt »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #15
throw0101c wrote: post #12

The home upgrade that most folks need is a symmetrical fibre optic of some kind, with open-access [1] and either municipal [2] or non-profit at OSI Layer 1/2, with competition at OSI Layer 3. I think at this point 100Mbps would be the minimum, with diminishing returns once you start getting above 1Gbps (but available with XG(S)-PON(G.98(0)7)/NG-PON2(G.989)/HSP(G.9804) and 802.3ca). It was technically possible to wire…

The internet is designed for average people to suck down content, rather than create content. It's why I get 1gbps down but 35mbps up.

That's not "the internet", that's last hop of the internet and mostly due to technical limitations (if you got X bandwidth giving most of it to upload makes sense). FTH makes it easier to give symmetrical access

Re: EE is working with Qualcomm to add Wi-Fi 7 to consumer broadband hubs

#29

Post by ilyt »

pzo wrote: post #6

> Wi-Fi 6's comparable maximum rate is 9.6Gbps. There is no consumer problem of today, no domestic use case imaginable, where 50Gbps works where 10 will not. iphone has just 2x2 MIMO antena so even with WiFi 6 can get only max 2.4Gbps (1.2Gbps per antena - someone correct me if I'm wrong). And those are only max speed in labs in perfect conditions. So there is definitely use case for WiFi 7 in consumer devices e.g. V…

Streaming raw video to VR headset is probably only situation when it makes sense for consumers. For near every single other thing it's a massive overkill

Re: EE is working with Qualcomm to add Wi-Fi 7 to consumer broadband hubs

#30

Post by treis »

agloe_dreams wrote: post #9

What annoys me is this: I have a TMobile iPhone 15 Pro and three Erro Pro 6 units, all with wired backhaul. Over the wire, my fast.com results repeatedly reach ~1.2 Gigs. Over Wifi, from a foot away, my results are around 650Mbps. The local church recently had T-Mobile install a 5G antenna array around it. I'm about two blocks away. Over 5G, I get 1.4Gigs down, though my walls, through an entire house between us. But…

I think pretty much all wifi devices lie about the speed they can obtain. A lot that claim gigabit combine the speeds of 2.4GHz & 5GHz to get to 1 Gbps. Few devices out there legitimately offered the speed they advertise. At least that's what I saw when I looked a couple years ago.
Post reply on HN