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

Does our “need for speed” make our wi-fi suck?

orb.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 327 posts

Re: Does our “need for speed” make our wi-fi suck?

#11

Post by kjkjadksj »

thewebguyd wrote: post #5
semiquaver wrote: post #4

The thing about speed tests causing a bad experience because they hog airtime felt like a non sequitur (since performing them is rare and manual) until I saw this: > Many ISPs, device manufacturers, and consumers automate periodic, high-intensity speed tests that negatively impact the consumer internet experience as demonstrated But there’s no support for this claim presented frankly I am skeptical. What WiFi devices…

> What WiFi devices are regularly conducting speed tests without being asked? ISP provided routers, at least Xfinity does. I've gotten emails from them (before I ripped out their equipment and put my own in) "Great news, you're getting more than your plan's promised speeds" with speedtest results in the email, because they ran speed tests at like 3AM. I wouldn't be surprised if it's happening often across all the res…

I have noticed Spectrum internet shits the bed at 12:30am pretty reliably.

Re: Does our “need for speed” make our wi-fi suck?

#12

Post by jeffbee »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #10
jeffbee wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ethernet pretty much sucks and has not improved substantially in consumer devices since the previous century. It also has pretty severe idle power consumption consequences for PCs, unless you are an expert who goes around fixing that.

You still get the best speeds over ethernet today because of how wifi standards are slow walked, both on the router and the device connected with the router. Ethernet standards are slow walked too of course but we are talking slow walking a 2.5g or 10g connection here, even otherwise crappy hardware is likely to have 1g ethernet and it’s been that way for at least 10 or 15 years.

If you want to transfer the contents of your old mac to your new mac, your best options in order of speed are 1) thunderbolt, 2) wifi, and 3) ethernet. You do not, in any sense, get "the best speeds" from ethernet. The market penetration of greater-than-1gb wired networks in consumer devices is practically nothing.

Re: Does our “need for speed” make our wi-fi suck?

#13

Post by typpilol »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #3
PaulHoule wrote: post #2

I did some experimentation with UniFi hubs and came to the conclusion that if you can give each device its own WiFi channel that would be ideal -- contention is that bad and often an uncontended channel with otherwise poor characteristics will beat a contended channel that otherwise looks good. The other bit of advice that is buried in there that no-one wants to hear for residences is the best way to speed up your Wi…

> The other bit of advice that is buried in there that no-one wants to hear for residences is the best way to speed up your Wi-Fi is to not use it. You might think it's convenient to have your TV connect to Netflix via WiFi and it is, but it is going to make everything else that really needs the Wi-Fi slower. It's a much better answer to hook up everything on Ethernet that you possibly can than it is to follow the mo…

The reality is that most people only have a single cord coming into the house

So they would have to do quite a bit of work to run cable. Also people living in apartments that cant just start drilling through walls.

I'd say most ppl use wifi because they have too, not pure convenience

Re: Does our “need for speed” make our wi-fi suck?

#14

Post by astrange »

jeffbee wrote: post #12
kjkjadksj wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You still get the best speeds over ethernet today because of how wifi standards are slow walked, both on the router and the device connected with the router. Ethernet standards are slow walked too of course but we are talking slow walking a 2.5g or 10g connection here, even otherwise crappy hardware is likely to have 1g ethernet and it’s been that way for at least 10 or 15 years.

If you want to transfer the contents of your old mac to your new mac, your best options in order of speed are 1) thunderbolt, 2) wifi, and 3) ethernet. You do not, in any sense, get "the best speeds" from ethernet. The market penetration of greater-than-1gb wired networks in consumer devices is practically nothing.

I have all 2.5gbit at home with some 10gbit SFP copper connections, it wasn't particularly difficult. The devices with built-in Ethernet ports are all gigabit of course, but the ones with USB-C ports have 2.5gbit adapters.

I could go to 10gbit but the Thunderbolt adapters for those all have fans.

Re: Does our “need for speed” make our wi-fi suck?

#15

Post by pbronez »

jeffbee wrote: post #12
kjkjadksj wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You still get the best speeds over ethernet today because of how wifi standards are slow walked, both on the router and the device connected with the router. Ethernet standards are slow walked too of course but we are talking slow walking a 2.5g or 10g connection here, even otherwise crappy hardware is likely to have 1g ethernet and it’s been that way for at least 10 or 15 years.

If you want to transfer the contents of your old mac to your new mac, your best options in order of speed are 1) thunderbolt, 2) wifi, and 3) ethernet. You do not, in any sense, get "the best speeds" from ethernet. The market penetration of greater-than-1gb wired networks in consumer devices is practically nothing.

If you’re the kind of person who wants better than gigabit Ethernet, it’s very available. 2.5Gbe is just a USB adapter away. Mac Studio comes with 10GbE. Unifi networking gives you managed multi-gig and plenty of others do unmanaged multigig at affordable prices. Piles of consumer NAS support multigig.

I think this market is driven by content creators. Lots of prosumers shoot terabytes of video on a weekly basis. Local NAS are essential and multi-gig local networks dramatically improve the editing experience.

Re: Does our “need for speed” make our wi-fi suck?

#16

Post by pbronez »

esseph wrote: post #6
semiquaver wrote: post #4

The thing about speed tests causing a bad experience because they hog airtime felt like a non sequitur (since performing them is rare and manual) until I saw this: > Many ISPs, device manufacturers, and consumers automate periodic, high-intensity speed tests that negatively impact the consumer internet experience as demonstrated But there’s no support for this claim presented frankly I am skeptical. What WiFi devices…

Ubiquiti UniFi used to, I don't know if it still does.

It’s configurable

Re: Does our “need for speed” make our wi-fi suck?

#17

Post by typpilol »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #11
thewebguyd wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What WiFi devices are regularly conducting speed tests without being asked? ISP provided routers, at least Xfinity does. I've gotten emails from them (before I ripped out their equipment and put my own in) "Great news, you're getting more than your plan's promised speeds" with speedtest results in the email, because they ran speed tests at like 3AM. I wouldn't be surprised if it's happening often across all the res…

I have noticed Spectrum internet shits the bed at 12:30am pretty reliably.

Really? My spectrum has been super reliable in Michigan. Way better than when I had Comcast here

Re: Does our “need for speed” make our wi-fi suck?

#18

Post by fragmede »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #3
PaulHoule wrote: post #2

I did some experimentation with UniFi hubs and came to the conclusion that if you can give each device its own WiFi channel that would be ideal -- contention is that bad and often an uncontended channel with otherwise poor characteristics will beat a contended channel that otherwise looks good. The other bit of advice that is buried in there that no-one wants to hear for residences is the best way to speed up your Wi…

> The other bit of advice that is buried in there that no-one wants to hear for residences is the best way to speed up your Wi-Fi is to not use it. You might think it's convenient to have your TV connect to Netflix via WiFi and it is, but it is going to make everything else that really needs the Wi-Fi slower. It's a much better answer to hook up everything on Ethernet that you possibly can than it is to follow the mo…

And the big one I want to point out, is that this AI stuff has me downloading so many ten gigabyte model files to run them locally that I'm really feeling the lack of speed that my setup has.

Re: Does our “need for speed” make our wi-fi suck?

#19

Post by nativeit »

esseph wrote: post #6
semiquaver wrote: post #4

The thing about speed tests causing a bad experience because they hog airtime felt like a non sequitur (since performing them is rare and manual) until I saw this: > Many ISPs, device manufacturers, and consumers automate periodic, high-intensity speed tests that negatively impact the consumer internet experience as demonstrated But there’s no support for this claim presented frankly I am skeptical. What WiFi devices…

Ubiquiti UniFi used to, I don't know if it still does.

At least in my UniFi instance, this is only done when manually triggered, but I seem to recall a setting where it could be automatically updated daily.

Re: Does our “need for speed” make our wi-fi suck?

#20

Post by kulahan »

jeffbee wrote: post #12
kjkjadksj wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You still get the best speeds over ethernet today because of how wifi standards are slow walked, both on the router and the device connected with the router. Ethernet standards are slow walked too of course but we are talking slow walking a 2.5g or 10g connection here, even otherwise crappy hardware is likely to have 1g ethernet and it’s been that way for at least 10 or 15 years.

If you want to transfer the contents of your old mac to your new mac, your best options in order of speed are 1) thunderbolt, 2) wifi, and 3) ethernet. You do not, in any sense, get "the best speeds" from ethernet. The market penetration of greater-than-1gb wired networks in consumer devices is practically nothing.

brb ima turn on my microwave halfway through your transfer
Post reply on HN