151–160 of 250 posts
For the context - what do US, UK and China do?
In the US, it's open for unlicensed use for very low power devices. That is, it's open for WiFi. It's used by WiFi 6E, 7, and 8. https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-opens-entire-6-ghz-band-ver...
https://publicknowledge.org/ted-cruz-wants-to-sell-your-wi-f...
> In response, the Wi-Fi Alliance and the DSA are trying to stoke fears that such a move would severely dent Europe's digital development, claiming Wi-Fi is the primary way consumers access the internet and constraining it would impact progress. Just today, there’s a news report in India where the major telecom companies have lobbied that the entire 6 GHz band be reserved for mobile services and that even part of it…
For better or worse mobile companies will probably make a more efficient use of the space in a country like India at a practical level. I can at least see why you might do this. I don't know anything really about India's telecoms market, but I know in other 'similar' countries you can buy a mobile phone data plan for like a couple/few dollars a month, but a fixed line is 10X that. You could argue it's not very progre…
If you don't know what you're talking about, why even bother to post? Maybe wait for a topic that you know something about before responding.
This is just corporate greed! I live in a EU country in an apartment and 5GHz is completely crowded and pretty much unusable because of DFS (making your WiFi AP unexpectedly stop to do a complete scan and choose a new channel), so 6GHz is the only stable, high bandwidth option here, and we need more channels so that most peopole chan switch to it. The cellular networks operators can have that shitty 5GHz part of the…
And you think the same problem wouldn't exist with 6ghz? It will be as crowded as 5
(Student wifi hotspots in a large lecture theatre, that's another problem entirely!)
Multiple things can be true simultaneously. For instance: * The reach for 6GHz by mobile service providers is straight-up greed, as Wi-Fi is a threat to their business expansions towards monopolization * Wi-Fi is incredibly overcrowded, and a shift to 6GHz will not solve the underlying issues causing the crowding in the first place (mobile device density, over-reliance on Wi-Fi instead of running ethernet to capable…
We gave WiFi 800Mhz in the 5Ghz band and we said the same thing at the time 'this is the last we'll need'. That's 10x as much as in 2.4ghz and at a higher frequency. I remember a lot of people at the time getting really upset about how wasteful that was. Just saying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "significantly" is 50%, but still nowhere near 1 channel per network even if all networks cooperated. 5Ghz has 500Mhz worth of total bandwidth, while 6Ghz has (in US/CA, and hopefully in EU eventually) 1200Mhz. That's over double . 6Ghz has more 160Mhz channels (7) than 5Ghz has 80Mhz channels (6).
so in reality you're 1 channel up over 6GHz becasue people are not buying wifi6 router to stay on 80MHz channel
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For better or worse mobile companies will probably make a more efficient use of the space in a country like India at a practical level. I can at least see why you might do this. I don't know anything really about India's telecoms market, but I know in other 'similar' countries you can buy a mobile phone data plan for like a couple/few dollars a month, but a fixed line is 10X that. You could argue it's not very progre…
I don't know… probably… probably… I don't know anything really If you don't know what you're talking about, why even bother to post? Maybe wait for a topic that you know something about before responding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The most efficient way to extract money from people is to sell off the spectrum to the highest bidding rent seeker, I agree. As for most efficient use of the resource, well, consulting my spectrum analyzer, ISM bands are winning by a mile and we should want more of them.
Sure obviously giving it to WiFi and then installing town wide free WiFi would be the absolute most efficient option but I'm trying to stay realistic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> estadounidenses And in French the inhabitants of "les Etats-Unis" are "Etats-uniens". I've taken the habit of referring to them as USAians, which often gets negative reactionsand remains rare - but I find it is the most accurate demonym and I'll keep pushing it. I look forward to the world inventing demonyms for the citizens of the European Union, because at least it will mean that our emerging national body is get…
Whenever I’ve heard the term américain it’s been used to refer to a US citizen, not a mexicain or citizen of some other American country.
This is just corporate greed! I live in a EU country in an apartment and 5GHz is completely crowded and pretty much unusable because of DFS (making your WiFi AP unexpectedly stop to do a complete scan and choose a new channel), so 6GHz is the only stable, high bandwidth option here, and we need more channels so that most peopole chan switch to it. The cellular networks operators can have that shitty 5GHz part of the…
that's why I'm running only 2.4Ghz APs, enough bandwidth for mobile common uses, all static hardware has wires to them. Far better then 5GHz band
It's enough to stream 4k video (though barely, and I'd be better off moving to a TV), has better wall penetration and is fast enough for browsing and updating software.
I don't have to deal with congestion though. I think I've only seen a neighbour's AP once and I doubt they started hiding their SSID. My guess is that congestion is an issue because transmission power isn't low enough and there's little you can do to fix someone else's AP other than be increasingly louder than them.