this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2023
278 points (94.0% liked)

Technology

59223 readers
3341 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] kirklennon@kbin.social 232 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (16 children)

The confusing alphabet soup of Wi-Fi versions got renamed. 802.11n became Wi-Fi 4, 802.11ac became Wi-Fi 5, and 802.11ax became Wi-Fi 6. Wi-Fi 7 is still in development so 6 is the best in-use version.

[–] mustardman@discuss.tchncs.de 94 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Technically 6E is the best in-use version for compatible devices. Same as WiFi 6 but adds the 6GHz spectrum that was recently unlocked by many regulatory agencies around the world. The 6GHz range is significantly less congested and would have better real-world performance in dense residential areas.

Edit: A few months ago I stumbled upon this site where the author goes quite in-depth about WiFi and does so in a way that is easy to understand. They debunk/corroborate claims and technologies advertised by manufacturers so it really helps demystify the process of selecting the right WiFi gear.

[–] MimicJar@lemmy.world 45 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's funny that WiFi is alphabet soup as the other comment mentioned, they rebranded to a single, simple number...then chucked an E on the end.

I get how/why, but it's just funny.

[–] mustardman@discuss.tchncs.de 29 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Strykker@programming.dev 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Usb could have been great, then they decided that with every minor version bump they needed to go back and fuck with the name of the previous version..

Like FFS just do 3(5gbps) 3.1(10gbps) 3.2(20gbps) etc or whatever the fucking difference even is between them all at this point.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Paradox@lemdro.id 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

6E is great, but basically nothing supports it. I got a 6E capable AP from Ubiquiti, and looking at my devices table, basically nothing has ever used the 6GHz radio. My house has a wide variety of devices, many new. The only thing that's used it is my MacBook

[–] derpo@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And that MacBook must get unparalleled speed and airtime

[–] Clusterfck@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 1 year ago

I got over a 1 gigabit download on my S23 Ultra and still couldn't believe that 10 years ago 10 megabit on wifi was considered decent.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mr_tyler_durden@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago

And then, because they can’t help themselves, they came out with 6E. Honestly I think all standards bodies (USB, HDMI, WiFi) just love making stupid sub-versions that make things even more confusing.

[–] worsedoughnut@lemdro.id 21 points 1 year ago

pre-numbering, it was almost like trying to decipher Sanskrit when going out to buy a router.

[–] Kazumara@feddit.de 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm more confused now than before. I always knew what b, g, n and ac were, but now when people say Wifi 5 or Wifi 6 I don't know which of the standards it corresponds to.

[–] Etienne_Dahu@jlai.lu 34 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Just count them, that's what I do. 1 is a, 2 is b, 3 is g, 4 is n, 5 is ac, 6 is ax.

[–] naticus@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You want to be really confused then? Because b is WiFi 1 and a is WiFi 2. Everything else you said is correct though.

[–] Etienne_Dahu@jlai.lu 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Wait, what? How could they do that? The first standard was wifi a, I was there 3000 years ago! These guys have no respect for history! /OldManYellsAtCloud

Edit: it seems that b and a both came in 1999. Oh well.

[–] anlumo@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They also weren’t compatible with each other. That was fun.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kazumara@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Thanks, that actually a good idea.

I guess I did miss "a", that was never something I saw on our older APs when I was a teen, only "b"

[–] towerful@programming.dev 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

WiFi has literally gone the opposite of USB.
It used to be obvious what USB speeds were, whereas WiFi was 802.11b or whatever.
Now we have WiFi 5 or WiFi 6. And we have USB-C PD 10gbps with AltMode

[–] hyperhopper@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

USB has gotten more complicated and does way more now in more contexts. It charges laptops now, it carries multiplexed displayport signals, it does its own handshake and performs hardware level initialization protocols.

Meanwhile we've been wanting the same thing out of wifi since the start. Nothing's really changed, we just want it to go faster.

[–] towerful@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago

Fair point.
USB doing everything requires significantly more description of what a port can actually do.
I just wish the USB foundation didn't go with something that makes it difficult to find devices supporting specific features, and played directly into the marketing "upselling/shrinkflation" thing.
The ubs3.1, usb3.2, gen1, gen2, 10gbps etc. It's a LOT, and everything is very similar.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] favrion@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (4 children)
[–] kirklennon@kbin.social 42 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The very simple version is that the newer versions support faster speeds.

[–] mustardman@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I would add the potential for better range as well from a variety of improvements.

Newer WiFi standards can take advantage of multiple frequencies in a single link, which allows for fallback on the slower, but longer range, 2.4GHz networks. Beamforming has been available since at least WiFi 5 (802.11ac) and helps connection quality as well. The new 6GHz spectrum is uncongested and gives better performance in areas with high saturation of 2.4GHz and 5GHz networks, such as apartments and highrises.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] CantStopStaring@lemmynsfw.com 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's more nuanced than faster speeds. All newer versions of WiFi came with speed improvements but compared with previous versions WiFi 6 speed improvements were comparatively modest. The advantage with WiFi 6 over its predecessors was a focus on improving latency and reliability. The number of supported clients was drastically increased with the implementation of technologies first developed in cell networks. Wireless antennas used to be limited to serving each client one at a time. Now they've been given the ability to multitask.

You can liken it to a restaurant where the cook is the network, the waiter is the wireless antenna, and each customer is a wireless device. With WiFi standards before version 6, the waiter was not very good at their job and once they collected an order, they would give it to the cook and wait for the cook to finish cooking the entire meal before delivering it to the customer and moving on to the next customer. This method was improved in the past by making the waiter quicker which is where we get the speed boosts. You can also improve on this by adding more antennas or "waiters" to the environment but the waiters themselves are still not operating as effectively as they can on an individual level. This is why WiFi 6 is such a major improvement that flies under the radar. The improvement may not be that noticable in a home environment where the antennas only have to serve a limited number of clients but in an environment where hundreds or even thousands of clients are communicating simultaneously, this is a critical improvement. On top of this, the improvements have decreased the rate of packets being dropped and improved latency so even in home environments, a network running on WiFi 6 will be more robust and reliable. WiFi 7 will go back to the old paradigm of significantly increasing speed once again.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] ulph@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago
[–] Squirrel@artemis.camp 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It means it is only 1/3 evil

[–] nucleative@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

That's... Not how any of this works 🤔

[–] cheeseandkrakens@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] outplayed@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] grumpyrico@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Mr_Sir@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)
load more comments
view more: next ›