Fast Wi-Fi's Slow Road To Standardization 140
Posted
by
timothy
from the vested-interests-took-off-gloves dept.
from the vested-interests-took-off-gloves dept.
CWmike contributes this excerpt from Computerworld: "For a technology that's all about being fast, 802.11n Wi-Fi sure took its sweet time to become a standard, writes Steven J. Vaughan Nichols. In fact, until September 2009, it wasn't, officially, even a standard. But that didn't stop vendors from implementing it for several years beforehand, causing confusion and upset when networking gear that used draft standards from different suppliers wouldn't always work at the fastest possible speed when connected. It wasn't supposed to be that way. But, for years, the Wi-Fi hardware big dogs fought over the 802.11n protocol like it was a chew toy. The result: it took five drama-packed years for the standard to come to fruition. The delay was never over the technology. In fact, the technical tricks that give 802.11n its steady connection speeds of 100Mbps to 140Mbps have been well-known for years."
Drama...? (Score:4, Funny)
I love this line; "The result: it took five drama-packed years for the standard to come to fruition"
Yep, this has definitely kept me on the edge of my seat waaayyyy more than watching Lost or Heroes.
Re:Blueray of Wifi (Score:1, Funny)
How's that HD video streaming working out for you?
Re:Drama...? (Score:5, Funny)
I hear HBO has hired someone to write a season or two based on the whole ordeal. Rumours are it will be called "N" and the tagline will be "Wi the Fi is this taking so long?". It's not above any of the normal problems that HBO shows have. You know, the kind where there is a secret love plot between two characters that have no influence on the story whatsoever. Or the writers write in a love scene, and then it gets cut short for commercial breaks.
Re:Promoting the progress of science and useful ar (Score:2, Funny)
an Australian government
and one from the US Constitution: ... Try again, Congress.
Does this not point out a flaw in your logic?
He's obviously suggesting that U.S. Congress failed because it didn't order an invasion of Australia to promote the progress of science.