The difference between "b" and "g" networks?

[Jonathan Bones]

Could anyone point me in the direction of a good tutorial on/explanation of the differences between "b" and "g" wireless networks? Or perhaps there's a good thread on the subject already, that I just haven't come across?

Here's what I know currently:


1. "b" is older, slower, and thus cheaper.

2. However, "b" doesn't have the security strength that "g" does.

3. Despite the fact that "g" is faster, no home user should actually need it, as current cable/DSL connections don't surpass 5 Mbits. (Oh, and what are the actual speeds at which the networks run?)

4. When it comes to connections and routers, the two are totally compatible. Just, of course, you're going to be limited to "b" speed if you're using any "b" device.

5. D-Link and Linksys lead the market when it comes to hardware, but there shouldn't be any compatibility problems between devices made by different manufacturers.

Please let me know if I'm wrong on any of these points.

Questions:

6. Is connecting via PCI preferable to USB in any way, or is it just a matter of what's most convenient/what you have available?

7. What are these "speedboost" edition devices that Linksys sells? In what situation would they be needed?

8. Also, I've heard that there's a new standard coming out later this year with nearly impenetrable security. What can you tell me about it?


Thanks!

 

[C.Ingram]

You are mostly right. I can get something like 6Mbps now. With business grade lines around that speed, and Verizons Fiber to the Premisis, soon we will have links > 10Mbps.

When deciding between b and g you should see what kind of traffic you'll have on your own network. If you are mainly going for just internet access, then b is more than enough. If you are going to push large files around your home network, g would be faster, but still may or may not be worth it. I tend to transfer >1GB of data at a time, so the faster speed would benifit me. I can't say if it would benifit you or not.

You may want to avoid any pre-release or specially branded wriress equippment, as those devices tend to be incompatible with other companies. You may also want to look at ZyXel's products. They seem quite nice: http://www.zyxel.com/product/category.php?indexFlagvalue=1021876859

 

[turtile]

I would get g. I have b and trashed it, it gets like 5 megs 30ft from the router. At a different floor it barely has a connection and drops off a lot.

 

[SkyHi]

You're lookin pretty good about correctiveness, get g!

 

[Jonathan Bones]

Thanks guys!

Do you have any specific answers to 6, 7, and 8?

Perhaps these "speedboost" cards/routers are the "specially branded" devices C. Ingram referred to?

 

[C.Ingram]

I can't really comment on those last two questions. Regarding USB vs PCI, PCI should be more widely supported. You may want to go with something that has a detachable antenna or a USB adapter so you can move things around a bit.

 

[Jonathan Bones]

Thanks again!

Asked my friend, and apparently these special routers run as fast as 108 Mbits.

Also, this new standard is the encryption "AES". Not sure if that'll just be incorporated into current "g" devices, or what.

 

[C.Ingram]

Either way, I wouldn't trust it. If you want to keep your data safe use encryption yourself. Make sure you use SSL when you check your e-mail or sensitive web pages. If you are in a business enviornment, the WAP should only allow access to a VPN server.

 

[mikesgroovin]

as for #8......you are probably referring to 802.11n.
This has been in the works for a while now and a standard still hasn't been set. i have been waiting for the IEEE meetings to start for 4 months now and the very first meeting was a month from yesterday (3.17.05). the wi-fi world is actually VERY exciting right now because basically what happens is, the IEEE comes out with a new definition of wireless (hence the 802.11n) and then they hold meetings and companies more-or-less kill each other in competition over who gets to set this new standard. i believe that the way it works is this:
IEEE makes a set of rules concerning their new "standard"
The IEEE has said the following about 802.11n:

1) They want it to be at least 100MBs ACTUAL throughput. (Example: 802.11g's actual throughput is about half of 54MBs) So, 802.11n may be advertised as 200MBs data-rate, that actually gets about half the actual throughput.

2) WPA will not be enough. Security is going to be HUGE!!!! 128bit encryption will hopefully be a thing of the past.

3) VoIP is ALL over Wi-Fi now.....so, the companies competing on the standard for IEEE's 802.11n will have to be up on "VoWi-Fi" (Voice over Wi-Fi, rather than just Voice over IP)


So, there was just a meeting a month ago and although no one "won" the conference....(a company or group of companies must get 75% of the vote or higher)....there will be yet another conference (aka: battle) in another month or so.

Watch your stocks...because whoever usually wins this.....their stocks HIT THE STARS! .... and then split

The main companies are TGn Sync and WWiSE. TGn is made up by Sony and Intel to name a couple.....although there are more. WWiSE has Broadcom (I LOVE this company!!!!) and Motorola along with more.

It should be interesting to say the least. But, I don't think that we will have a standard until July or so.....and the first real adapters wont be released until Sept or October.

Whatever you do......don't fall into the "Pre-N" wireless crap pit.......they promise but do not deliever....i know from experience.

I DO KNOW however that Sony plans to be making the standard WAY above the 100MB mark of ACTUAL throughput. They are planning on advertising the standard as over 500MBs!!!! So, the ACTUAL throughput will be between 200MBs and 300MBs!!!!

 

[Jonathan Bones]

But don't some of these boosted "g" devices already allow for 100 Mbit+? As you say, we may be looking at an actual throughput of 200-300 Mbits, but it still seems like a small improvement considering wired cat5e networks are supposed to be able to reach 1000 Mbits. But I guess you just don't want to go wireless if you're going to be transferring large amounts of data over your LAN.

Thanks for the explanation!