Compared to accessing the internet service (Comcast at 6Mps) through a wired desktop that connects to a wirless router, does does the speed coming into the laptop through home wireless network slower or the same?
Depending on how fast the network card on the laptop supports, some are faster then other, I believe. Correct me if I'm wrong.
John Boe
What I read is that 802.11b is 11Mps and 802.11g is 54 Mps but the actual rate is half of that.
My question was independent to the Wi-Fi card, does the speed from comcast slow down? I guess it doesn't.
Correct Mps to Mbps. I would prefer that the stadard usage of the term is MBps.
I guess, this link answers my question:
On 25 Aug 2006 09:17:04 -0700, "Amanda" wrote in :
Depends on:
On 25 Aug 2006 09:37:27 -0700, "Amanda" wrote in :
Even less than that, and those are maximum speeds that are only attainable with very good signal (e.g., short distance, no walls).
Comcast speed is unaffected, but overall speed might be limited by the router or the wireless link.
On 25 Aug 2006 09:39:10 -0700, "Amanda" wrote in :
Mbps = megaBITS per second MBps = megaBYTES per second Big difference!
On 25 Aug 2006 09:43:56 -0700, "Amanda" wrote in :
Pay attention mostly to Jeff's posts, and to his reference:
The wikis below should be able to answer most of your wireless questions.
| AZApoker wrote: |> Depending on how fast the network card on the laptop supports, some are |> faster then other, I believe. Correct me if I'm wrong. |>
| | What I read is that 802.11b is 11Mps and 802.11g is 54 Mps but the | actual rate is half of that.
Or worse.
Since both transmit and receive is on the same frequency, it is not possible to transmit continuously. In addition to not transmitting when any other node is transmitting, there are additional time gaps needed to deal with issues like reflections.
Additionally, if the communication is between 2 nodes that use an access point, then things will be far worse because every frame of data is transmitted twice on the channel.
| My question was independent to the Wi-Fi card, does the speed from | comcast slow down? I guess it doesn't.
If you have sufficient speed to keep up with whatever burst rate you get from Comcast, then the answer is no. But do keep in mind that cable is more "bursty" than something like DSL. You can get a lot of speed at once, then not much at all another time while one or more of your neighbors are pulling down a big web page, or MP3, or movie.
As long as the cable mode is attached at the access point or otherwise reaches it by wire instead of wireless, then radio path to the laptop should not see the doubling effect of node-to-node through access point.
But you still can see slowdowns due to others using the same, or even nearby, channel.
802.11b is almost certainly going to slow down those speed bursts you could get from cable. A good 802.11g installation in a rural location probably won't.
Okay, then. Didn't know that it was for bits. We are still deal with bits in speed?
On 25 Aug 2006 11:13:43 -0700, "Amanda" wrote in :
Wi-Fi vendors like to quote maximum possible raw bits because the numbers are bigger and more impressive to unsophisticated buyers. ;)
On 25 Aug 2006 17:17:37 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@ipal.net wrote in :
The biggest issue is usually collisions.
With all due respect, that's simply not true.
That would depend on factors like distance, obstructions, interference, compatibility of wireless adapters with the router, etc. As you probably could tell, I have a Comcast account. Almost every machine in my home is connected wirelessly. Right now, I'm logging d/l speeds averaging 5892 kbps using a desktop with a wireless PCI card in my loft area. The router is located in a spare bedroom, on the same floor, approximately 25 feet away, separated by a wall. Downstairs, my laptop is logging regularly speeds in excess of 5900 kbps.
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 17:08:55 GMT John Navas wrote: | On 25 Aug 2006 09:39:10 -0700, "Amanda" wrote | in : | |>Correct Mps to Mbps. I would prefer that the stadard usage of the term |>is MBps. | | Mbps = megaBITS per second | MBps = megaBYTES per second | Big difference!
8 times the "difference" (really, a big ratio)!On 25 Aug 2006 11:13:43 -0700 Amanda wrote: | | John Navas wrote: |> On 25 Aug 2006 09:39:10 -0700, "Amanda" wrote |> in : |>
|> >Correct Mps to Mbps. I would prefer that the stadard usage of the term |> >is MBps. |>
|> Mbps = megaBITS per second |> MBps = megaBYTES per second |> Big difference! | | Okay, then. Didn't know that it was for bits. We are still deal with | bits in speed?
Speed tends to get expressed in BYTES when the nature of the way it is used involves no particular recognition of bits. You may also see bytes referred to as characters or octets in certain contexts.
Speed tends to get expressed in BITS when the nature involves bits in some way such as serialized transmission. Bits also gets used when sales people get involved because they see bigger numbers as better.
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 20:22:30 GMT John Navas wrote: | On 25 Aug 2006 17:17:37 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@ipal.net wrote in | : | |>On 25 Aug 2006 09:37:27 -0700 Amanda wrote: | |>| What I read is that 802.11b is 11Mps and 802.11g is 54 Mps but the |>| actual rate is half of that. |>
|>Or worse. |>
|>Since both transmit and receive is on the same frequency, it is not |>possible to transmit continuously. In addition to not transmitting |>when any other node is transmitting, there are additional time gaps |>needed to deal with issues like reflections. | | The biggest issue is usually collisions. | |>| My question was independent to the Wi-Fi card, does the speed from |>| comcast slow down? I guess it doesn't. |>
|>If you have sufficient speed to keep up with whatever burst rate you |>get from Comcast, then the answer is no. But do keep in mind that |>cable is more "bursty" than something like DSL. You can get a lot of |>speed at once, then not much at all another time while one or more |>of your neighbors are pulling down a big web page, or MP3, or movie. | | With all due respect, that's simply not true.
This from someone that thinks VPN is necessary to access the internet? And you didn't even specify what if several pieces of information you believed was not true. Oh wait, I know, you think it's all not true.
On 26 Aug 2006 04:26:59 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@ipal.net wrote in :
To be clear, since you're playing dense, the Comcast nonsense.
On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 05:04:26 GMT John Navas wrote: | On 26 Aug 2006 04:26:59 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@ipal.net wrote in | : | |>On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 20:22:30 GMT John Navas wrote: |>| On 25 Aug 2006 17:17:37 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@ipal.net wrote in |>| : |>| |>|>On 25 Aug 2006 09:37:27 -0700 Amanda wrote: |>| |>|>| What I read is that 802.11b is 11Mps and 802.11g is 54 Mps but the |>|>| actual rate is half of that. |>|>
|>|>Or worse. |>|>
|>|>Since both transmit and receive is on the same frequency, it is not |>|>possible to transmit continuously. In addition to not transmitting |>|>when any other node is transmitting, there are additional time gaps |>|>needed to deal with issues like reflections. |>| |>| The biggest issue is usually collisions. |>| |>|>| My question was independent to the Wi-Fi card, does the speed from |>|>| comcast slow down? I guess it doesn't. |>|>
|>|>If you have sufficient speed to keep up with whatever burst rate you |>|>get from Comcast, then the answer is no. But do keep in mind that |>|>cable is more "bursty" than something like DSL. You can get a lot of |>|>speed at once, then not much at all another time while one or more |>|>of your neighbors are pulling down a big web page, or MP3, or movie. |>| |>| With all due respect, that's simply not true. |>
|>This from someone that thinks VPN is necessary to access the internet? |>And you didn't even specify what if several pieces of information you |>believed was not true. Oh wait, I know, you think it's all not true. | | To be clear, since you're playing dense, the Comcast nonsense.
It's shared access. That would be much like 2 different users using the same access point on the same channel. So sometimes you can get all the bandwidth, and sometimes not (not usually happens around evening when most home users are surfing, downloading, sharing, etc).
On 26 Aug 2006 17:53:35 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@ipal.net wrote in :
With all due respect, that's simply not true. Comcast generally has sufficient capacity to deliver the specified consumer speed.
Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.