Wi-Fi 7 to get the final seal of approval early next year, new standard is up to 4.8 times faster than Wi-Fi 6::There are a lot of ‘draft’ Wi-Fi 7 devices around, but ‘Wi-Fi 7 Certified’ devices will only come to market sometime next year.

  • ghastly_03_startup@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    People will rush out to buy the newest thing and it won’t change performance with their fancy router in the basement. People have no clue how to set up networks properly.

    • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      Well, then they have to rush out to buy a new, fancy router for the basement to support their newest thing. And round and round we go…

  • tabular@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    What do I need a wireless connection many times faster than my internet for? Streaming game rendering to future VR goggles?

    • EatYouWell@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 years ago

      Most people don’t, and that’s OK. You’ll just upgrade whenever your current equipment breaks down.

      But businesses will be a large market share for increased speeds.

      • timetraveller@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        me over hear with my gigabit-ethernet plugs in every wall as if they were as important as electricity… upgrade those suckers to 10-gig-ethernet, and wifi-has nothing over other than mobility… mobility until you leave the room… sounds about like being on a wire.

        wireless needs a better understanding, and for most that have no understanding they just see faster as better, when no wireless is better than a wired connect, that is why the cellar towers, fiber connection, and even coax-connections all are needed to “power the wireless”.

        i’m shocked at how many new or remodeled homes have no “ethernet port” but yet they will have power plugs-n-mass every where in the house, electricity for everything, and then they plugin 5Ghz repeaters into all the wall sockets so that they get decent room to room speeds.

        • dmention7@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          You have a point about how silly it is to scrimp on ethernet ports in new construction/remodels–wifi with a wired backhaul is unquestionably preferable to pure mesh.

          But to say “wifi has nothing other than mobility” is purely asinine. It’s like saying that planes offer nothing over cars except the ability to travel faster–yeah… that’s kinda the point! Compared to the number of networked devices in the average home, there are very few current or near-future devices that could leverage even a gigabit connection fully, let alone justify a dedicated wired connection.

          Streaming video needs a few 10s of Mbits tops, security cams are similar, streaming audio needs a fraction of that, your smart home devices & hubs are negligible, mobile phones and tablets downloading 100MB apps barely even blink at current wifi speeds. Even the average WFH-er is going to saturate their company’s VPN before their wifi connection struggle.

          Is an ethernet connection technically better in some of those cases? Sure, but the vast majority of people would notice no functional difference aside from having to plug in a second cable.

  • gen/Eric@iusearchlinux.fyi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I just upgraded to a WiFi 6E router. Both my phone and my laptop support 6E.

    Speeds are great, until you leave the living room (where the router is). Go up to my bedroom, and 6E won’t even connect. So it’s fast, but 6Hz has trouble going through walls.

    Most of the other devices in the house are on 5GHz and that’s still super fast and able to reach basically everywhere.

    • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      the difference between 5Ghz (5150-5895) and 6Ghz (5925-7125) is not really sufficient to blame for most home uses. It’s expected as a rule to lose about 10-20% more power than 5Ghz through walls (where 5Ghz lost 100% more power than 2.4 Ghz does). It’s much more likely that your new WAP just does less power or worse antenna than the old one did.

        • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Wireless defines how you access the point… Not that the access point itself is wireless.

          A switch is technically a “standard” access point (or just ports in the wall connected back to the switch).

          We use “Wireless” access point to denote access to the network without physical connections.

          WAPs can connect to the network via wired or wireless means. Where most people will reference “WAP” as a wired (wired uplink) connected wireless access point… and Mesh (Wireless uplink) WAPs as wireless connected wireless access points.

    • Cycloprolene@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Almost certainly because your router isn’t broadcasting at full power (30dbm or 1w).

  • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    I am just glad that 6E and 7 have access to 6GHz so that once my devices support it i can disable both 2.4 and 5GHz to lower interference from neighboring networks. The higher it goes in frequency the less interference everyone will get.

    • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      2 years ago

      Less RF interference, sure, but a lot more wall and physical object interference as the higher frequencies aren’t able to go through them nearly as much.

      Overall, it’s great to have more spectrum available, especially in a less crowded range. More options means more optimal solutions to be had.

      • Sibbo@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        Just wait until we enter the gamma spectrum, then it should be quite penetrative.

        • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          They already have that, but it’s only been a limited release so far. Just a drop in the ocean.

      • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        Thats true. And the higher it goes the more money you have to spend to properly network. I have heard 60GHz requires you to be in the same room as the AP but gives fantastic speeds. What i eventually plan on doing is buying say a 24 port PoE switch and running 2 cables to the ceiling in each room (for redundancy) and putting an AP in every room. I know that will cost a good chunk of money, but with an AP in every room that would future proof the network for higher and higher frequencies in the future.

        • andrew@lemmy.stuart.fun
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 years ago

          If you’re wanting to future proof, run conduit not just wires. For now a setup like that is overkill and probably straight up won’t work well, since roaming is a client decision and the clients make really silly choices sometimes.

          • howrar@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            I keep seeing this brought up but I can’t find information on how they work. How do you actually get new wire through a conduit? Do they not get stuck in corners? Or on the ridges of the tubes? What if you need to send wires upwards?

            • nowwhatnapster@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              2 years ago

              A pull string is typically vacuumed though the conduit and left inside for attaching to and pulling wires through.

        • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          This is it. All this speed is theoretical, unless you’re willing to fork out a lot for a grid of APs with LoS.

    • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      It’d be real freakin awesome if every IoT device didn’t still rely on 2.4Ghz

      • ghastly_03_startup@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 years ago

        Cheaper wi-fi NIC for cheap devices. Won’t change. Those devices use so little bandwidth and often are placed all over the house so 2.4G’s greater ability to pass through walls / floors makes 2.4G ideal for those devices.

    • Player2@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      Some day most people will upgrade their devices and it will become smarter to go back to 5GHz

      Would be funny, anyway

    • waitmarks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      You wont want to disable 2.4 and 5GHz on wifi 7. The reason it gets so much higher speeds than 6e is that it can send data on all 3 spectrum simultaneously. If you turn off 2.4 and 5GHz you would essentially be limiting yourself to 1/2 speed.

  • Omega_Jimes@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Will I be able to use it in another room? Because wow wifi 5 was awful, and 6 isn’t that much better.

    • Fal@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 years ago

      Generally as wireless tech gets faster, it’s less able to travel distances or penetrate stuff

      • Omega_Jimes@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        That’s the most frustrating thing. I have 3 mesh waps in my house, but if you connect in a different room you get 2.4ghz. At this point I need a mesh wap in every room.

        As the wavelengths get shorter, so too does my patience :/

  • onlinepersona@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 years ago

    “Wi-Fi 7 supports superior connectivity for emerging use cases with high levels of interactivity and immersion,”

    How far can I be from the access point and how many walls can there be in between? WiFi at home is already pretty bad just two rooms over from the router.

  • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldBanned
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    Wifi 6 has become pretty affordable but the high speed 6E is still super expensive.

    Is 7 an innovation or just more antennas and processing power usage?

    • Skimmer@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      It’s an entirely new standard, so no, it won’t just be a firmware patch.

  • arcadefx1@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    Early adoption might be expensive.

    I’ll wait as I put in WiFi 6E last year. I get 500-800mbps. I positioned 3 units through out. My laptops support WiFi 6 and 6E. So…no reason to upgrade since they cannot hit the higher speeds without direct line or adapter.

    • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Speed is higher on 5GHz and 6GHz because the channels are wider. For every 10MHz of channel width you can get ~100mbps if there is no interference. 2.4GHz goes so far that it is pretty much impossible to get a channel with no interference and speeds suffer for it. 5GHz has much more bandwidth and lower range so you are much more likely to find a free channel to use unless you live in an apartment building or such. 6GHz has even larger bandwidth available and goes even less distance than 5GHz, though not much less, so finding a free channel should be even easier.

    • DLSantini@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Pretty sure length is important for penetration. Wait… what were we talking about?

    • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      If the cause of the poor 2.4ghz range was tons of interference on that band, then maybe. But lower frequencies simply go farther, so 6ghz will always have a lot shorter range than 2.4ghz. Though while it’s impossible to change the laws of physics, it might be possible to change the laws around wireless telecommunication to allow it to transmit at a much higher power - not sure if WiFi 7 does.