More Antennas, Faster Wireless 110
rouge86 writes "The New Scientist has a story on how researchers broke the network speed record using a wireless network and multiple antennas. They plan to use the demonstration to show how powerful multiple antennas can be. Applications include power saving on mobile phones and reducing interference."
Wireless the wave of the future (Score:1, Interesting)
Ya its great (Score:1)
Re:Ya its great (Score:2)
And the number of places deploying VPN's and encryption over their wireless networks are... ? Have you ever walked around a city with a wireless device?
still have the issue of authentication
There used to be the issue of access before you had to deal with the weak authentication thats set up in most places. Admins are bending over backwards to open holes as they deploy wireless networks.
Re:Wireless the wave of the future (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Wireless the wave of the future-Faithful. (Score:2, Insightful)
Ok, after the (mostly) needless citing is done, I find it nave to have faith in science. Then again, it seems to be the most powerful
Re:Wireless the wave of the future-Faithful. (Score:2)
Re:Wireless the wave of the future-Faithful. (Score:2)
Suppose someone is sick with a disease. The religionist's approach is to pray over the person, or cast some spells, or some such nonsense. Occassionally, the person will get better, and the religionist will say it's because his god did it. Most of the time, the person dies, and the religionist says the god willed it.
Then a scientist comes around. He determines the disease is caused by a bacteria. He does experiments, and figures out how to kill the bacteria using peni
Re:Wireless the wave of the future-Faithful. (Score:1)
Why is it that simple-minded people always want to appeal to "faith" instead of taking the time to learn how things really work?
I was going to look into that once, but I decided it was easier to just believe that they are all simple-minded.
Re:Wireless the wave of the future (Score:1)
No guarantee of quality of service.
No tech support.
Not to mention that SOME people will still have to have conventional ISP accounts, otherwise there will be no bandwidth for everyone else. These people will also likely need to have bigger and buffer hardware to handle being a data chokepoint.
Re:Wireless the wave of the future (Score:2)
Freenet [sourceforge.net] uses a scheme similar to this. Content is inserted into the network with a unique cryptographic key (*nb). The data is inserted with a 'depth' parameter, specifying an approximate TTL value for the insertion directive. Hosts along the way cache the data and pass it to the next host until the TTL expires (hosts usually, but not always, decriment the TTL). When
Re:Wireless the wave of the future (Score:2)
Now asuming you just wanted to talk to califona from new york and each hop got you 50 miles. That's... 2462 / 50 or 30 hops so your net bandwith would be 1/30th of the avalable bandwith asuming full coverage. Now chances are it's going to be closer to 100 hops aka not a strat line and not alwase 100 miles.
NetZero in a broadband world (Score:1)
Now given to options pay nothing and get say 100th the bandwith or pay 50$ an month and get full bandwith most people are going to opt for spending cash
NetZero: $10/mo for 48 kbps. Comcast: $46/mo for 3000 kbps. Trust me, people will put up with 1/60 the speed to save cash. And are you sure it'll be 1/100 the bandwidth, or just 100 times the latency?
So unless the mesh networks start having servaces that the ISP wish to connect to your not going to see mesh networks making the internet free.
Some un
Re:NetZero in a broadband world (Score:2)
Now most people would pay for high speed of some sort 10,000 Kbps connections are out in some areas for 60$ a month so everyone that's still useing a modem by choice would stick with mesh net everyone else would have real internet acsess.
A nation wide Meshnet would have horable bandwith but within a city it might not be that bad. Say you had 10,000 people on mesh net in New York at an
Re:Wireless the wave of the future (Score:2)
Re:Wireless the wave of the future (Score:2)
First off there is more than one person using the system so divide by the number of users.
Second devide by the number of average hops because each message needs to use bandwith from more than one network.
Now you have 1,000,000 users over 10,000,000 10Mbits/s stattions with an average hop count of 100.
Total bandwith = 10,000,000 * 10 Mbit = 100,000,000 Mbits/s. Each users bandwith = 100,000,000 Mbits/s / 1000,000 / users / 100 hops. = 10KB/s
Re:Wireless the wave of the future (Score:2, Insightful)
If (and when) a breakthrough is made, either with an economic optical switch or the pricing of electronic processing equipment for optical fibre, wireless will once again take a back seat.
d
3G phones (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:3G phones (Score:2, Funny)
Re:3G phones (Score:1)
Great engineering (Score:4, Informative)
Recombining smaller signals in real time, however, requires considerable computing power. So the Siemens team developed new computer algorithms in order to send more data using existing hardware.
In short: programmers managed to push existing hardware with a more efficient code. That's called hacking, albeit with a serious look, and I like that!
Re:Great engineering (Score:3, Insightful)
There are two kinds of hacking involved here, software and hardware. The commenter above is giving props to the programmers, because in their [apparent] opinion people don't do enough optimization. This kind of thing goes on all the time, but I guess it's good to recognize some people, as opposed to no p
They should both impress you... (Score:2)
It's mathematics and tuning of the algorithms used to work through that mathematics that made the DSP firmware possible. You have to thoroughly understand the math behind the DSP stuff to optimize it right.
Just because there's code involved, doesn't mean that there were just code-monkeys doing the work.
Re:They should both impress you... (Score:1)
Simplying combinging the signals doesn't get the job done in MIMO or phased-array situations. These people who did the real work certainly were not code monkeys.
Re:Great engineering (Score:1)
Re:Great engineering (Score:1)
Re:Great engineering (Score:1)
Re:Great engineering (Score:2)
(Seriously-- I don't like my devices passively using processor time)
Re:Isn't this the concept... (Score:2)
duplicate post (Score:5, Informative)
Re:duplicate post (Score:1, Informative)
Re:duplicate post (Score:2)
Re:duplicate post (Score:2)
(A joke only ruined by the fact that this isn't actually a dupe, assuming this guy [slashdot.org] is correct.)
OFDM Has Been Around for a While (Score:4, Interesting)
It's nice to see more practical uses of it in wireless standards like WiFi IEEE 802.11a, 802.11g and in WiMax IEEE 802.16a.
All this adds up to the death of the control by telco's in the last 100 yards of net connectivity. Go OFDM!!
OFDM != MIMO / SIMO Antenae (Score:2)
Using multiple antenae is also a good way to get diversity in a way that complements OFDM (spatial vs. freqency).
hmm.. wavelets? (Score:3, Interesting)
More antennas = better? (Score:1)
Re:More antennas = better? (Score:2)
Re:More antennas = better? (Score:2, Informative)
The three blades give a better shave since when you take one stroke, it takes three. Having four blades [schickquattro.com], however, is getting a little ridiculous.
Re:More antennas = better? (Score:1)
Wireless speed record means... (Score:3, Funny)
Interference (Score:2, Informative)
And increasing it for the neighbour, unless he also has multiple antennas.
Wich gets us back to the start, only with even more interference...
Re:Interference (Score:2)
The main reason for not using multiple antennas has been cost and you really couldn't use them for recieveing in the past because of things like multipath playing merry hob with your reception. Nowadays, things are quite different.
Hear! Multiple multiple antennas. (Score:2)
So wait... (Score:2, Funny)
Obligatory Wardriving Post (Score:2)
How is this something new? (Score:1)
Re:How is this something new? (Score:2, Funny)
The principle is nothing new (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The principle is nothing new (Score:1)
Re:The principle is nothing new (Score:1)
Re:The principle is nothing new (Score:2)
Umm..yeah..that was the..er..joke!
Re:The principle is nothing new (Score:1)
I was just..uh...testing!
I'll be in the corner over there.
FTFA: 50 MBits Average for Wireless Networks? (Score:2)
I would think that a mean network would be the 802.11b network running 11MBits, not 50. Are there really that many 802.11g networks out there, pushing the average up to 50, or is this reporter just clueless because their office runs around 50? I used to travel quite a bit, and what networks I did run into at coffee shops and airports were 11 Mbit. Do others have a different view than
Re:FTFA: 50 MBits Average for Wireless Networks? (Score:2)
Wait... (Score:2, Funny)
yay no more wires, only mass attena arrays (Score:1)
yay no more wires, only mass attena arrays (Score:1)
What happens when... (Score:1)
Re:What happens when... (Score:2)
This is already under consideration... (Score:3, Interesting)
Proposals were submitted back in August for 802.11n, and all proposals still in the running use MIMO+OFDM (the technique described here). Hardware supporting various prototypes is already around in a usable form.
It seems unlikely that 3x4 MIMO will be around in the first wave, due to cost constraints - 2x3 (2 tx, 3 rx) is the most likely initial configuration.
Re:This is already under consideration... (Score:1)
Hmmm. (Score:2)
Re:Hmmm. (Score:2)
Power to the people vs. Where are the IT jobs? (Score:1)
This is the same entitlement scenario that was looked at with MP3s an