802.11ac 'Gigabit Wi-Fi': What you need to know

[Bill_Bright]

On another note, why don't they scrap a and b support? Surely there is some overhead here that they could remove?

There are still millions of a and b devices in use out there and nobody likes to spend money to replace something that is still perfectly good.

Legacy support has always been, and probably always will be a dampening factor when it comes to advancing technologies. 11a and 11b will go away, but it will take awhile. I mean there are still Windows 95/98 users out there.

[Raza0007]

Originally Posted by Bill_Bright

Naw. I don't buy that - not as a general blanket statement. 11ac is specifically designed to provide better coverage (fewer blindspots) over a greater range. Yes, lower frequencies do pass through some materials better than higher frequencies (due to longer wavelengths) but the difference between 2.4GHz and 5GHz, which are clearly in the same RF Frequency Band, is not that dramatic. Therefore, those same walls are likely to affect either frequency in a similar fashion (with some notable exceptions).

Well, I will go with my own experience, as I already mentioned, in one bedroom of my house only the 2.4 GHz signals are able to reach from a 802.11n router. The 5 GHz band does not work there.

I am sure in an open area the 802.11ac 5GHz coverage will be better than the 802.11n coverage, but in practical situation, especially if you require your router's signals to penetrate multiple walls, 2.4 GHz still outperforms 5 GHz.

[Raza0007]

Originally Posted by funkydude

They would need to put them in anyway for real backwards compat with a/b/n 2.4Ghz receivers.

Yeah, that is what it looks as the 802.11ac standard itself is exclusively 5 GHz. If they want it to be back compatible they will have to include the 2.4 GHz transmission on 802.11n standard (which is back compatible with a/b/g).

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...king-_-NA-_-NA looks like its a $199.99 a Pre- Order. Release Date: 06/03/2012