Email Delivery

Receive new posts as email.

Email address

Syndicate this site

RSS 0.91 | RSS 2.0
RDF | Atom
Podcast only feed (RSS 2.0 format)
Get an RSS reader
Get a Podcast receiver


About This Site
Contact Us
Privacy Policy



Web this site

January 2007
Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      

Stories by Category

Administrative :: Administrative
Financial :: Financial
Future :: Future
Hardware :: Hardware Adapters ExpressCard PC Card/CardBus PCI Card Antennas Chips Gateways Gigabit Ethernet
MIMO :: MIMO Spatial multiplexing
Market :: Market Consumer Enterprise
Standards :: Standards 802.11n Draft N Task Group N
Video :: Video


December 2006 | November 2006 | October 2006 | September 2006 | August 2006 | July 2006 | June 2006 | May 2006 | April 2006 | March 2006 | February 2006 | January 2006 | December 2005 | November 2005 | October 2005 | September 2005 | August 2005 | July 2005 | June 2005 | May 2005 | April 2005 | March 2005 |

Recent Entries

Mainstream Coverage of Draft N Status, and a Statement on Weasels
Dell Joins Draft N Delusion

Site Philosophy

This site operates as an independent editorial operation. Advertising, sponsorships, and other non-editorial materials represent the opinions and messages of their respective origins, and not of the site operator or JiWire, Inc.


Entire site and all contents except otherwise noted © Copyright 2001-2006 by Glenn Fleishman. Some images ©2006 Jupiterimages Corporation. All rights reserved. Please contact us for reprint rights. Linking is, of course, free and encouraged.

Powered by
Movable Type

« June 2006 | Main | August 2006 »

July 20, 2006

Mainstream Coverage of Draft N Status, and a Statement on Weasels

By Glenn Fleishman

The Global and Mail in Toronto writes about consumer confusion with Draft N: I’m quoted as a skeptic, which I am, of the sense in releasing devices that conform to a non-existent stamp and for which there is no third-party rigorous certification process for interoperability. The danger to consumers is noted in this paragraph from the story:

“A full-page Future Shop ad in newspapers recently declared: “Wireless-N. It’s a revolution in Networking.” The ad offered a special price on a Linksys wireless N router and laptop adapter, but made no mention of the format being non-standard. Future Shop and Linksys representatives did not return calls and e-mails seeking comment.”

Of course, Linksys is using a brand name, Wireless-N, which has a specific set of promises associated with it. I’m a little surprised to see them using Wireless-N, because their final product will also be called Wireless-N. And I would think that they would want to make the proviso in the ad—especially in a country like Canada that has more controls on advertising—that the Wireless-N sold today won’t necessarily be fully upgradable to the Wireless-N sold in a few months.

I’ve been getting pushback from several companies about my complaint, noted in this article, that chipmakers and manufacturers won’t guarantee a hardware upgrade for the final version of 802.11n, if such an upgrade is needed. These firms believe I’m besmirching their good name—that I’m calling them, in effect, either liars or weasels.

Let me be clear that I’m not. Any company I speak to about this will tell me bluntly and on the record that they aren’t guaranteeing hardware upgrades. They all truly expect to work this out in firmware or possibly drivers plus firmware. They’re in part betting on this because it will be a clean transition to Final N if that’s the case.

Rather, I’m stating that these companies are committing brand suicide by tying themselves to products that might be dead ends. Sure, they’ll still work with any compatible equipment at slower speeds and with like equipment at the fastest speeds. But consumers aren’t going to read an ad such as Future Shop’s cited in this article or any ad by any of their competitors or the actual packaging and make the fine distinction that the companies are willing to state in public for quotation.

That’s not misleading. It’s not even weasely. However, it does provide the opportunity for potentially millions of consumers to lose trust in the promise of Wi-Fi (even though that brand isn’t on the boxes!) and in the individual firms’ reliability if the worst case happens and hardware upgrades are required for full interoperability.

Posted by Glennf at 12:52 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

July 17, 2006

Dell Joins Draft N Delusion

By Glenn Fleishman

Dell will offer Broadcom-based Draft N adapter as built-to-order notebook option: The “Dell Wireless 1500 draft-802.11n dual-band wireless card” will use the Intesi-fi technology that Broadcom has developed in advance of an industry-approved standard for 802.11n. Broadcom isn’t alone, but I’m stunned that Dell will  sign onto this at this stage. The upgrade costs $59. (Acer will ship a Q3 laptop with Draft N built in, The Register reports.)

The press release from Broadcom states, “Broadcom Intensi-fi technology complies with the current IEEE 802.11n draft specification and is available in a variety of draft-802.11n routers, including those from Linksys, NETGEAR and Buffalo.” There is no way to comply with a draft specification of this sort. It’s an early draft, likely to change, and there’s no one outside of the firms trying to push this early Draft N gear who believes it’s a good idea to write one’s name in water.

The Broadcom press release also states, “Intensi-fi solutions are also interoperable with draft-802.11n technology from other chipmakers.” Yeah, right. In certain testing which belies most of the magazine lab tests of the technology. What’s the brand promise behind this statement? What happens if a competitors updates their firmware, and interoperability fails? This is why the Wi-Fi mark works—stable standards, independent lab testing, and the possibility of failing tests—and this kind of standards-by-marketing committee fails.

This is making me slightly ill as I see companies rush to push something out that nobody needs. Regular MIMO on the market provides the distance boost that’s really at the crux. The rest of this Draft N technology could patiently wait until the standard is done.

I reiterate that no manufacturer I’m aware of is willing to promise that equipment they release today will be fully upgradable and interoperable with the final, release 802.11n specification even if they have to swap out hardware. Without that promise in place, they’re selling what could turn into expensive paperweights that offer minimal functional improvements at excessive cost compared to what final, shipping, interoperable, certified products will provide in probably no more than six months.

Wait, I say, wait.

A Dell spokesperson provided a clear statement that I believe is frank and fair to my question as to whether Dell would offer upgrades if hardware were required. Dell said,

“Dell felt there was compelling value for our customers in the current draft standard, in terms of range and throughput, to justify releasing a product based on the draft.

“Although the Dell Wireless 1500 is fully compliant to the current draft and several elements of the draft will be incorporated into the final standard, Dell cannot guarantee upgradeability to the final standard. Regardless of final upgradeability, the Dell Wireless 1500 card will continue to perform at throughput rates and ranges superior to 802.11g, when paired with Draft 802.11n routers with the Intensi-fi technology, and provide customers with the ability for multiple users to use high-bandwidth wireless applications throughout the home.

“Also note, the Dell Wireless 1500 Draft 802.11n card is backwards compatible with 802.11 a/b/g wireless standards, so users will always be able to access these wireless networks no and in the future.”

This is well stated. There is nothing misleading or incorrect in this response. However, I don’t believe that any Dell customer should purchase what is essentially a beta or pre-release item that cannot be guaranteed upgradability. But I appreciate that Dell isn’t overhyping the product.

Posted by Glennf at 11:10 AM | Comments (0)