Receive new posts as email.
RSS 0.91 | RSS 2.0
RDF | Atom
Podcast only feed (RSS 2.0 format)
Get an RSS reader
Get a Podcast receiver
| 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 |
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
« Airgo, Broadcom Back Wi-Fi Alliance Plan for Draft N | Main | ASUS Guarantees Draft N Upgrades to Final Ratified Version »
Their conclusion is that some are wanting: They liked the non-Draft N Rangemax 240 from NetGear best for overall reliability and interoperability. It can’t achieve the highest speeds, using the Airgo third-generation chips, but here (and elsewhere) it’s been found to offer range and reliability. The later firmware obviously helps, as tests early this year found more problems in other reviews.
Fundamentally, interoperability at reasonable speeds is the problem with buying gear now. Sticking to one vendor’s equipment produces the best and most reliable performance.
Posted by Glennf at September 8, 2006 2:56 PM
Categories: Draft N