PDA

View Full Version : Intel Wireless N feature



jcampi
07-23-2007, 06:08 PM
I'm already mad. Just when I got a new laptop I notice many new models offer a Intel Wireless N feature along with the usual 802.11G, etc. My laptop is a new Sony VAIO. Is there any chance that you can update an existing laptop with a firmware or Intel update? I think I already know the answer is going to be 'No', but I just wanted to ask.

Dan18960
07-23-2007, 08:11 PM
Your correct - the answer is NO.

The bandwidth is based on chipset not firmware. Firmware updates only enhance or correct flaws in the chipset instruction set.

jcampi
07-23-2007, 10:45 PM
Son of a _____! I knew it!

Phelyx
07-24-2007, 12:13 AM
They will have external usb ports or pci-express cards i'm sure.

dale@fcg
07-24-2007, 02:56 AM
Has wireless N arrived as in security and connectivity, or are we still in the "growing pains" stage?

jcampi
07-24-2007, 08:10 AM
Phelyx, they already have usb and cards for wireless N. It would have been nice to have wireless N built-in to the pc. Oh, well. Wireless G seems fine at 54Mbps.

jcampi
07-28-2007, 05:51 PM
My new Sony Vaio laptop (model VGN-C240E) doesn't have a slot for a wireless card. I'm not happy about this, but it's still a nice laptop. I should have researched this aspect about the laptop before getting it. I could use a usb wireless N device for my Linksys Wireless N router. Could I use ANY brand of usb wireless N device or should it be a Linksys brand?
The speedtest.net site clocks my laptop connection at 12075kb/s (12Mbps). Would I realize a faster connection and would it be worthwhile to spend the $ for a wireless N usb device for the laptop???

TonyDi
07-28-2007, 06:27 PM
No need for 'N' wireless unless you're streaming video to your TV. What does your ISP offer speed wise? Probably below the 54 MBPS that the 'G' devices support. I see no reason to go to the almost new 'N' standard if you're only accessing the Internet. Where you'll see the difference is between nodes internal to your home or office.

jcampi
07-28-2007, 06:30 PM
After doing some research I agree with you, Kelly. Wireless N doesn't appear to increase the 54Mbps speed of wireless G. It seems like it improves the range and signal strength. If I'm already getting 12075kbps I don't think a wireless usb adapter will do anything for me. Plus, Vista might have trouble with the device. I better leave well enough alone.

TonyDi
07-28-2007, 09:26 PM
opps... forgot about the range factor. Thanks for reminding me about that. So there's finally a reason for the casual home user to move to a 'N' wireless. However, if range is an issue, they can always look at a range extender for either the 'b' or 'g' network.
Cost would be about $100.

Seth
07-29-2007, 04:29 AM
opps... forgot about the range factor. Thanks for reminding me about that. So there's finally a reason for the casual home user to move to a 'N' wireless. However, if range is an issue, they can always look at a range extender for either the 'b' or 'g' network.
Cost would be about $100.

I might be completely wrong on the following:

Isn't the output level regulated by some governing body?

For example, a 900 MHZ phone has the same output level of a 2 GHZ phone, but the higher frequency provides a cleaner signal.But an omni-directional booster antenna for a router does raise the signal strength. So why not just make the router provide the same signal strength as the booster antenna? Let me guess...more money for the router manufactures.

In my experience, wireless internet is very precarious and has a long way to go before becoming stable.

TonyDi
07-29-2007, 09:24 AM
I believe you're correct about the output level being regulated. So how does the almost new 'n' standard do it? My guess is the modulation technique and error correction allows communication at a lower signal level.

dbarrow
07-29-2007, 09:39 AM
Power levels are "fixed" by FCC regulation in all radio bands to reduce interference with other devices. Remember the old CB days when hams and high power users would bust through on your TV or radio?

N simply moved to a bandwidth not in as much competition or with as much interference from other devices like microwaves and wireless phones. Range can still be reduced by wiring in the house and large metal objects in the path of the signal that soak up radio waves.

Booster antennas don't actually "boost" power levels. They are just more finely tuned and often directional with a narrow beam width to better capture existing signal.
If you dig up the specs on these (after market) antennas, you can frequently find a graphic representation of the "lobes" or most sensitive reception areas showing the best coverage angles. Directional antennas need to be "aimed" with the most sensitive lobe pointing directly at the source. Even with an OMNI DIRECTIONAL antenna (the common round stub(s) found on routers) there are distinct lobes or angles of coverage that are more distinct. Often, rotating the router or antennas can align the most sensitive lobe in the direction you most often use.

"Repeaters" are another option to get around obstacles and interference. Again, they don't boost signal levels but simply receive it from one side and broadcast it out the other. Placed at the end of effective range, they double that by repeating it out again a similar distance.