802.11N confusion

[david-8uUts6sDVDvs2Lz0fTdYFQ at public.gmane.org (David Kramer)]

Tom Metro wrote:
> I pity the average consumer going to buy a wireless N router.

Keep in mind Wireless N has only been "official" for half a year
(according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11).  But the
concept has been agreed upon for a long time.

> That's when I went back to the research drawing board and learned more
> about 802.11N, how it utilizes two different frequency bands, and that
> products that use only one of the two bands still get labeled 802.11N,
> so it's possible your router and laptop aren't even on the same
> frequency, despite both being N products.

Yup I figured that out.  I'm assuming that's what Netgear calls "Dual
Band", though maybe that's something else.  The Dual Band version is $60
more than the one that doesn't say dual band
http://www.staples.com/Netgear-Prosafe-Smart-Wireless-Controller/product_788052
http://www.staples.com/StaplesProductDisplay?langId=-1&storeId=10001&productId=321044&catalogIdentifier=2

I can't see how that feature is worth $60 for me though.

> It seems the Draft N marketplace is a rather confusing mess. Have you
> ever looked at the routers for sale at say Staples and wondered why
> there are 3 similarly described Linksys N routers, each at a different
> price point ranging from $50 to $130?

I got the idea to use Newegg to compare them, because they have the best
comparison feature.  I also noticed some are saying:
IEEE 802.11n
IEEE 802.11n Draft
IEEE 802.11n Draft 2.0

Now, this could be just inconsistent data entry, but I never heard of a
2.0 version of the draft.  That seems to be their identifier for dual
band, though.  There was very little difference between the specs of all
these units, except some specifically says dual band, some have 4 wired
ports and some have 5, and some are gigiabit ethernet for the wired ports.

> The devices can vary by the number of streams, number of independently
> operating antennas, number of bands (2.4 GHz and/or 5.8 GHz), and width
> of the bands, providing theoretical speeds from 6.5 Mbps to 600 Mbps.
> See the data rate chart:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/802.11n#Data_rates
> 
> There's an attempt to distill the most relevant bits into a label of the
> format a x b:c, where a=transmit antennas, b=receive antennas, and
> c=streams. See:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/802.11n#Number_of_antennas

This page:
http://www.live.netgear.webcollage.net/server/staples/netgear-product-content/si?ws-action=http://www.live.netgear.webcollage.net/www.netgear.com/products/r_g/rangemaxwirelessnroutersandgateways/wnr3500.aspx-features.html?channel-product-id%3d728144%26wcpc%3dwnr3500%26format%3dpopup~MarkupType!document!PresentationFormat!html!enable-reporting!true,http://content.webcollage.net/staples/product-content-page?channel-product-id%3d728144%26wcpid%3dnetgear-wnr3500%26report-event%3dproduct-button-click%26usemap%3d0
says that RangeMax units have 8 internal antennae.  The Dual Band have
up to 23 free channels and the others have 3

> Good luck making that consumer friendly. So far manufacturers haven't
> event bothered to report this info.

Correct.  Not even the Netgear website itself attempts to compare their
own products.

> A consequence of this is that you can buy an 801.11n router to go with
> an 802.11n notebook and experience: 1. no connection if the two run on
> different frequencies (most single frequency devices use 2.4 GHz, so
> unlikely), or 2. reduced speed because one or both devices don't have
> enough antennas, streams, or don't operate at 5 GHz where you're more
> likely to be able to operate at full bandwidth without interference.

I don't currently have any N equipment, but I've added that as a
requirement "for future expansion"

> Then I read about "single stream" pseudo-N (they're not officially N
> compliant) routers being brought onto the market as a cheaper alternative:
> http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/content/view/30804/100/

Good link, but parts of it are just as confusing as the advertisements
for the routers.

> SmallNetBuilder's Wireless FAQ: The Essentials
> http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-basics/31083-smallnetbuilders-wireless-faq-the-essentials

I found this one more helpful.  Thanks.

> All that lowered my expectations of seeing N speeds, but I attempted to
> look into ways to diagnose the wireless link to my laptop, such as
> determining what frequencies it and the router supported, and checking
> to see which channels were more crowded in my area, but I didn't get far
> before running out of time.

Thanks, Tom.  Some great information there.  Since most of it says
"Vendors and manufacturers lie", it's not ultimately useful ;)