[mythtv-users] Wireless

[Simon Hobson]

James Linder <jam at tigger.ws> wrote:

> [for the ignorant like me 11n is 300M bits/sec]

No it isn't.
Like any wireless system, it's speed is "up to ..." and of course the marketing types will quote the maximum theoretical figures even if the only people in the world who can achieve that are engineers in a screened lab with perfect conditions and no interference from the neighbours.

I recall reading of some research a few years ago that showed that in some places (eg blocks of flats and so on with dense coverage of WiFi routers), the actual throughput of WiFi on the 2.4G band was "naff all" as 95% of the theoretical bandwidth available was taken up by signalling - with the remaining 5% being shared between all the users.

As already said, if you can, try the 5.8G band - not only is it less busy (still lots of 2.4G only kit around), there are more channels, and the signals travel shorter distances through buildings so less interference from neighbours.


Better WiFi kit is now starting to employ "band steering" that will force client devices onto the 5.8G band where both ends support it and the signal is adequate for just these reasons.


I'd suggest downloading iStumbler and exploring how much WiFi you have around you. If there's a lot then you can expect poor WiFi throughput.


I *always* recommend cabled connections where practical. Short of faulty components/equipment, I've yet to see a situation where a cabled connection isn't superior in performance and reliability to wireless - but obviously it lacks the mobility element.
At work we have a client who has just built an extension for a new office - we weren't consulted in any way or we'd have advised them accordingly. They put cabling in for phones and power - but said "we'll use WiFi". Last I heard their IT guy was pulling some cables in and clipping them along the new walls :-/