O/T Q Re: Tx Rates 802.11 vs. USB

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ron
  • Start date Start date
R

Ron

I figgered that there are some pretty clever people in here...so why not
toss this out?

I'm looking for an external wireless adapter, with a USB connector. There
are several from which to choose. A few of them are 802.11g, and these have
a USB 2.0 interface...and will therefore run at no less than 54 Mbps. Most
advertise 100 or 108 Mbps, and I'm sure that they will indeed run at that
speed with compatible WAP's and/or routers. The problem is that these
adapters are a little pricey. So...

I'm considering a less expensive type; one which runs at 22 Mbps. I believe
that 22 Mbps would be quite adequate for my needs. The problem is, the
units which run at 22 Mbps all have a USB 1.1 interface. *And isn't a USB
1.1 interface restricted to 12 Mbps??*

Inquiring minds wanna know.
TIA
Ron
 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ron wrote:
| I figgered that there are some pretty clever people in here...so why not
| toss this out?
|
| I'm looking for an external wireless adapter, with a USB connector. There
| are several from which to choose. A few of them are 802.11g, and
these have
| a USB 2.0 interface...and will therefore run at no less than 54 Mbps.
Most
| advertise 100 or 108 Mbps, and I'm sure that they will indeed run at that
| speed with compatible WAP's and/or routers. The problem is that these
| adapters are a little pricey. So...
|
| I'm considering a less expensive type; one which runs at 22 Mbps. I
believe
| that 22 Mbps would be quite adequate for my needs. The problem is, the
| units which run at 22 Mbps all have a USB 1.1 interface. *And isn't a USB
| 1.1 interface restricted to 12 Mbps??*
|
| Inquiring minds wanna know.
| TIA
| Ron
|
|

Yes, the method of connecting the wireless adaptor is limited to 12MBps
with USB 1.1, however, I dont understand your question:

With wireless the rates are never full specification, your getting
closer to 7 Mbps in the 11 Mbps 802.11b flavor and 25 Mbps in the 54
Mbps a and g flavors

So with a 802.11b adaptor (I assume is this 'one that runs at 22'
perhaps they just count the bandwidth and assume its available for both
up and down at the same time?) your not exceeding USB 1.1 rates.

And provided you could find a wireless usb that *was* A or G, *and* usb
1.1, then yes, you would have a bottleneck, but signal compatibility
with other devices, and running at what the standard is capable of are
two seperate things.

It would be a slightly retarded tourist on your network, I know the
language, just cant talk it as fast as you guys.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFAMqa65sKixANmEMgRAkAKAJ40eM2l+peD8uui5U4horMPYZGXcgCgjPGO
pn5ZJVLnd/j/eLN8DgmzAfU=
=lQFp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
Hmm. P'raps I wasn't clear;

-If a USB 1.1 port offers a "flow rate" of 12 Mbps, and...
-a USB 1.1 device therefore "runs" at 12 Mbps, then...
-how can a USB 1.1 wireless network adapter send/receive data at 22 Mbps?
Or any faster than 12 Mbps, for that matter?!

Maybe I'm mixed up. I was under the impression that the 802.11b standard
represented a 'flow rate" of 11 Mbps. And if you wanted a faster flow rate,
then you had to step up to 802.11g. Or perhaps this is related to the
mystical calculations that the adapter builders do? i.e. advertising a
device which conforms to the 802.11b standard...but which runs at 22 Mbps?
<Rod? Rod Serling?>

Thoughts? Anyone?
 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ron wrote:
| Hmm. P'raps I wasn't clear;
|
| -If a USB 1.1 port offers a "flow rate" of 12 Mbps, and...
| -a USB 1.1 device therefore "runs" at 12 Mbps, then...
| -how can a USB 1.1 wireless network adapter send/receive data at 22 Mbps?
| Or any faster than 12 Mbps, for that matter?!

It cant. Just because the standard supports it, due to method of
connection not all DEVICES may. (i mean, would you have this debate if
someone made a 802.11b ISA card? its obvious the standard is one thing,
implementation of it is another)


|
| Maybe I'm mixed up. I was under the impression that the 802.11b standard
| represented a 'flow rate" of 11 Mbps. And if you wanted a faster flow
rate,
| then you had to step up to 802.11g.

Or 802.11a, yes. (which has 54MBps flow rates)

|Or perhaps this is related to the
| mystical calculations that the adapter builders do? i.e. advertising a
| device which conforms to the 802.11b standard...but which runs at 22 Mbps?
| <Rod? Rod Serling?>
|

Similar to 600w $24 PSU's.... Truth in advertising isnt what it used to
be....

| Thoughts? Anyone?

Truth in advertising has *never* been what it should be ;)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFAMsBb5sKixANmEMgRAv5yAKC9TtBzsfdU17aS2ysooeR0QEEW+wCffyUP
qLviv9sf5LZOHHdJtuxoHXw=
=DSM8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
Gotcha. So, that would explain why the 11g devices utilize a USB 2.0 port;
so that their [theoretical] transfer speeds -- of 54 Mbps and beyond -- are
not restrained by the 12 Mbps limitation of the USB 1.1 standard.

Hmm.

(Excellent analogy with the PSU's, btw.)

Thanks for your input.
Ron
 
=|[ Ron's ]|= said:
Gotcha. So, that would explain why the 11g devices utilize a USB 2.0 port;
so that their [theoretical] transfer speeds -- of 54 Mbps and beyond -- are
not restrained by the 12 Mbps limitation of the USB 1.1 standard.

Hmm.

(Excellent analogy with the PSU's, btw.)
Click to expand...
I thought so too *g
'xcuses for rabble rousing }
 
Back
Top