FCC : one-gigabit Wi-Fi soon.

[patio]

4-3-2-1.....

[camerongray]

WiFi, is a wireless technology that allows an electronic device to exchange data or connect to the internet using 2.4 GHz UHF and 5 GHz SHF bands.
I just talked to them. I used to h ave an account. They use the upper band of Wi-Fi and their SID is visible on a stock wireless router. But you have  to have a device that can do VPN, which they provide. VPN does not change the frequency used. It is still inside the Wi-Fi bands The range is over a mile. Even so, it can be used in rural areas under dial conditions. It is not a mobile service. And presently it is only 20 megabit service.

Okay, then either you are wrong, or their site is wrong.

Yes, Things like Municipal Wi-Fi exist, but this technology isn't remotely targeted at helping them as the primary thing.  These WiFi systems are not very common and are used in very special circumstances, the primary method of connecting homes to the internet is still via cables.  I can safely say myself that I would much rather have a physical cable connecting me to the internet over a temperamental, interference prone wireless connection.

In systems like this, the WiFi speed will come a lot later, the companies need to work out the issue of actually getting the gigabit speed internet connection to the access points in the first place, using, guess what(?), copper or fibre cable!  This is a massive undertaking.

Gigabit WiFi at the moment is being targeted at streaming content around a local network.etc as this can actually use gigabit speeds.  If you had explained it this way then it would all have been fine rather than totally guessing the uses and intention of this technology as you have done in several different threads on this forum.

In conclusion - When you make threads, stop guessing!

[Geek-9pm]

In systems like this, the WiFi speed will come a lot later, the companies need to work out the issue of actually getting the gigabit speed internet connection to the access points in the first place, using, guess what(?), copper or fibre cable!  This is a massive undertaking.

That is true! The technology will get way ahead of the service.
The idea of 'Gigabit Internet' is being picked up on the radar. Later I might post a new story. Unless somebody else wants to.

Google Gigabit Internet.   

[camerongray]

I know that Gigabit internet is a thing along with 10 gigabit internet and every other speed of internet connection that will come in the future.  What I am saying is that Gigabit WiFi isn't really being developed primarily for gigabit internet connections which are an extremely long way off, they are built for things like streaming video and games around a home, something that current WiFi can be too slow for.

For example, all my storage is over my network, not in my PC.  If I am on my desktop with a Gigabit network connection it is lightning fast but over WiFi from my laptop it can be a bit sluggish, I would love Gigabit WiFi to solve this problem.

[BC_Programmer]

Back to topic. Gigabit Wi-Fi opens the door for Gigabit Internet. 

Ignoring the already mentioned issues with this statement that have been described at length, Why would Gigabit Wifi open the door for Gigabit Internet when the prevalence of gigabit routers and network adapters did not?

[Geek-9pm]

Why would Gigabit Wifi open the door for Gigabit Internet when the prevalence of gigabit routers and network adapters did not?

Common sense. Gigabit routers do not come with 200 feet of fiber cable. Not free installation of the fiber.
Gigabit Internet over fiber to the house is very pricy.
Gigabit Internet over Gigabit Wi-Fi will be economical. Relatively speaking.

[camerongray]

Why would Gigabit Wifi open the door for Gigabit Internet when the prevalence of gigabit routers and network adapters did not?

Exactly, and on a similar note - Fast Ethernet (100mbps) was introduced in 1995 yet 100mbps connections becoming available for consumers has only really been happening in the last few years.

Common sense. Gigabit routers do not come with 200 feet of fiber cable. Not free installation of the fiber.
Gigabit Internet over fiber to the house is very pricy.
Gigabit Internet over Gigabit Wi-Fi will be economical. Relatively speaking.

How?  Wireless access points are going to be expensive and will have to be installed relatively near the houses that they are serving, these access points will need fibre connections anyway.

My connection is fibre to the cabinet in the street which is a few hundred metres from my flat and then delivered from there through the regular phone line, for wireless, the fibre will still need laid until a fairly short distance from the property, much like FTTC needs.  To get a fast speed you don't need to have the fibre connection the entire way into the property, there are other ways of using existing cable to get the connection into people's homes.

Also notice how fast wireless speed drops off with distance, If you are talking about trying to do links between buildings at that speed, you will really struggle to maintain high enough speed.  Not to mention, interference, drop outs.etc.

Since you seem to ignore any question I ask, I feel very little point in asking this but I will anyway.  Why do you just make up stuff and post it here as fact then spend all this time trying to make people believe you whereas you could either just do research in the first place or just not post stuff that you don't understand in the first place?

[BC_Programmer]

Common sense. Gigabit routers do not come with 200 feet of fiber cable.

Will Routers supporting the new Wireless/Wifi standard come with 200 feet of fiber cable? Because any Wireless Access point- whether 100gbps or not- is going to need a wired WAN connection to the internet and will require that infrastructure just as any wired LAN solution would.

Gigabit Internet over fiber to the house is very pricy.
Gigabit Internet over Gigabit Wi-Fi will be economical. Relatively speaking.

It seems you are either not understanding the networking concepts at play or- possibly- are being purposely disingenous.

A standard router, as used in your typical household, has wired connections. You connect cat5 or compatible cables to the LAN ports, and connect the computers; simple enough. They have one WAN connection. Depending on the router, you might connect different jacks. Often it's another Ethernet connection. a Cable-connected system, for example, would have the Cable coax going into a Cable Modem, and from that Cable Modem a Wired connection goes to the router.

Routers also, of course, support wireless connections. You can imagine them simply as "invisible" extra LAN connections that are wireless. However, this only eliminates the connection from that computer to the router. The router and it's wired upstream connections still exist.

The idea is there is no "gigabit internet over wifi" the phrase is rather nonsensical in the same sense that saying that removing a school zone would allow you to drive faster on a highway several miles away. Gigabit wifi will increase the speed of wireless connections between an access point and a computer. Access Points are not "ISP Nodes" of any form; instead they are just routers or router/modems connected, via cables, to the ISPs selected backbone. (DSL/ADSL uses Phone jacks, Cable uses Coaxial cables, etc).

Thus I fail to understand the reasoning that Gigabit wifi would in any way encourage improvements to the networking backbone where the advancement to gigabit ethernet connections didn't. It will not eliminate the expense of having to lay down high-speed cable backbones- Wifi does not comprise any part of the networking infrastructure until after the service has been delivered to the ISP customer, and well it shouldn't the advertised transfer speeds are a ideal maximum and generally is not entirely suitable beyond the size of your typical household.

[Geek-9pm]

It will not eliminate the expense of having to lay down high-speed cable backbones- Wifi does not comprise any part of the networking infrastructure until after the service has been delivered to the ISP customer, and well it shouldn't the advertised transfer speeds are a ideal maximum and generally is not entirely suitable beyond the size of your typical household.

You are mistaken.
First of all, I am not an enemy of fiber optic. The point is that a wireless system can either supplement or replace a fiber system.  Really, fibber is better. Cost of the manpower to deploy it is a big issue here in California. And some other places.

An yes, I do a lot of research on this.  Broadband wifeless systems with not one strand of fiber do exist.  Neither in the drop wire , the feeder or the backbone.  They don't need wire. Well, wire for power, of course.
The FCC will approve of Wii-Fi stations with a range of 5000 meters. If it such might  do a gigabit for every customer at that range has yet to be determined.
Keep asking questions.

[camerongray]

An yes, I do a lot of research on this.  Broadband wifeless systems with not one strand of fiber do exist.  Neither in the drop wire , the feeder or the backbone.  They don't need wire. Well, wire for power, of course.

Where do you define the "broadband" connection to start then?  It's not like ISPs have their datacenter and transmit entirely wirelessly from there.

Yes, in theory you could have a wireless system but this is totally not what this announcement was meant to say, it is talking about WiFi for home use where gigabit speeds benefit stuff like streaming.

Cost of the manpower to deploy it is a big issue here in California. And some other places.

How on earth is wireless easier to deploy?  You need masts, you need access points, you need power and cable to these access points.  At least here, it is fairly common to use existing channels in the street or even sewers to run the fibre cable, they do not need to dig up the entire street to be able to install it in a lot of cases.

And please, cite all your stuff like you have totally failed to do in your Secure Boot thread rather than just stating your incorrect theories as fact.

[Geek-9pm]

Apparently the link I gave at first is bad.  My bad. 
Here is is again.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/04/01/fcc_doubles_5ghz_bandwidth_in_prep_for_move_to_1gb_wifi/
FCC doubles 5GHz spectrum in prep for one-gigabit Wi-Fi
That site has a links to this:

Washington, D.C. – The Federal Communications Commission today provided for accelerated growth
and expansion of new Wi-Fi technology that can offer faster speeds of one gigabit per second or more,
increase overall capacity, and reduce congestion at Wi-Fi hot spots. The new rules will make 100 MHz of spectrum more accessible for use in homes and congested spaces like convention centers, parks, and airports and increase the potential for more unlicensed spectrum innovation.
The Commission adopted a Report and Order modifying the rules governing the operation of Unlicensed National Information Infrastructure (U-NII) devices operating in the 5 GHz band. By its action the Commission significantly increased the utility of the 100 megahertz of spectrum, and streamlined existing
rules and equipment authorization procedures for devices throughout the 5 GHz band. U-NII devices play an important role in meeting public demand for wireless broadband service. Currently U-NII devices operate in 555 megahertz of spectrum in the 5 GHz band, and are used for Wi-Fi and other high-speed wireless connections. These devices support a variety of applications including Wi-Fi hot
spots and wireless home local area networks to connect smart phones, tablets and laptops to the Internet, broadband service to rural areas offered by Wireless Internet Service Providers and off-loading of traffic from commercial cellular wireless networks. The rules adopted today remove the current restriction on indoor-only use and increase the permissible power which will provide more robust access in the 5.150-5.250 GHz band. This in turn will allow U-NII devices to better integrate with other unlicensed portions of the 5 GHz band to offer faster speeds and reduce congestion at crowded Wi-Fi hot spots such as airports and convention centers.
The Commission also modified certain technical rules to improve protection for incumbent systems by equiring manufacturers to secure their devices against illegal modification which could cause interference to incumbent users in the band.
Action by the Commission March 31, 2014 by First Report and Order (FCC 14-30). Chairman Wheeler,
Commissioners, Clyburn, Rosenworcel, Pai, and O’Rielly with Chairman Wheeler, Commissioners
Clyburn, Rosenworcel, Pai and O’Rielly issuing statements.
For further information, contact Mark Settle (202-418-2470); [email protected]

I am sorry if that caused confession. My remarks were based on what the FCC said., opt something  I dreamed.
 Does anybody want to know about my dreams? Much more interesting.

[camerongray]

My remarks were based on what the FCC said., opt something  I dreamed.

Then why not quote something from the FCC that states that this will somehow improve the growth of gigabit internet connections... 

[Geek-9pm]

"The new rules will make 100MHz of spectrum more accessible for use in homes and congested spaces like convention centers, parks, and airports and increase the potential for more unlicensed spectrum innovation," the FCC said in its Monday announcement.

Specifically, "the rules adopted today remove the current restriction on indoor-only use and increase the permissible power which will provide more robust access in the 5.150-5.250GHz band," the FCC said.

[camerongray]

Err.... that doesn't say anything about allowing people to somehow get gigabit internet connections, it is talking about how having more spectrum available to use can allow for more devices operating at the same time without interference.

Tip - When you are citing something as evidence, at least check that what you are citing does actually back up your claim...

[BC_Programmer]

The new rules will make 100MHz of spectrum more accessible for use in homes and congested spaces like convention centers, parks, and airports and increase the potential for more unlicensed spectrum innovation,

What this is saying is that the revisions to the rules by the FCC will make 100Mhz more of the electromagnetic spectrum available for home-devices. the FCC controls the use of Radio waves by devices in the United States, with various devices having classifications. It also controls rules regarding electronic devices interfering with such signals. "unlicensed spectrum innovation" means extending standards by using parts of the available spectrum. For example, Early "Dual band" routers used a band of the spectrum that was not used by their underlying 802.11 technology to increase transfer speeds.

the FCC said in its Monday announcement.

What this is saying is that the FCC announced this on a Monday. Monday is the Second Day of the week in most countries. It is named after  the old english name which translates to "moon day". Under ISO 8601 it is the first day of the week.

the rules adopted today remove the current restriction on indoor-only use and increase the permissible power which will provide more robust access in the 5.150-5.250GHz band

What this is saying that the existing restrictions on the use of the wireless spectrum for indoor use being used as well as the changes to interference limitations to allow transmissions to use more power will allow devices in the home to use more bandwidth of the electromagnetic spectrum. Interestingly, despite the title of the originally linked article (which is actually a dead link), nothing in the actual announcement mentions either Wifi or Internet connectivity. So it's possible you have been the victim of the chosen headline.