Maximum PC wireless networking RSS Feed

LG Unveils New 2TB NAS with Built-In DVD burner

Ryan Whitwam — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 21:16:24 -0500

LG has chosen CEDIA as the venue to show off its new N2R1 NAS box. The product’s aim, according to the press release, is to protect digital media files. The unit is capable of up to 2TB of RAID storage, and has a built-in DVD burner. Other specs include DLNA, Ethernet, and WiFi. Unfortunately, the wireless networking is limited to 802.11g. With 2TB of storage, you might want to wire this one in via Ethernet.

The system has remote access support, allowing consumers to access their files from any internet connection. The N2R1 is fully compatible with Windows, Linux, and Mac operating systems. LG’s new NAS will be available sometime this fall with a price of $299 for the 1TB version, or $399 for 2TB.

New D-Link DIR-628 Router Features Dual-Band 802.11n at Popular Prices

Mark Edward Soper — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 18:04:07 -0500

DIR-628: Two Modes in One Router...

The new D-Link RangeBooster N Dual Band Router, the DIR-628, joins a very short list of 802.11n-compliant routers that are compatible with both the 802.11n 2.4GHz mode (backwards-compatible with 802.11g and 802.11b) and the optional 5GHz mode (backwards-compatible with 802.11a):

Linksys WRT600N
D-Link's own Extreme N Duo Media Router DIR-855
Netgear's RangeMax WNDR3300

(Buffalo Tech's Wireless-N products are involved in ligitation and are currently not available in the US).

5GHz support enables 802.11n networks to escape the channel congestion inherent in 2.4GHz networks (where only three of the 11 channels theoretically available do not overlap) and achieve faster throughput through the use of double-width (40MHz) channels.

To find out how the DIR-628 implements the 2.4GHz and 5GHz modes, and to find out what level of wired Ethernet it supports, keep reading.

...But Not Two Routers in One

The DIR-628's dual-band rivals actually feature two routers in one: they have dual radios that can transmit on the 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands at the same time, enabling you to have two separate wireless networks (one for data and one for streaming media).

By contrast, the DIR-628 uses a simpler (and less-costly) design: during setup, you select whether you want to use the 2.4GHz or 5GHz frequency. Thus, if you have dual-mode 802.11n and/or 802.11a wireless adapters (which run at 5GHz) on your network, you can run in 5GHz mode. If you have only 2.4GHz adapters (802.11n, 802.11g, or the pre-Cambrian 802.11b), choose the 2.4GHz mode.

This router gives you the ability to move from 2.4GHz to 5GHz without replacing the router, but there's no way to have a mixture of clients. If the DIR-628 is at the center of your wireless network, you must upgrade all of your clients from 2.4GHz or 5GHz at the same time. Ouch!

Fast Ethernet in a Gigabit Ethernet World

The other cost-cutting feature of the DIR-628 is its lack of Gigabit Ethernet support. Gigabit Ethernet is supported in other dual-band routers, enabling wired clients with Gigabit ports to run at top speed. And, some 2.4GHz-only 802.11n routers, such as the D-Link DIR-655 and the Linksys WRT310N include Gigabit support at only a slight price premium to the DIR-628.

Missed It by This Much!

In terms of features, the DIR-628 is a puzzling mixture of the interesting (switchable between 2.4 and 5GHz) and frustrating (runs only one band at a time; lacks Gigabit Ethernet ports). The DIR-628 is likely to be of the greatest interest to those who already have 5GHz-compliant 802.11n (or 802.11a) hardware and are looking for a low-cost way to move to 802.11n support. For the vast majority of users, however, who are running in the 2.4GHz band or have dual-band clients, there are better choices in the marketplace.

(image courtesy D-Link)

The Difference Between Standards and “Standards”

Michael Brown — Fri, 04 May 2007 14:51:51 -0500

The dictionary has many definitions for the word “standard,” but I’ve been thinking of this one: “Something considered by an authority or by general consent as a basis of comparison; an approved model.” In the U.S., you can plug any electrical device into any electrical outlet, and that device will work. That’s a true standard. If only things were so simple in the computer industry.

What we have instead is at least two definitions: One revolves around standards defined by the IEEE and one revolves around standards defined by industry consortiums. IEEE standards are voted on by engineers whose sole interest—in theory, at least—is to see the best technology win. Technology guaranteed to be interoperable no matter who manufactures it; technology that doesn’t interfere with other products already widely deployed in the marketplace.

The problem with the IEEE is that engineers tend to be a single-minded, crusty, picky, lot that demand everything be just so before they’ll give their stamp of approval. They’re much more concerned with the standard being as perfect as it can be than they are in seeing actual products based on that standard reach the market. The upside is that this is a very democratic process; and when the standard is finally approved, it’s rock solid and dependable. The IEEE-1394 serial bus and IEEE 802.11a/b/g wireless-networking standards are good examples. The downside is that the IEEE moves at glacial speed. In this case, the 802.11n wireless Ethernet standard is a perfect example.

The computer industry’s other definition for standard revolves around industry consortiums that develop a consensus for how to build a certain class of product. Companies pay money to join the consortium, they sometimes contribute their intellectual property, they in all cases agree to license their relevant IP to every other member of the consortium, they conduct a series of meetings to hash out how this class of product will function, and they develop a logo and marketing plan aimed at educating consumers about their new standard. A product bearing the consortium’s logo is ostensibly guaranteed to be interoperable with any other product bearing that logo.

Speed is often the biggest advantage of the consortium approach to standards development. The member companies want to bring their new product to market as quickly as possible. If IEEE members are motivated by ideals, consortiums are motivated by profits. The consortium approach is decidedly undemocratic, however, in that the largest companies with the deepest pockets and the most influence have the biggest role in defining the standard, which sometimes leaves smaller and perhaps more innovative players out in the cold.

The other problem with the consortium approach is that there is often more than one trying to accomplish the very same goal. Take powerline networking, for instance. There are currently three consortiums in today’s market whose member companies all sell products that enable you to build a LAN using the existing powerlines in your home: The HomePlug Powerline Alliance, the Consumer Electronics Powerline Communication Alliance (CEPCA), and the Universal Powerline Association (UPA). The IEEE, meanwhile, is also in the very early stages of defining a standard for broadband Interenet access overr powerlines (IEEE P1901).

Although some manufacturers—such as Netgear—offer products based on two or more of these “standards,” these products are not interoperable across the standards. For example, Netgear’s HDX101 and HDXB101 powerline adapters cannot send or receive data to and from Netgear’s XE102, XE103, XEP103, and WGBX102 powerline adapters—even though these are all powerline-networking products. These networks can coexist, but they can’t cooperate.

Here’s something else to consider: Although Intel left the HomePlug Powerline Alliance in 2000, the split was short-lived and Intel’s Matt Theall now serves as the organization’s president. More recently, Intel recently announced its intention to offer HomePlug powerline networking as an option on its desktop platforms beginning in 2008.

All this confusion over standards isn’t limited to powerline networking, either. Several consortiums are competing to establish the best way to stream audio and video through your home (HANA, DLNA, MOCA, et al), the best way to automate your home (Z-Wave, Zigbee, et al), and so on.

So what are we as consumers to do? Buyer beware: If you decide to jump into a technology that the IEEE has not yet established a standard for, the best you can do is make sure that all the components you buy adhere to the same industry consortium’s standard. And then hope that that consortium carries the day.

March 2004: The Perfect Wireless Network

The Maximum PC Staff — Mon, 01 Mar 2004 00:00:00 -0600

In the PDF archive of the March 2004 issue, you can find:

Join the wireless revolution!
P4 Prescott, all you need to know
Your one all end all Guide to RAM
Awesome Product Reviews, including AVG Anti-Virus and Adobe Photoshop CS!
Ask the Doctor
Rig of the Month
The Watchdog
And a whole lot more!

Click the enormous cover image to the right to download the PDF archive today!