In article
<4316a671-149f-4884-9d9f-011deec03afd@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
species8350 <not_here.5.species8350@xoxy.net> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Any know problems with the Belkin 54g wireless PCI adapter?
>
> Are ther better buys?
>
> Thanks
I just bought and installed a Netgear USB adaptor in my Windows box
WG111 v3
It was a cinch to install and get working to link with my BigPond Home
Network Gateway for internet access, and then with my Apple iMac for
sharing files
I had tried this with a different brand (I've forgotten the name) and
had lots of problems both in setting it up and in it dropping out all
the time
So. Netgear is a good way to go if you can use USB - I haven't used
Belkin, but they are expensive
> Hi,
>
> Any know problems with the Belkin 54g wireless PCI adapter?
>
> Are ther better buys?
>
> Thanks
Are you talking about a PCI wireless card or a USB adapter?
"
In 54G I have a Belkin PCI card, a Belkin USB adapter, and a cheapie
high power" Chinese USB adapter.
The Belkin PCI card is very good provided you install it after the
software (or disable the card before installing the software) to avoid
problems.
The Belkin USB dadapter is of average power and has no provision for an
antenna.
The cheapie Chinese USB adapter has provision for an antenna, and
easily outperforms the others by 10-15% better s/n ratio.
USB adapters require more CPU usage from the PC so a PCI card is better
for a lower powered PC.
On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 01:57:08 GMT, David
<postings@REMOVE-TO-REPLYconfidential-counselling.com> wrote:
>In article
><4316a671-149f-4884-9d9f-011deec03afd@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
> species8350 <not_here.5.species8350@xoxy.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Any know problems with the Belkin 54g wireless PCI adapter?
>>
>> Are ther better buys?
>>
>> Thanks
>
>I just bought and installed a Netgear USB adaptor in my Windows box
>WG111 v3
>
>It was a cinch to install and get working to link with my BigPond Home
>Network Gateway for internet access, and then with my Apple iMac for
>sharing files
>
>I had tried this with a different brand (I've forgotten the name) and
>had lots of problems both in setting it up and in it dropping out all
>the time
What speed?
The only adapter I have been able to get full speed out of at 802-11N,
is a D-Link Expresscard which consistently gives me 300 mbps from
anywhere in the house to a Netgear Rangemax Gigabit Edition router. I
never got the equivalent Linksys card to work at all.
This is important when you have networked storage for backup and file
sharing.
None of the USB adapters I tried worked at anything close to the
advertised speed (270 mbps) because of the limitations of USB itself.
They also reduced speed with distance from the router, which the
D-Link expresscard didn't.
I also have a PCI to MCMCIA expansion card in my desktop, so I can use
all the old laptop cards I have lying around - one of which was a
Netgear 802-11N card. Again, for some reason I never got the expected
270 mbps but then this machine normally uses gigglebit wired ethernet
so I wan't too worried.
There seem to be two chipset suppliers and it's not always clear which
you're going to get until you open the box. Both Netgear and D-Link
supply version and version 2 models which are supposed to be the same
as far as the user is concerned.
One seems to operate consistantly at 300 mugglebits. The other at up
to 270, with "up to" being painfully accurate.Weaker antenna reception
and generating a weaker signal.
Which IMO is naughty because they don't tell you.
Poor USB performance is more of a problem because I use a USB dongle
that gets swapped between several old PCs when I need to use them.
>So. Netgear is a good way to go if you can use USB - I haven't used
>Belkin, but they are expensive
Belkin always struck me as "no name with a label" if you see what I
mean. Cheap connectors, cables and mice at Office Max.
On Sep 1, 3:06*am, "me here" <gloaming_ag...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> species8350 wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> > Any know problems with the Belkin 54g wireless PCI adapter?
>
> > Are ther better buys?
>
> > Thanks
>
> Are you talking about a PCI wireless card or a USB adapter?
> "
> In 54G I have a Belkin PCI card, a Belkin USB adapter, and *a cheapie
> high power" Chinese USB adapter.
>
> The Belkin PCI card is very good provided you install it after the
> software (or disable the card before installing the software) to avoid
> problems.
>
> The Belkin USB dadapter is of average power and has no provision for an
> antenna.
>
> The cheapie Chinese USB adapter has provision for an antenna, and
> easily outperforms the others by 10-15% better s/n ratio.
>
> USB adapters require more CPU usage from the PC so a PCI card is better
> for a lower powered PC.
>
> USB adapters can also minimize cable loss issues.
>
> Rob
Hi,
Why is it advisable to install the software first?
I was talking about the Wireless PCI Adapter, not USB dongles.
>On Sep 1, 3:06*am, "me here" <gloaming_ag...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> species8350 wrote:
>> > Hi,
>>
>> > Any know problems with the Belkin 54g wireless PCI adapter?
>>
>> > Are ther better buys?
>>
>> > Thanks
>>
>> Are you talking about a PCI wireless card or a USB adapter?
>> "
>> In 54G I have a Belkin PCI card, a Belkin USB adapter, and *a cheapie
>> high power" Chinese USB adapter.
>>
>> The Belkin PCI card is very good provided you install it after the
>> software (or disable the card before installing the software) to avoid
>> problems.
>>
>> The Belkin USB dadapter is of average power and has no provision for an
>> antenna.
>>
>> The cheapie Chinese USB adapter has provision for an antenna, and
>> easily outperforms the others by 10-15% better s/n ratio.
Can I ask where you got it and how it was described?
>> USB adapters require more CPU usage from the PC so a PCI card is better
>> for a lower powered PC.
>>
>> USB adapters can also minimize cable loss issues.
>>
>> Rob
>
>Hi,
>
>Why is it advisable to install the software first?
Because otherwise it can find a generic driver for the same chipset
which may or may not provide what you want.
When I was having problems installing a 300 mbps express card because
of buggy software, I tried various alternatives including leaving it
in, and it picked up a generic Atheros driver at 54 mbps.
FWIW it worked properly when I downloaded the latest software and ran
it from the downloads folder instead of the CD. But I still had to
remove the card first.
>I was talking about the Wireless PCI Adapter, not USB dongles.
PCMCIA laptop adapter or PCI expansion card in a desktop?
I'd recommend getting the fastest setup you can afford. 54 is OK for
stuff off the broadband connection but if you ever want to access data
from other PCs it will be too slow and you'll only end up spending
more money.
Once you realise what a home network can do for you, you start doing
things you never originally imtended. Eg I bought a networked storage
box for backups - and then used it to share files between the machines
on the network as well.
Which brings up another question. If it's a laptop it's been a long
time since they didn't come with wireless already, and these days the
come with 54 mbps already installed. Some are even coming out with
faster wireless.
>
> >
> > Why is it advisable to install the software first?
>
> Because otherwise it can find a generic driver for the same chipset
> which may or may not provide what you want.
>
> When I was having problems installing a 300 mbps express card because
> of buggy software, I tried various alternatives including leaving it
> in, and it picked up a generic Atheros driver at 54 mbps.
>
> FWIW it worked properly when I downloaded the latest software and ran
> it from the downloads folder instead of the CD. But I still had to
> remove the card first.
>
> > I was talking about the Wireless PCI Adapter, not USB dongles.
>
> PCMCIA laptop adapter or PCI expansion card in a desktop?
>
> I'd recommend getting the fastest setup you can afford. 54 is OK for
> stuff off the broadband connection but if you ever want to access data
> from other PCs it will be too slow and you'll only end up spending
> more money.
>
> Once you realise what a home network can do for you, you start doing
> things you never originally imtended. Eg I bought a networked storage
> box for backups - and then used it to share files between the machines
> on the network as well.
>
> Which brings up another question. If it's a laptop it's been a long
> time since they didn't come with wireless already, and these days the
> come with 54 mbps already installed. Some are even coming out with
> faster wireless.
>
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > S
With the Belkin it will go into a sort of shunting mode where it
continually connects and disconnects or at best gets a very very weak
connection.
You must also NOT let windows manage the connection or the same thing
will happen.
I see quite a few entries on the web where people have criticised the
Belkin adapters, but from the symptoms described it seems they didn't
read the instructions, and got the adapter into this major
conflict/loop.
The only way to fix it is to completely uninstall the driver, pull or
deactivate the card and start again.
The cheapie chinese "hi power" USB dongle was off Ebay and made some
slightly outrageous claims about giving 50% better range. It
supposedly has 22 dBm transmit power.
It uses a Realtek chipset.
This is not ideal for Linux and the Bekin driver is a better bet if you
use Ubuntu or similar.
I was very sceptical but it was so cheap there wasn't much to lose.
There seem to be quite a few similar units on Ebay.
I was amazed how much better it performed than the PCI card - with the
same biquad antenna or a 5 dBi rubber ducky attached.
I was using the biiquad to connect to a very weak signal through trees
about 100 metres away. In wet or windy conditions the PCI card would
drop out, but not the Realtek, it just hung in there - albeit with a
bit of variation.
In regard to 54G I have a NAS as well and it's damn slow over 54G wifi.
On Sep 1, 5:47*pm, Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Sep 2009 04:57:16 -0700 (PDT), species8350
>
>
>
>
>
> <not_here.5.species8...@xoxy.net> wrote:
> >On Sep 1, 3:06*am, "me here" <gloaming_ag...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> species8350 wrote:
> >> > Hi,
>
> >> > Any know problems with the Belkin 54g wireless PCI adapter?
>
> >> > Are ther better buys?
>
> >> > Thanks
>
> >> Are you talking about a PCI wireless card or a USB adapter?
> >> "
> >> In 54G I have a Belkin PCI card, a Belkin USB adapter, and *a cheapie
> >> high power" Chinese USB adapter.
>
> >> The Belkin PCI card is very good provided you install it after the
> >> software (or disable the card before installing the software) to avoid
> >> problems.
>
> >> The Belkin USB dadapter is of average power and has no provision for an
> >> antenna.
>
> >> The cheapie Chinese USB adapter has provision for an antenna, and
> >> easily outperforms the others by 10-15% better s/n ratio.
>
> Can I ask where you got it and how it was described?
>
> >> USB adapters require more CPU usage from the PC so a PCI card is better
> >> for a lower powered PC.
>
> >> USB adapters can also minimize cable loss issues.
>
> >> Rob
>
> >Hi,
>
> >Why is it advisable to install the software first?
>
> Because otherwise it can find a generic driver for the same chipset
> which may or may not provide what you want.
>
> When I was having problems installing a 300 mbps express card because
> of buggy software, I tried various alternatives including leaving it
> in, and it picked up a generic Atheros driver at 54 mbps. *
>
> FWIW it worked properly when I downloaded the latest software and ran
> it from the downloads folder instead of the CD. But I still had to
> remove the card first.
>
> >I was talking about the Wireless PCI Adapter, not USB dongles.
>
> PCMCIA laptop adapter or PCI expansion card in a desktop?
>
> I'd recommend getting the fastest setup you can afford. 54 is OK for
> stuff off the broadband connection but if you ever want to access data
> from other PCs it will be too slow and you'll only end up spending
> more money.
>
> Once you realise what a home network can do for you, you start doing
> things you never originally imtended. Eg I bought a networked storage
> box for backups - and then used it to share files between the machines
> on the network as well.
>
> Which brings up another question. If it's a laptop it's been a long
> time since they didn't come with wireless already, and these days the
> come with 54 mbps already installed. Some are even coming out with
> faster wireless.
>
>
>
> >Thanks
>
> >S- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
On 2 Sep 2009 09:09:16 +1100, "me here" <gloaming_agnet@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>With the Belkin it will go into a sort of shunting mode where it
>continually connects and disconnects or at best gets a very very weak
>connection.
>
>You must also NOT let windows manage the connection or the same thing
>will happen.
Thats one of the problems with the current state of wireless. Some
work with Windows, others need the supplied utility.
>I see quite a few entries on the web where people have criticised the
>Belkin adapters, but from the symptoms described it seems they didn't
>read the instructions, and got the adapter into this major
>conflict/loop.
I didn't try the Belkin because I was recommended not to get it.
>The only way to fix it is to completely uninstall the driver, pull or
>deactivate the card and start again.
>
>The cheapie chinese "hi power" USB dongle was off Ebay and made some
>slightly outrageous claims about giving 50% better range. It
>supposedly has 22 dBm transmit power.
>
>It uses a Realtek chipset.
>
>This is not ideal for Linux and the Bekin driver is a better bet if you
>use Ubuntu or similar.
>
>Here's a picture I took of it.
>
>http://users.picknowl.com.au/~gloaming_agnet/info.html
>
>I was very sceptical but it was so cheap there wasn't much to lose.
>
>There seem to be quite a few similar units on Ebay.
Thanks. I'll check it out.
>I was amazed how much better it performed than the PCI card - with the
>same biquad antenna or a 5 dBi rubber ducky attached.
Some of the name wireless stuff is crap. I think it depends which
chipset they use. It doesn't do their reputations much good.
>I was using the biiquad to connect to a very weak signal through trees
>about 100 metres away. In wet or windy conditions the PCI card would
>drop out, but not the Realtek, it just hung in there - albeit with a
>bit of variation.
Thats pretty good.
>In regard to 54G I have a NAS as well and it's damn slow over 54G wifi.
Yes. That's why I use 802-11N. It's still slower than wired gigglebit
but it is acceptable. I'm a semi-invalid so I do a lot of work either
from in bed or on the sofa under a blanket.
> me here <gloaming_agnet@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > With the Belkin it will go into a sort of shunting mode where it
> > continually connects and disconnects or at best gets a very very
> > weak connection.
>
> > You must also NOT let windows manage the connection or the same
> > thing will happen.
>
> I have a belkin USB adapter.
> The first one was junk, cycling, had to unplug and replug to get it to
> connect.
> Then it quit altogether. I put it in a drawer and went back to my
> DLink 802.11b.
>
> I needed another WiFi, and the Belkin annoyed me, so I called
> support... Lifetime Warranty, and the new one runs just fine with
> the Belkin drivers and Windows Wireless Zero Management.
>
> I think they had a bad batch.
Wow, I didn't realize they had a lifetime warranty.
I also have a Belkin wireless router, which I now use as an access
point, and it's been faultless and a very strong performer in each mode.
The only reason I went Belkin is because I picked up the wireless
router, PCI card and USB adapter for half price off the local store"s
"returns" table.
The only Belkin product I ever had trouble with was a dedicated access
point (once again off the returns table) which wouldnt respond - I
didn't worry about a warranty claim as I really didn't need it, but
couldn't help myself, so I returned it to the returns table again and I
suppose it's still being returned :-)
me here <gloaming_agnet@hotmail.com> wrote:
> With the Belkin it will go into a sort of shunting mode where it
> continually connects and disconnects or at best gets a very very weak
> connection.
> You must also NOT let windows manage the connection or the same thing
> will happen.
I have a belkin USB adapter.
The first one was junk, cycling, had to unplug and replug to get it to
connect.
Then it quit altogether. I put it in a drawer and went back to my DLink
802.11b.
I needed another WiFi, and the Belkin annoyed me, so I called support...
Lifetime Warranty, and the new one runs just fine with the Belkin drivers
and Windows Wireless Zero Management.
I think they had a bad batch.
--
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5
In article <9d1p95hkoogr2nhr9ijv4t3efnukv2kfvu@4ax.com>,
Christopher A. Lee <calee@optonline.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 01:57:08 GMT, David
> <postings@REMOVE-TO-REPLYconfidential-counselling.com> wrote:
>
> >In article
> ><4316a671-149f-4884-9d9f-011deec03afd@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
> > species8350 <not_here.5.species8350@xoxy.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Any know problems with the Belkin 54g wireless PCI adapter?
> >>
> >> Are ther better buys?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >
> >I just bought and installed a Netgear USB adaptor in my Windows box
> >WG111 v3
> >
> >It was a cinch to install and get working to link with my BigPond Home
> >Network Gateway for internet access, and then with my Apple iMac for
> >sharing files
> >
> >I had tried this with a different brand (I've forgotten the name) and
> >had lots of problems both in setting it up and in it dropping out all
> >the time
>
> What speed?
Rated g, but I have no idea about what the actual speed achieved is -
sorry. But for me that wan't an issue as my BigPond Gateway is also
rated g - so an N wouldn't be of much use
On Sep 2, 9:24*am, David <posti...@REMOVE-TO-REPLYconfidential-
counselling.com> wrote:
> In article <9d1p95hkoogr2nhr9ijv4t3efnukv2k...@4ax.com>,
> *Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 01:57:08 GMT, David
> > <posti...@REMOVE-TO-REPLYconfidential-counselling.com> wrote:
>
> > >In article
> > ><4316a671-149f-4884-9d9f-011deec03...@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
> > > species8350 <not_here.5.species8...@xoxy.net> wrote:
>
> > >> Hi,
>
> > >> Any know problems with the Belkin 54g wireless PCI adapter?
>
> > >> Are ther better buys?
>
> > >> Thanks
>
> > >I just bought and installed a Netgear USB adaptor in my Windows box
> > >WG111 v3
>
> > >It was a cinch to install and get working to link with my BigPond Home
> > >Network Gateway for internet access, and then with my Apple iMac for
> > >sharing files
>
> > >I had tried this with a different brand (I've forgotten the name) and
> > >had lots of problems both in setting it up and in it dropping out all
> > >the time
>
> > What speed?
>
> Rated g, but I have no idea about what the actual speed achieved is -
> sorry. *But for me that wan't an issue as my BigPond Gateway is also
> rated g - so an N wouldn't be of much use
>
> David
> ....- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hi,
Am I right in assuming that Belkin adapters are fine providing one
installs the software first, and uses their software?.
> On Sep 2, 9:24*am, David <posti...@REMOVE-TO-REPLYconfidential-
> counselling.com> wrote:
> > In article <9d1p95hkoogr2nhr9ijv4t3efnukv2k...@4ax.com>,
> > *Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 01:57:08 GMT, David
> > > <posti...@REMOVE-TO-REPLYconfidential-counselling.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > In article
> > > > <4316a671-149f-4884-9d9f-011deec03...@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.c
> > > > om>, species8350 <not_here.5.species8...@xoxy.net> wrote:
> >
> > > >> Hi,
> >
> > > >> Any know problems with the Belkin 54g wireless PCI adapter?
> >
> > > >> Are ther better buys?
> >
> > > >> Thanks
> >
> > > > I just bought and installed a Netgear USB adaptor in my Windows
> > > > box WG111 v3
> >
> > > > It was a cinch to install and get working to link with my
> > > > BigPond Home Network Gateway for internet access, and then with
> > > > my Apple iMac for sharing files
> >
> > > > I had tried this with a different brand (I've forgotten the
> > > > name) and had lots of problems both in setting it up and in it
> > > > dropping out all the time
> >
> > > What speed?
> >
> > Rated g, but I have no idea about what the actual speed achieved is
> > - sorry. *But for me that wan't an issue as my BigPond Gateway is
> > also rated g - so an N wouldn't be of much use
> >
> > David
> > ....- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Hi,
>
> Am I right in assuming that Belkin adapters are fine providing one
> installs the software first, and uses their software?.
>
> I note they have a lifetime guarantee.
>
> Thanks
On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 08:24:17 GMT, David
<postings@REMOVE-TO-REPLYconfidential-counselling.com> wrote:
>In article <9d1p95hkoogr2nhr9ijv4t3efnukv2kfvu@4ax.com>,
> Christopher A. Lee <calee@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 01:57:08 GMT, David
>> <postings@REMOVE-TO-REPLYconfidential-counselling.com> wrote:
>>
>> >In article
>> ><4316a671-149f-4884-9d9f-011deec03afd@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
>> > species8350 <not_here.5.species8350@xoxy.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> Any know problems with the Belkin 54g wireless PCI adapter?
>> >>
>> >> Are ther better buys?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >
>> >I just bought and installed a Netgear USB adaptor in my Windows box
>> >WG111 v3
>> >
>> >It was a cinch to install and get working to link with my BigPond Home
>> >Network Gateway for internet access, and then with my Apple iMac for
>> >sharing files
>> >
>> >I had tried this with a different brand (I've forgotten the name) and
>> >had lots of problems both in setting it up and in it dropping out all
>> >the time
>>
>> What speed?
>
>Rated g, but I have no idea about what the actual speed achieved is -
>sorry. But for me that wan't an issue as my BigPond Gateway is also
>rated g - so an N wouldn't be of much use
Thanks.
It's not so much the speed of the broadband gateway but the amount of
data you want to move around the home network - backup to network
storage, file and printer sharing etc. Some of us have gone beyond
file sharing to client/server.
USB dongles aren't so good at higher speeds because of the limitations
of USB itself. I found speed slowing drastically with N as the load
increased. Another poster has pointed out how much CPU is used with
USB, which could be part of the problem but N also pushes the transfer
rate of the USB interface to the limit.
I've used Netgear and D-Link N USB, and while they've stayed up I
never operated at anything close to the rated 270 mbps. The only
device I have that works as specified in a D-Link Expresscard that
gives me a consistent 300 mbps anywhere in the hose.
My biggest gripe is that the suppliers just say "up to 270mbps"
without giving you any help. You're on your own finding all this out
the hard way.
Too much stuff from different manuacturers doesn't work properly with
each other, and even sometimes from the same one when they use
different chip sets.
Microsoft is also a bit flakey in this area and the application
developers haven't caught up either.
On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 08:13:59 -0400, Christopher A. Lee
<calee@optonline.net> wrote:
>USB dongles aren't so good at higher speeds because of the limitations
>of USB itself.
USB 1.1 is limited to 12Mbits/sec, which will certainly be a problem
for 802.11g speeds. However, USB 2.0 is limited to 480MBits/sec,
which is considerably faster than the 54Mbits/sec needed for the
highest 802.11g speed. 802.11n may be a problem for USB, but I've
found that speeds over about 120Mbits/sec very difficult to achieve
and then only at fairly close ranges. Therefore, USB 2.0 should not
be the limiting factor.
>I found speed slowing drastically with N as the load
>increased.
I assume you mean "throughput" and "system load". It shouldn't slow
down. If it does, your computah is hurting for horsepower. Please
note that if it can do 100Mbit/sec on the ethernet port, without a
slow down, then it should also be able to do the same on the USB 2.0
ports. If not, something else is amis, such as a badly written
wireless driver.
>Another poster has pointed out how much CPU is used with
>USB, which could be part of the problem but N also pushes the transfer
>rate of the USB interface to the limit.
The limit of USB is about 3 times the best you can do with 802.11n.
However, that assume the machine is capable of digesting the data. If
the destination for the data is /dev/null, then you have the best of
all cases, and it should be no problem. However, if you're viewing an
HD MP4 video, the CPU has to divide its time between dealing with the
USB port data, and dealing with displaying the movie in real time. If
both require the full attention of the CPU, there's going to be
visible dropouts (pixelation). It won't be so much the lack of
performance on the USB port, as it will be the inability of the CPU to
keep up with the video stream. It may look like a 802.11n slowdown,
but it's really a video processing problem.
If you wanna do some useful benchmarks, look into iperf and jperf.
<http://openmaniak.com/iperf.php> (tutorial)
<http://sourceforge.net/projects/iperf>
<http://sourceforge.net/projects/jperf>
These should give you performance data (i.e. throughput) without
simultaneously benchmarking a video application, or hard disk speed.
For confirmation of my guess, also try USB wireless benchmark, while
watching an HD MP4 movie from the local hard disk. I predict you'll
see a major slowdown.
>I've used Netgear and D-Link N USB, and while they've stayed up I
>never operated at anything close to the rated 270 mbps. The only
>device I have that works as specified in a D-Link Expresscard that
>gives me a consistent 300 mbps anywhere in the hose.
Careful there. DLink does something that I consider to be rather
devious. They only display the initial connection speed on the status
page. You may probably get 300Mbit/sec initial connection, when
there's no traffic moving, but as soon as you start downloading, and
the errors accumulate, the speed will drop. Most wireless client
managers do NOT display the inevitable drop in speed, or at best, when
the system slow down and then only after a long delay insuring that
the data cannot be used for tuneing. DLink does it even worse, but
displaying the initial connection speed, and leaving it there. The
bottom line is that you have to do the benchmarking yourself, and
usually with a 3rd party application, as the Microsoft diags usually
report what the NDIS driver is reporting, which is the same that Dlink
uses for its connection manager. Incidentally, sniffing the 802.11
management frames with Netstumbler to get the connection speeds is
useless because it would need to sniff 4 different streams
simultaneously. Actually, I've never bothered to try it, but am
fairly sure sniffing won't work.
>My biggest gripe is that the suppliers just say "up to 270mbps"
>without giving you any help. You're on your own finding all this out
>the hard way.
Everyone lies, but that's acceptable because nobody listens. It's
fully capable of going 270Mbits/sec and can probably be demonstrated
in a Greenfield (i.e. perfect) environment or a laboratory. That's
about the same as a 150mph automobile, that can easily do 150mph on a
straight flat unoccupied road, but might have some difficulties on a
city street. Caveat Emptor.
See the data rate chart at:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11n>
It would be nice if there were a standard test environment suitable
for realistic benchmarking, but not this week. Important parameters,
such a room reflectivity, interference, and wall construction are just
too difficult to duplicate. So, the manufacturers supply an upper
limit. In my limited experience, you'll be luck to *maintain* speeds
greater than 54mbits/sec in a "typical" indoor environment.
>Too much stuff from different manuacturers doesn't work properly with
>each other, and even sometimes from the same one when they use
>different chip sets.
No kidding. I'll just ignore that the 802.11n specification isn't
quite done yet. Also, that there are a growing number of
implimentations that claim to be 802.11n. For example:
1. Pure Beam Steering
2. Pure Spatial Multiplexing
3. Both Beam Steering and Spatial Mux.
4. Spatial Mux with anything from 1x2:2 (which I don't consider to be
MIMO but is common with USB adapters) to a max of 4x4:4.
5. All the above in a 20MHz channel or a 40Mhz channel.
6. With 802.11g protection on or off.
7. nd a whole mess of minor implimentation options which may make or
break a connection. Getting all this compatible between manufacturers
is not going to be easy.
At least the Wi-Fi Alliance is testing for pre-802.11n standards
compliance, which should be a big help.
>Microsoft is also a bit flakey in this area and the application
>developers haven't caught up either.
If you mean WZC (wireless zero config) is a bit flakey, that's an
understatement. It's permanently broken and misdesigned in XP. Vista
wireless is a huge improvement, but still lacking for things like
connection progress indication, error recovery, monitoring, dealing
with large numbers of AP's, etc. Maybe Windoze 7 will get it right.
In my never humble opinion, Intel Proset 12 is the closest
approximation of a useful and functional connection manager and
driver. Note that it took many years of constant improvments to make
it that way.
>>David
>>....
Incidentally, I would be interested in your iperf or jperf results if
you decide to run them. Email address in signature below.
On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 09:19:14 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:
>On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 08:13:59 -0400, Christopher A. Lee
><calee@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>USB dongles aren't so good at higher speeds because of the limitations
>>of USB itself.
>
>USB 1.1 is limited to 12Mbits/sec, which will certainly be a problem
>for 802.11g speeds. However, USB 2.0 is limited to 480MBits/sec,
>which is considerably faster than the 54Mbits/sec needed for the
>highest 802.11g speed. 802.11n may be a problem for USB, but I've
>found that speeds over about 120Mbits/sec very difficult to achieve
>and then only at fairly close ranges. Therefore, USB 2.0 should not
>be the limiting factor.
USB is simplex (ie one direction at a time) and bit serial. So it
takes longer to send data that is parallel in the computer out to the
adapter and make it parallel again in the adapter, as well as having
to keep transitioning between send and receive down the USB interface.
The 480 mbps also has to handle any handshaking protocol between the
computer and the adapter.
The express card splats the data out to the adapter in parallel. It's
like the difference between counting up to 32 and just saying 32.
>>I found speed slowing drastically with N as the load
>>increased.
>
>I assume you mean "throughput" and "system load". It shouldn't slow
Yes.
This surprised me until I discovered how USB uses up CPU.
>down. If it does, your computah is hurting for horsepower. Please
>note that if it can do 100Mbit/sec on the ethernet port, without a
>slow down, then it should also be able to do the same on the USB 2.0
>ports. If not, something else is amis, such as a badly written
>wireless driver.
I use gigabit Ethernet on the desktop, and the only time I have used
wired Ethernet on the laptop was to connect directly to the cable
modem.
Wouldn't surprise me though. Most of this stuff is badly written crap
because it costs too much to write decent software.
>>Another poster has pointed out how much CPU is used with
>>USB, which could be part of the problem but N also pushes the transfer
>>rate of the USB interface to the limit.
>
>The limit of USB is about 3 times the best you can do with 802.11n.
>However, that assume the machine is capable of digesting the data. If
>the destination for the data is /dev/null, then you have the best of
>all cases, and it should be no problem. However, if you're viewing an
>HD MP4 video, the CPU has to divide its time between dealing with the
>USB port data, and dealing with displaying the movie in real time. If
>both require the full attention of the CPU, there's going to be
>visible dropouts (pixelation). It won't be so much the lack of
>performance on the USB port, as it will be the inability of the CPU to
>keep up with the video stream. It may look like a 802.11n slowdown,
>but it's really a video processing problem.
Yet I get far better performance from my D-Link Expresscard, reported
by the task manager and the performance monitor. File transfer times
also reflect this.
I have no problem dealing keeping up with the video stream unless I've
got conflicting security packages. These figures are from the
performance monitor.
If anything the current problem area is the Netgear wireless router.
If I lose my broadband connection it seems to forget work on the local
network while trying to recover. And it's easy to overload it
downloading from torrents (which I don't do all that often)I don't
often download torrents but when I do
In either case applications lose their connection to files on the
networked disk box and don't reconnect when it recovers.
>If you wanna do some useful benchmarks, look into iperf and jperf.
><http://openmaniak.com/iperf.php> (tutorial)
><http://sourceforge.net/projects/iperf>
><http://sourceforge.net/projects/jperf>
I'll try these.
>These should give you performance data (i.e. throughput) without
>simultaneously benchmarking a video application, or hard disk speed.
>For confirmation of my guess, also try USB wireless benchmark, while
>watching an HD MP4 movie from the local hard disk. I predict you'll
>see a major slowdown.
I run HD MP4 off a shared network disk. No problems at all with the
300 mbps express card but stuttering if I use USB.
>>I've used Netgear and D-Link N USB, and while they've stayed up I
>>never operated at anything close to the rated 270 mbps. The only
>>device I have that works as specified in a D-Link Expresscard that
>>gives me a consistent 300 mbps anywhere in the hose.
>
>Careful there. DLink does something that I consider to be rather
>devious. They only display the initial connection speed on the status
>page. You may probably get 300Mbit/sec initial connection, when
>there's no traffic moving, but as soon as you start downloading, and
>the errors accumulate, the speed will drop. Most wireless client
>managers do NOT display the inevitable drop in speed, or at best, when
>the system slow down and then only after a long delay insuring that
>the data cannot be used for tuneing. DLink does it even worse, but
>displaying the initial connection speed, and leaving it there. The
>bottom line is that you have to do the benchmarking yourself, and
>usually with a 3rd party application, as the Microsoft diags usually
>report what the NDIS driver is reporting, which is the same that Dlink
>uses for its connection manager. Incidentally, sniffing the 802.11
>management frames with Netstumbler to get the connection speeds is
>useless because it would need to sniff 4 different streams
>simultaneously. Actually, I've never bothered to try it, but am
>fairly sure sniffing won't work.
This is as reported on the task manager and performance monitor. The
latter "adds things up" to get what should be a fairly accurate
throughput. Although it does have its own overheads.
This is the express card in the laptop.
Oddly enough their USB dongle and the Netgear equivalent report
varying speeds in the places you would look for it in.
>>My biggest gripe is that the suppliers just say "up to 270mbps"
>>without giving you any help. You're on your own finding all this out
>>the hard way.
>
>Everyone lies, but that's acceptable because nobody listens. It's
>fully capable of going 270Mbits/sec and can probably be demonstrated
>in a Greenfield (i.e. perfect) environment or a laboratory. That's
>about the same as a 150mph automobile, that can easily do 150mph on a
>straight flat unoccupied road, but might have some difficulties on a
>city street. Caveat Emptor.
People do listen though. Especially when they are planning a network.
And the guys in the stores aren't very helpful either.Prime example
was the expansion card I put in the desktop to add a PCMCIA socket
because of all the old PCMCIA cards from various laptops. "Yes, we
sell lots of different cards for laptops, what kind do you want?"
"It's an expansion card for a desktop PC so I can use all the old
laptop cards we all have". "No such thing".
>See the data rate chart at:
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11n>
>
>It would be nice if there were a standard test environment suitable
>for realistic benchmarking, but not this week. Important parameters,
>such a room reflectivity, interference, and wall construction are just
>too difficult to duplicate. So, the manufacturers supply an upper
>limit. In my limited experience, you'll be luck to *maintain* speeds
>greater than 54mbits/sec in a "typical" indoor environment.
>
>>Too much stuff from different manuacturers doesn't work properly with
>>each other, and even sometimes from the same one when they use
>>different chip sets.
>
>No kidding. I'll just ignore that the 802.11n specification isn't
>quite done yet. Also, that there are a growing number of
>implimentations that claim to be 802.11n. For example:
>1. Pure Beam Steering
>2. Pure Spatial Multiplexing
>3. Both Beam Steering and Spatial Mux.
>4. Spatial Mux with anything from 1x2:2 (which I don't consider to be
>MIMO but is common with USB adapters) to a max of 4x4:4.
>5. All the above in a 20MHz channel or a 40Mhz channel.
>6. With 802.11g protection on or off.
>7. nd a whole mess of minor implimentation options which may make or
>break a connection. Getting all this compatible between manufacturers
>is not going to be easy.
One of the reasons I chose my router: Netgear claim that when the
standard is finalised this will reflected in a (probably just
firmware?) upgrade,
>At least the Wi-Fi Alliance is testing for pre-802.11n standards
>compliance, which should be a big help.
Yes.
>>Microsoft is also a bit flakey in this area and the application
>>developers haven't caught up either.
>
>If you mean WZC (wireless zero config) is a bit flakey, that's an
I was being diplomatic.
>understatement. It's permanently broken and misdesigned in XP. Vista
>wireless is a huge improvement, but still lacking for things like
>connection progress indication, error recovery, monitoring, dealing
>with large numbers of AP's, etc.
I agree with all of these. Error recovery on the network is
particularly bad.
> Maybe Windoze 7 will get it right.
Don't hold your breath. I only got Vista because that's what came with
replacement machines after two successive laptop mother board failures
and a desktop that fried itself during a heat wave when the air
conditioning failed.
I use the machines as tools. Having been a mainframe architecture
level hardware professional in my professional life I don't need to be
a PC nerd now.
Not being in the best of health it's not always convenient to use the
desktop PC so I need to do the same things using the same files from
the laptop. Hence the need for a wireless network that operates as the
manufacturers advertise.
>In my never humble opinion, Intel Proset 12 is the closest
>approximation of a useful and functional connection manager and
>driver. Note that it took many years of constant improvments to make
>it that way.
I don't think any of my adapters use the Intel chip set. I know that
when I didn't install properly the D-link came up with a default
Atheros driver.
To be honest I'm disappointed how little the manufacturers do to help.
And especially disappointed that they use different chipsets and
drivers in adapters that behave differently even though they're sold
in the same box with the same labeling.
>>>David
>>>....
>
>Incidentally, I would be interested in your iperf or jperf results if
>you decide to run them. Email address in signature below.
On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 14:05:37 -0400, Christopher A. Lee
<calee@optonline.net> wrote:
>This surprised me until I discovered how USB uses up CPU.
<http://utils.newfreeware.com/utils/1506/download/>
14 day trial or you pay $70. The lite version will do the basics
after the 14 days.
>Wouldn't surprise me though. Most of this stuff is badly written crap
>because it costs too much to write decent software.
Actually, I find that my speeds are very close to the legal limit
(480Mbit/sec) for USB file transfers from a USB attached hard disk. I
would expect similar performance with wireless. However, I can't find
my numbers, so I'll run a quick test later today.
>I have no problem dealing keeping up with the video stream unless I've
>got conflicting security packages. These figures are from the
>performance monitor.
Permon is quite accurate but not as good as iperf and jperf for
benchmarking.
>I run HD MP4 off a shared network disk. No problems at all with the
>300 mbps express card but stuttering if I use USB.
Yep, serial versus parallel again. However, please note that Wi-Fi is
inherently a serial protocol, with the added bonus of being half
duplex. With streaming video, the half duplex is not as big a hit as
you would expect because of the asymmetrical bandwidth. Protocol
overhead is what slows thruput down to about half the connection
speed.
>This is as reported on the task manager and performance monitor. The
>latter "adds things up" to get what should be a fairly accurate
>throughput. Although it does have its own overheads.
I'll trust Perfmon not the speeds reported by the connection manager
or WZC.
>Oddly enough their USB dongle and the Netgear equivalent report
>varying speeds in the places you would look for it in.
Good. If you can see changes, then the reporting program is probably
giving an honest speed indication. However, please note that the
connection speed can be different for each direction, and literally
for each packet. I don't know if the Netgear connection manager
reports an average, peak, or wild guess.
>People do listen though. Especially when they are planning a network.
Well, nobody listens to me and I don't do much planning. However, I
do quite a bit of damage control, which is a good indication that
something is not being planned or calculated. When I start seeing
real numbers, test results, and calculations, then I'll know that
there's been some planning. I don't see much of that in my work or in
this newsgroup.
>One of the reasons I chose my router: Netgear claim that when the
>standard is finalised this will reflected in a (probably just
>firmware?) upgrade,
Prediction: When the standard is eventually released for general
consumption, there is going to be a flurry of updates, only some of
which will be functional, tested, and stable. My guess is that the
problems will take at least 3 firmware updates to nail down. Maybe
more if the vendor cares about cross vendor interoperability.
>>If you mean WZC (wireless zero config) is a bit flakey, that's an
>
>I was being diplomatic.
Why? Bashing Microsoft is almost a national sport. Everyone hates
them. I still think back in horror at the days before MS, when CP/M
was the high fashion operating system. I dread to think of what the
world would be like if CP/M had prevailed. MS has certainly had its
problems and made some mistakes, but in general, they've done more
good than evil. Unfortunately TCP/IP, wireless, networking, and in
particular, WZC are areas where MS has done rather badly. I sometimes
wonder if whomever wrote the drivers and user interface tools had ever
even operated a real wireless network.
>I agree with all of these. Error recovery on the network is
>particularly bad.
Yep. A great example is WZC and WPA. Type in the wrong WPA pass
phrase (twice) and WZC will attempt to connect, fail, and not give a
clue what's wrong. Worse, it's a rather tricky and non-obvious mess
trying to fix the pass phrase. Same problem if you change the WPA
pass phrase on the router. Extra credit for the brilliant user
interface decision, where double clicking on an SSID in the "view
available networks" window, offers to disable automatic connection,
which is stupid when the user just want to try again at typing in the
right WPA pass phrase.
>I use the machines as tools. Having been a mainframe architecture
>level hardware professional in my professional life I don't need to be
>a PC nerd now.
I have dad news for you. PC's are like quicksand. Once you jump into
the muck, you're going to sink deeper and deeper into the
technobabble, acronyms, and bug chasing exercises. There's no way you
can turn a PC into a real appliance type system (such as a banking ATM
machine) and not get involved in the technology.
>Not being in the best of health it's not always convenient to use the
>desktop PC so I need to do the same things using the same files from
>the laptop. Hence the need for a wireless network that operates as the
>manufacturers advertise.
Get well please. The world need competent computer types.
The justifications for wireless and many and varied. As I previously
ranted, there's no way to make a system that works for every possible
configuration and use. I mention HD video as the worst case but there
are others. Like any technology, leave yourself some headroom and
don't run the technology at full throttle all the time. With
wireless, all the manufacturers lie to varying degrees. Sometimes,
they don't even know the difference between their marketing baloney
and reality. If you need a good dose of reality, see Tim Higgins
writings on:
<http://www.smallnetbuilder.com>
>To be honest I'm disappointed how little the manufacturers do to help.
It's not easy for them. For example, Netgear is now on its 3rd
generation (and I think 3rd chipset supplier) for 802.11n products and
the specification hasn't even been finalized. I would not expect
support to be up to speed on what appears to be an endless beta test.
Also, support does not have the benefits of hands on experience. It's
much like reading about wireless from a book. You don't really
understand the problems until you've experienced them first hand. For
support, just identifying the problems over the phone are difficult
mostly because the average caller does not have the appropriate
vocabulary to describe the problem (much less describe their own
system). Fortunately, about 90% of the problems are simple user or
installation errors, which support can usually handle with a scripted
troubleshooting tree. Suggestion: reduce your expectations.
>And especially disappointed that they use different chipsets and
>drivers in adapters that behave differently even though they're sold
>in the same box with the same labeling.
Chuckle. Welcome to marketing. There are now 9 different mutations
of the Linksys WRT54G, each with radically different guts, but nearly
identical packaging. This is mostly to avoid stocking and chargeback
issues with dealers. When a company issues a new hardware release,
the first thing that happens is that the distributors immediately
return all their "old" stock as unsellable. They only can sell the
absolute latest. So, the manufacturers respond by making the packages
and model numbers nearly indistinguishable. It works.
me here <gloaming_agnet@hotmail.com> wrote:
> dold@46.usenet.us.com wrote:
> > I needed another WiFi, and the Belkin annoyed me, so I called
> > support... Lifetime Warranty, and the new one runs just fine with
> > the Belkin drivers and Windows Wireless Zero Management.
> >
> > I think they had a bad batch.
> Wow, I didn't realize they had a lifetime warranty.
Pretty painless, too. They asked the standard questions about trying it on
a different computer, and loading the proper software, and then they sent a
new one out. I had to give a credit card which was never charged, since I
returned the old one as soon as the new one arrived.
--
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5
> me here <gloaming_agnet@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > dold@46.usenet.us.com wrote:
> > > I needed another WiFi, and the Belkin annoyed me, so I called
> > > support... Lifetime Warranty, and the new one runs just fine with
> > > the Belkin drivers and Windows Wireless Zero Management.
> > >
> > > I think they had a bad batch.
>
> > Wow, I didn't realize they had a lifetime warranty.
>
> Pretty painless, too. They asked the standard questions about trying
> it on a different computer, and loading the proper software, and then
> they sent a new one out. I had to give a credit card which was never
> charged, since I returned the old one as soon as the new one arrived.
Belkin Adapters 
Linear Mode
