• n3m37h@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    8 hours ago

    The triangle of compromise

    Speed
    Bandwidth
    Range

    You cant have all 3. Just like manufacturing

      • BassTurd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Speed and bandwidth correlate but aren’t the same. Bandwidth is the amount of data that can pass through a medium and speed is the transmission rate. If you have a gig connection and one device, you can get close to gig speeds. If you have the same gig connection with 1000 devices saturating the medium, you aren’t likely to get gig speeds.

    • felixwhynot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      8 hours ago

      To be fair most wifi is used within homes or businesses these days so I would simply sacrifice range — as long as the minimum range is reasonable

        • acosmichippo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          also don’t need 15 GBps (120gbps) for every day use, so some of that bandwidth can be sacrificed for better range. ultra high speed hdmi is 48gbps.

          • Lodespawn@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 hours ago

            Yeah I wonder if they can use the same configuration to improve bandwidth at frequencies that penetrate walls, people and things better

        • vinnymac@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          6 hours ago

          I would use this for streaming games from a wired PC to a device that’s wireless. Not having to run a wire is magical.

          • Ŝan • 𐑖ƨɤ@piefed.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            I mean, no kidding. Þere are any number is use cases for getting rid of wires. Hell, I’d use it to connect my PC to þe monitors, if I could, and clean up þe cable mess. But streaming from þe home media server to a TV? No brainer. Also, even if þe single-room comment is accurate, daisy chain. Þe only real show stopper would be if it were line-of-sight.

          • Lodespawn@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            23 minutes ago

            I don’t think this is a product yet … more like a technical solution for building a power efficient modulation at high frequency. Gigabit speeds are great but the band they are sitting in is mostly useless unless you have line of sight.

      • n3m37h@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        5G mm wave can be blocked by paper ffs, range doesnt matter if a leaf can block the line of sight. Idk why we can use the low bandwidth long range 900-1200mhz and just use an array of atenna send out multiple channels to increase bandwidth. I’d prefer range over bandwidth I wont utilize

    • qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I would probably add “transmit power” in there somewhere, but I guess if you’re assuming regulatory limits then it’s not a big variable.

      • n3m37h@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        yeah, I was thinking of the manufacturing triangle, Speed, Cost, Quality, when I was thinking up of what it would be for wifi lol

  • Oisteink@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    And what are we downloading? Is the cloud dead? Why do i need 15gbps on my phone? Is it made for consoles and their relentless 120gb patches?

    • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      For home use, all I can think of is wireless video. 15 GB/s is faster than the fastest DisplayPort or HDMI versions. It could handle any resolution and refresh rate currently in use without any compression. That would be useful for VR headsets since they need low latency.

    • heyWhatsay@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 hours ago

      One example I’ve read, was to remotely drive autonomous vehicles, and feed back all data collected from cameras and sensors. I’m not a fan of it being used this way, but it would mostly serve that kind of purpose.

      • BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Putting fiber in the ground is expensive. I work for an ISP, and we estimate fiber overbuild costs at $15/ft. So a mile of underground fiber costs about $79,200.

        • Sarmyth@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Yup. That’s why we gave them all that money years ago to do it. It was cheaper then too.

    • n3m37h@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      1.5gb/s is way more than enough for the average person. Hell, 200Mb/s is more than enough. That would only be 10 min.