Windows 7 - IEEE Approves 802.22 Standard (aka Super Wi-Fi)

Brink · 07-29-2011

Quote:

Last September, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) formalized a set of technical rules for the use of unused broadcast spectrum between TV frequencies (also known as “white space”), paving the way for what is being dubbed Super Wi-Fi. However, one final formality still remained: the finalization of the new wireless standard.
Now that, too, is out of the way. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) has published the IEEE 802.22 standard, more popularly known as Super Wi-Fi, for Wireless Regional Area Networks (WRANs).

Read more at: Maximum PC | IEEE Approves 802.22 Standard (aka Super Wi-Fi)

Dave76 · 07-31-2011

That is good news.

Hope to see this start deploying soon.

seekermeister · 07-31-2011

Hmm, I hadn't heard of it til now. From what I read, the only advantage of super Wi-Fi is range, since the transmission level is so low. I'm sure that will interest some, but it would not fit my needs. With that much range, I would be even more concerned about hacking than I am with my 300 Mbps N Wi-Fi. Even though they believe otherwise, I would also be concerned about the mingling of signals with TV transmission, not only because of possible interference one way or another, but because it seems that it would make it even easier for hackers to go by unnoticed.

Beta · 07-31-2011

We might see hardware coming out by next fall. From approval to deployment takes a long time. I am not slaming it by any means. I am just saying it will take a long time to come out.

wat docdude · 08-02-2011

I could use some super wifi. I live in a suburban area, but there are only a couple houses on my block so the cable companies just skipped it I guess. It wouldn't be financially worth it for them.

I'm so close yet so far. :/

alphanumeric · 08-02-2011

Quote: Originally Posted by seekermeister

Hmm, I hadn't heard of it til now. From what I read, the only advantage of super Wi-Fi is range, since the transmission level is so low. I'm sure that will interest some, but it would not fit my needs. With that much range, I would be even more concerned about hacking than I am with my 300 Mbps N Wi-Fi. Even though they believe otherwise, I would also be concerned about the mingling of signals with TV transmission, not only because of possible interference one way or another, but because it seems that it would make it even easier for hackers to go by unnoticed.

I think the way this works is you receive the Super WIFI signal from your ISP instead of having a cable run to your house. On your LAN side you would still be running wireless N 2.4/5 GHz or cat 5 cables so it wouldn't be much different from what you have now.

draftsman · 08-03-2011

A new source to create compitition is always good. I just hope they don't get a whole new infrastructure in gear before they've thought out most of the cons to it. Every new technology or variation of it has it's pros and cons. Some people jump in with both feet and end up loosing their shirt because they didn't really think it out first. Sometimes that leaves a lot of their new customers holding an inefficiet, too expensive and a royal pain in the a....double s of a mess. Once you go down some roads and burn your bridges on the way, you may not be able to return to where you were.