5 ms·

As far as I know, this is the first Apple hardware to support Wifi 6E, which is something I've been waiting on for what feels like forever. I'm hoping the rumo

As far as I know, this is the first Apple hardware to support Wifi 6E, which is something I've been waiting on for what feels like forever. I'm hoping the rumored new laptops will also support 6E. For those that don't know, Wifi-6E uses the 6Ghz band, and I anticipate it will be very helpful in crowded residential environments where lots of Wifi APs are all landing on the same few 2.4 and 5Ghz channels.

jessriedel 4y ago
I can't understand the emphasis on more bandwidth. The pain with wifi is overwhelmingly dominated by the slowness establishing a connection (why does it take more than a second?!), with connection reliability and latency (for video calls) also being important. "Wifi 7: 10 Terrabyte/sec transfer speeds" *yawn* "Wifi 7: Connects in 500 ms, latency 20 ms, tri-band fallover for 5-nines reliability" *Opens checkbook*
- bombcar 4y ago
  All I want is wireless devices that can be connected to my 2.4GHz and 5Gz network at the same time with the same IP.
  - herpderperator 4y ago
    Dual-band (one device using both 2.4GHz and 5GHz) has existed for over a decade.
    - chrisbolt 4y ago
      That only uses one band at a time, with separate IPs and MAC addresses for each.
      - herpderperator 4y ago
        That's not what simultaneous dual-band means.[0] [0] https://www.google.com/search?q=simultaneous+dual+band https://www.google.com/search?q=simultaneous+dual+band
- crazygringo 4y ago
  I've never once noticed slowness in connecting as bothering me at all. Are you connecting to new Wi-Fi networks hundreds of times a day or something? My iPad just... stays connected to the networks it knows. And I believe that higher bandwidth is the solution to better reliability and latency when you've got lots of devices sharing the same router, or other interference. Isn't that how digital radio works?
  - jessriedel 4y ago
    In fairness, I do notice the time to connect to my home network much more when waking my Macbook Pro from sleep than my iPad. But it is still noticeable on the iPad. The place where the slowness is most noticeable on iPad is when I want to reconnect it to my iPhone's hotspot. I need to reconnect many times per day because the iPhone turns off the hotspot when its unused for 90 seconds to save battery, and this behavior infuriatingly cannot be disabled.
    - ycombinete 4y ago
      This is the only thing I’ve missed over the years after switching to Apple. The androids I owned would keep the hotspot enabled all day, apparently without killing the battery.
  - JCharante 4y ago
    I notice it all the time. The delay is really annoy when you go in an elevator (so no cell signal) and wait for it to reconnect to your wifi when you step out.
  - mixmastamyk 4y ago
    Apple stuff connects faster. Some folks say they "cheat." I think by assuming the connection established before it got a proper reply. Other OSs don't do that, so it seems like it takes a longer time.
- jayd16 4y ago
  Wifi is still time sliced, right? More bandwidth means more idle time means lower latency, no?
  - jessriedel 4y ago
    Last time I looked into this, I seem to remember that the Wifi protocol actually had ridiculous hard-coded wait times, e.g, broadcast, listen for 500 ms, then move to next step if nothing heard. I remember being baffled and never understood how that it could possibly be really how it worked, so I definitely might have been misinterpreting.
    - jayd16 4y ago
      Maybe you're thinking of a random wait time with a max. That prevents the problem with two sources talking over each other.
      - jessriedel 4y ago
        Maybe? > The main purpose of scan is to update/confirm the available WiFi SSID list around the user’s device. There are two types of scan: active scan and passive scan [3]. The active scan is triggered periodically: the mobile device first broadcasts the probe requests, and surrounding APs after hearing the probe requests will reply probe response packets, containing information such as the supporting physical rate. The mobile device will add the SSID of the AP into the candidate list, if it finds that the AP is compatible. In the passive scan, the list of available SSIDs can be updated by beacon packets broadcasted by APs periodically, e.g., every 100ms [4]. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1701.02528v1.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1701.02528v1.pdf In any case, a good protocol would have random wait times that are still (in expectation) of order the rate at which bits are communicated, not some human timescale. Relatedly: When I turn off a network by pulling the plug on a router, it takes many seconds for this to be reflected in the list of available networks on my Macbook. I don't think there's a good reason for it to be like this.
nfriedly 4y ago
Agreed! The thing about 6ghz is that it doesn't travel through walls as well, and tends to have shorter range in general. On the surface, this seems like a negative, but if you're in a crowded apartment building, it can actually be a major benefit. Even if a bunch of your neighbors end up using it on the same channel as you, you won't experience as much interference because the walls will attenuate their signals. Of course, a single AP might not reliably cover your entire home in 6ghz, but you can always fall back to 2.4 and 5ghz and/or get more APs. Additionally, WiFi 6 (and 6e) is better in general at detecting neighboring networks across all frequency bands and reducing interference automatically.
- sumtechguy 4y ago
  One of my neighbors put in 8 access points for about 1000sqft. Swamped everyone else out. That is what unfortunately will happen. :(
  - nfriedly 4y ago
    If they're configured correctly, multiple APs on a given network can actually lead to lower congestion, because they can each lower their signal strength to only cover a small area... but it sounds like that isn't what happened here. 8 in a single small home is absurdly excessive. My home is more than twice that size and I only have a single AP (although I have been considering adding 1-2 more.)
    - sumtechguy 4y ago
      I was tempted to just walk over and hand him one of my old ones that covered the apt easily... But they moved out and problem solved itself.
mensetmanusman 4y ago
It will be useful until everyone is on 6 GHz…

jessriedel 4y ago

I can't understand the emphasis on more bandwidth. The pain with wifi is overwhelmingly dominated by the slowness establishing a connection (why does it take more than a second?!), with connection reliability and latency (for video calls) also being important. "Wifi 7: 10 Terrabyte/sec transfer speeds" *yawn* "Wifi 7: Connects in 500 ms, latency 20 ms, tri-band fallover for 5-nines reliability" *Opens checkbook*

bombcar 4y ago
All I want is wireless devices that can be connected to my 2.4GHz and 5Gz network at the same time with the same IP.
- herpderperator 4y ago
  Dual-band (one device using both 2.4GHz and 5GHz) has existed for over a decade.
  - chrisbolt 4y ago
    That only uses one band at a time, with separate IPs and MAC addresses for each.
    - herpderperator 4y ago
      That's not what simultaneous dual-band means.[0] [0] https://www.google.com/search?q=simultaneous+dual+band https://www.google.com/search?q=simultaneous+dual+band
crazygringo 4y ago
I've never once noticed slowness in connecting as bothering me at all. Are you connecting to new Wi-Fi networks hundreds of times a day or something? My iPad just... stays connected to the networks it knows. And I believe that higher bandwidth is the solution to better reliability and latency when you've got lots of devices sharing the same router, or other interference. Isn't that how digital radio works?
- jessriedel 4y ago
  In fairness, I do notice the time to connect to my home network much more when waking my Macbook Pro from sleep than my iPad. But it is still noticeable on the iPad. The place where the slowness is most noticeable on iPad is when I want to reconnect it to my iPhone's hotspot. I need to reconnect many times per day because the iPhone turns off the hotspot when its unused for 90 seconds to save battery, and this behavior infuriatingly cannot be disabled.
  - ycombinete 4y ago
    This is the only thing I’ve missed over the years after switching to Apple. The androids I owned would keep the hotspot enabled all day, apparently without killing the battery.
- JCharante 4y ago
  I notice it all the time. The delay is really annoy when you go in an elevator (so no cell signal) and wait for it to reconnect to your wifi when you step out.
- mixmastamyk 4y ago
  Apple stuff connects faster. Some folks say they "cheat." I think by assuming the connection established before it got a proper reply. Other OSs don't do that, so it seems like it takes a longer time.
jayd16 4y ago
Wifi is still time sliced, right? More bandwidth means more idle time means lower latency, no?
- jessriedel 4y ago
  Last time I looked into this, I seem to remember that the Wifi protocol actually had ridiculous hard-coded wait times, e.g, broadcast, listen for 500 ms, then move to next step if nothing heard. I remember being baffled and never understood how that it could possibly be really how it worked, so I definitely might have been misinterpreting.
  - jayd16 4y ago
    Maybe you're thinking of a random wait time with a max. That prevents the problem with two sources talking over each other.
    - jessriedel 4y ago
      Maybe? > The main purpose of scan is to update/confirm the available WiFi SSID list around the user’s device. There are two types of scan: active scan and passive scan [3]. The active scan is triggered periodically: the mobile device first broadcasts the probe requests, and surrounding APs after hearing the probe requests will reply probe response packets, containing information such as the supporting physical rate. The mobile device will add the SSID of the AP into the candidate list, if it finds that the AP is compatible. In the passive scan, the list of available SSIDs can be updated by beacon packets broadcasted by APs periodically, e.g., every 100ms [4]. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1701.02528v1.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1701.02528v1.pdf In any case, a good protocol would have random wait times that are still (in expectation) of order the rate at which bits are communicated, not some human timescale. Relatedly: When I turn off a network by pulling the plug on a router, it takes many seconds for this to be reflected in the list of available networks on my Macbook. I don't think there's a good reason for it to be like this.

nfriedly 4y ago

Agreed! The thing about 6ghz is that it doesn't travel through walls as well, and tends to have shorter range in general. On the surface, this seems like a negative, but if you're in a crowded apartment building, it can actually be a major benefit. Even if a bunch of your neighbors end up using it on the same channel as you, you won't experience as much interference because the walls will attenuate their signals. Of course, a single AP might not reliably cover your entire home in 6ghz, but you can always fall back to 2.4 and 5ghz and/or get more APs. Additionally, WiFi 6 (and 6e) is better in general at detecting neighboring networks across all frequency bands and reducing interference automatically.

sumtechguy 4y ago
One of my neighbors put in 8 access points for about 1000sqft. Swamped everyone else out. That is what unfortunately will happen. :(
- nfriedly 4y ago
  If they're configured correctly, multiple APs on a given network can actually lead to lower congestion, because they can each lower their signal strength to only cover a small area... but it sounds like that isn't what happened here. 8 in a single small home is absurdly excessive. My home is more than twice that size and I only have a single AP (although I have been considering adding 1-2 more.)
  - sumtechguy 4y ago
    I was tempted to just walk over and hand him one of my old ones that covered the apt easily... But they moved out and problem solved itself.

mensetmanusman 4y ago

It will be useful until everyone is on 6 GHz…