| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
MS to intro Windows-only 'Soft Wi-Fi' 802.11x system | |
|
||
| Time: 09:01 EST/14:01 GMT | News Source: The Register | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
At this week's Windows Hardware Engineering Conference (WinHEC) in Seattle Microsoft will take the wraps off its big push into home wireless networking and open up on the Microsoft Connected Home Architecture. As a part of this, Microsoft will be introducing what is essentially a proprietary, Windows-only version of 802.11, "Soft Wi-Fi," which looks pretty much like a re-run of the Winmodem scenario. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 166 Last | Next |
The time now is
5:50:02 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 2960 (156.80.64.135) at 4/15/2002 9:07:52 AM |
|
For once, I'm glad something is Windows-Only :)
Who else would have it? I can see it now. Just like WinModems, OEM's will push this junk on unsuspecting buyers who think they will be getting 'quality' Wireless capabilities with their new computers, for free! Ugly stuff TL |
| #2 By 2459 (66.25.124.8) at 4/15/2002 9:22:16 AM |
|
This, like Winmodems, is not necessarily a Windows-only product. All the device manufacturer has to do is write a driver for other platforms. Given the correct drivers, host-based modems/Wi-fi hardware can run on Macs, Linux, or other platforms.
Host-based does not automatically equal "junk", either. If done correctly, CPU utilization shouldn't be a problem (especially with 1 GHz+ CPUs), and a software solution allows for more flexibility, increased potential of upgrades without purchasing new hardware, and lower device cost which can increase the popularity of the Wi-fi (or whatever) market. |
| #3 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 4/15/2002 10:34:48 AM |
|
#4 - That's interesting, because 802.11(which is all Apple's AirPort is) was available on the PC for years prior to Apple including it as a standard feature. So if you want to know what the Macintosh of the future will be like... look at the emerging technology available for the PC today.
Anyway, as to the article. I read some comments on this elsewhere and apparently what this is, is a move to create wireless ethernet cards that work more like wired ethernet cards. That is, today the transport layer is actually implemented directly within the 802.11 hardware. This means 802.11 cards can only work with TCP/IP based networking(not that you would necessarily want something different, but...). This new standard would implement the transport layer in the OS rather than on the card. So it's not strictly Windows only. |
| #4 By 20 (68.53.242.24) at 4/15/2002 11:06:32 AM |
| I love it when someone smacks a Mac/Linux user with the Reality Stick. I can almost hear them go "Oh..." |
| #5 By 116 (129.116.86.41) at 4/15/2002 11:48:15 AM |
| Yes leading the pack with proprietary mac only hardware is great # 9. Way to go with those ADC connectors for your apple monitors. Thats a real innovative thing to do. Apple an industry standard? Where is USB2 support on Mac OS? Please come back down to reality. |
| #6 By 2459 (66.25.124.8) at 4/15/2002 11:55:00 AM |
|
Really #9. How come I built my own PC that has a monitor with a built-in USB hub, a USB keyboard, mouse, joystick, speakers, and webcam all before Apple standardized on USB? Mac people always say stuff like that because they simply don't pay attention to other markets.
I've said this before, but some Mac users think Apple invented PCI, AGP, USB, and other PC technologies just because Apple finally got around to implementing them. They shunned the command line until OS X's inclusion of it. They rave about the quality of their hardware over PCs when there are Mac sites that complain about Mac hardware quality all the time, and it is possible to build a PC with higher quality (and faster) parts for a lower price. About the only thing in Macs that aren't PC parts are the motherboards and the CPU, though Apple has adopted virtually every PC standard available over the years making the platform very much like a PC. USB was popular and devices were available before Apple adopted it. One thing that Apple did do by adopting USB was allow device manufacturers, in the beginning, to come out with 2 versions of their existing or upcomming products and charge Apple customers more. PC standards, like USB, have been available and successful without the help of Apple. Apple, as is usually the case, plays catchup and tries to cover that with there marketing and design teams. This post was edited by n4cer on Monday, April 15, 2002 at 12:03. |
| #7 By 116 (129.116.86.41) at 4/15/2002 12:47:04 PM |
|
This is almost laughable. USB2 is not a standard? Well you must not be very smart beacuse I can buy USB2 PC's right now from Dell, Compaq, and even Gateway. What kind of stuff are you smoking? This is exactly what happened with USB and Mac people decide to play revisionist history and say that its because of them. You do realize that Mac's have less than 5% of the market. It doesn't make any difference what apple does. You are a niche market. Get used to it. Oh and by the way I have a USB2 and a USB2 CD Burner on my PC just in case you were interested. So before you talk about something you have no knowledge about I would suggest following the "Think before you type" rule.
The only reason Apple built ADC was to lock you into their platform. This is not a good business decision. They took a open standard (DVI) and made it a proprietary MAC only technology. I know of lots of pissed off apple customers who bought the cinema display when it came out only to find they couldn't use it because of the ADC connector. This is Apple's own customers and look how they treat them! Only recently has a solution come out on the market that would make this work. Guess those people at Apple just think differently than me. Way to be innovative there. Careful though as you might "innovate" yourself into oblivion. As for Apple hardware being better the motherboards on the original rev of the blue and white g3's had a failure rate of 1 and 3. That is just great maufacturing quality. Apple r00lz! :p |
| #8 By 2459 (66.25.124.8) at 4/15/2002 1:19:18 PM |
|
"You may have built your PC using USB but my guess is that you had a VERY limited selection of those products to choose from."
No. There were many devices available at the time. Quite a few were available from http://www.usbstuff.com, however I got my hardware from various places on the net (cheaper than locally) like Provantage, ValueAmerica, Computers4Sure, Multiwave, etc. The most abundandant devices were hubs, game controllers, keyboards, and webcams. But there were also mics, speakers, and other items. External drives were available, but more expensive, and generally slower than the internal IDE counterparts. "I don't think Apple invented every technology. Far from it. When they do, like FireWire, that's great." I wasn't referring to you in that statement. I am sorry it seemed that way, and I do agree that FireWire is a good technology. I was showing a pattern I have seen with Mac users, especially lately, where they think PC technologies are bad (in general) until Apple adopts them. Then they change their tune and act as if Apple invented or innovated a technology that has been available to PC users for years. AGP and PCI were examples. The command line was another feature I have seen Mac users dismiss. Yet, after its inclusion in OS X, I have seen Mac users embrace it, no longer referring to it as stupid or unnecessary. Some, as with other technologies that have originated on the PC, have even proclaimed the Mac better than PCs because they thought the technologies were unavailable to PC users, and when the see the feature in Windows or as part of a PC's featureset, dismiss it as a cheap copy. "It's not that Mac hardware is any better or worse than PC hardware...most of it is the same. It's that Apple makes sure the hardware AND software works together properly to ensure a seamless integration between the two. Thus creating a better end user experience with less hassle." You would think this is the case, but in reality, Macs seem to have just as many problems as PCs. "Would USB have been successful without Apple? Maybe. But it would not have grown so quickly with out it. That's a fact accepted by every tech column I've read on the topic." I would still have to disagree here. True, you wouldn't have the additional Mac users using the standard, but USB was gaining in popularity anyway. Apple just happened to release the iMac around the same time as hardware manufacturers were releasing there larger products like portable drives (although some of these were available, but the iMac allowed the release of special Mac branded versions that cost more). Many other products were in the marketplace before then. This post was edited by n4cer on Monday, April 15, 2002 at 13:22. |
| #9 By 2960 (156.80.64.135) at 4/15/2002 1:33:49 PM |
|
SodaBlue,
You are correct. However, when the PC products for 802.11 were costing upwards of $1000, the Airport hit the market at $399 (maybe $299, I forget) and Airport cards at only $100 per node. Apple might not have been the first to use 802.11, but that darned sure played a BIG part in getting it into the hands of consumers at an affordable price. Ain't that Ironic :) TL |
| #10 By 2960 (156.80.64.135) at 4/15/2002 1:39:21 PM |
|
n4Nicer,
Actually, he is quite accurate. USB was available on the PC first, but it was a stagnant technology. Short of some keyboards and mice, the product releases for USB were pretty much non-existent. And what did ship was a nighmare to get working right. When Apple started shipping the iMac, the USB market started picking up on BOTH sides of the fence. More devices. Better quality drivers. And finally we are where we are today. And, while I prefer FireWire to USB2, I agree with you that Apple should incorporate USB2 into it's next hardware line. OS support isn't an issue. It's the hardware that needs to be used. Like I said, I don't miss USB2 because I prefer FireWire, but I can understand the desire to have it. TL |
| #11 By 2960 (156.80.64.135) at 4/15/2002 1:42:25 PM |
|
Holy Cow! STOP IT Man... You are making us serious, knowledgeable Cross-Platform users look bad!
TL Some dude named Anonymous wrote: "As for USB 2? It's NOT a standard, kid. There are virtually NO products for it and it's not even included on any PC yet? How can you ask about Apple and USB 2 with a straight face when the PC world isn't even using it? Make no mistake though. When Apple does begin to USB2 (which they probably will in less than a year) it will have teh same effect as when they embraced USB 1...it will THEN become teh standard. " |
| #12 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 4/15/2002 2:56:37 PM |
|
Ok, some of the Mac users have things confused.
TechLarry is mistaken in thinking that Apple making AirPort available suddenly drove prices down. The prices on the PC side were already to that level when AirPort was released, it was because of this that Apple decided it would be a good time to promote this as a feature of the Mac. The simple fact that Apple has very little marketshare in the wireless ethernet market is counter to any claim that they were responsible for driving sales. It was companies like Linksys who have been responsible for putting 802.11 into the hands of the consumer. |
| #13 By 2459 (66.25.124.8) at 4/15/2002 4:04:46 PM |
| Just as with USB, Apple times there support for technologies when they start selling well in the PC space. iPod is another example. Only Apple could make an MP3 player seem so innovative when greater featured, lower price players with 4 times the storage were selling in the PC market for years. iMac flat panel is another example. All-in-one PC flat panels have been around. Apple just came with a different, less industrial design. Next, Apple will probably launch their version of a home theater PC. |
| #14 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 4/15/2002 4:13:35 PM |
|
I heard Apple was going to start innovating by making color graphics and stereo sound standard on all of their new G5 iMacs. :)
|
| #15 By 3339 (64.175.40.46) at 4/15/2002 6:41:08 PM |
|
The issue isn't who was first, but who provided the most timely and full implementation of a new technology to really shift what and how the technology was used? When did the PC world get to the point where finally every single machine had USB? (Have they?) I know that through 99-into 2000 I was still seeing new boxes without USB. Has the PC world eliminated the serial connection? No, most PCes still ship with serial. Every printer in my office is still serial. Must PC boxes only ship with 2 USB ports, but that's my keyboard and my mouse--if USB is only being used for my keyboard and mouse, what's the point? (I know this isn't the case, but I bet it's the standard case in the office.) I still need to buy a hub for expandability.
What's the point of adopting USB2 if the next new hardware from Mac will ship w/Bluetooth/Airport/USB/Firewire (maybe FW2)/Gigabit ethernet support? Why not wait for the majority of USB products to become USB2 products, why not let the PC world go through the confusion that may arise first? The difference between FW and USB2 is negligible never mind the fact that most devices will not even use the full capacity of 480 mbps anyway? As for wireless networking, I remember what was available to PC users before the Mac community adopted Airport--it wasn't that straightforward, cheap, or very well used--it had a very high geek factor. I also remember that the majority of those geeks adopted HomeRF and had to switch when that joke died. By the way, I don't know how this works or what exactly MS's goal is, but Apple does have a software-based base station implementation as well (only compatible up to OS 9.1)--with the software and another airport card you can use the computer as an antennae/base station. This product has been available since last's years education buying season. This post was edited by sodajerk on Monday, April 15, 2002 at 18:46. |
| #16 By 3339 (64.175.40.46) at 4/15/2002 6:45:49 PM |
| As for ADC, it is somewhat limiting, but it is also highly innovative and not going way. 3rd parties finally were able to produce both ADC-2-DVI and DVI-2-ADC adaptors so that hurdle is passed. A 3rd party is actually now producing its own ADC monitors. For the number of Mac fans who have complains regarding ADC, there is an equal number of PC users who are jealous and angry that they can't use a Mac monitor. |
| #17 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 4/15/2002 10:19:45 PM |
|
#4 - "it's got 128 bit encryption built in..."
You do realize that the encyption you speak of is basically useless, right? Wireless and security are two things that should never be talked about in the same sentence unless it's to say that they should never be taked about in the same sentence. :-) Give me about 20 minutes, and I'll have free access to your "secure" and "encrypted" wireless network. |
| #18 By 135 (208.50.201.48) at 4/16/2002 12:10:37 AM |
|
sodajerk - I think you are confused. wireless ethernet was in use within the corporate world for years prior to Apple's including it in the Mac. Back as early as 1992 we were using wireless networking between buildings on our college campus.
Similarly with the proprietary DVI connectors on the Mac flat panel displays. Nothing particularly innovative there, other companies have used proprietary connectors which include the power lines before. See, this is why people laugh when you use the word Apple and innovative in the same sentence. If these are examples of innovation, then everything Microsoft does is innovative as well. |
| #19 By 3339 (64.175.42.153) at 4/16/2002 12:33:59 AM |
|
soda, I know that individuals will invent and do their own thing; I know corporations had access to expensive, sophisticated wireless systems years ago... but if you want to ignore the fact that the wireless networking market was nascent 3 years ago, and that at one point there were competing standards in the PC world, of which Home RF led just two years ago (and that was only pulled last year), that's fine. Hell, at least recognize that 802.11 wasn't a standard in '92, and that companies had to wait for the FCC to approve wireless standards so that companies could sell legal, compliant products till 1998. (By the way, I actually just found an article from March 2002 pushing HomeRF2.0--anybody want to bet that even though 802.11a, .11g, and HomeRF2.0 products exist today, that Apple will be first to "really push" one of these next-gen wireless standards... in fact, they are probably just waiting on the FCC again.)
I don't think I tried to make the point that one company was more innovative than the other. I do believe my main points were that Apple did and still does have a more impressive implementation of USB. (I can still unplug a USB mouse, plug in another model, and lose all cursor control until reboot on a PC, for example... and I could go on...) But you ignore that. You ignore my argument that USB2 is irrelevant to a platform supporting so many other connection standards that offer greater benefits. Just because others have had proprietary video connectors; doesn't make ADC not innovative--the innovation lies in the fact that DVI is such a strong, pervasive standard, that to add power to it is a "bridgeable" addition, an addition that is easily accomodated now, and maybe worthwhile for the rest of the industry in time; beyond the transmission of power, ADC IS DVI. You also ignore the fact that Apple has already had a software base station for a year as well. This post was edited by sodajerk on Tuesday, April 16, 2002 at 01:03. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 166 Last | Next |
The time now is
5:50:02 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
