Tech journos are clueless

bealtine · 16-01-2011 4:27pm #1

http://www.yourtechstuff.com/techwire/2011/01/how-i-got-on-with-six-weeks-of-upcs-100mbs-broadband-service.html

Note the basic lack of comprehension of wifi:
"I did observe that the speed and signal strength fell off dramatically, if I was using the service over wi-fi. In the same room, the laptop clocked 60Mbs, a 40% fall-off (with about 5Mbs upload speeds). But two rooms away (about six yards), that fell to 30Mbs"

This is probably a common misapprehension of the basics of wifi but it is inexcusable for a technical journalists to not understand this...

watty · 16-01-2011 4:57pm

I believe the Pope might be Catholic.

PogMoThoin · 16-01-2011 5:02pm

No tests should ever be done on wifi, too many factors

Don't bother with this place of mis-information and political spin then so

lucernarian · 16-01-2011 5:18pm

I can't believe he doesn't know that wifi can't manage more than 54mbps, which is a very obviously printed speed on every 802.11G wifi router out there!

(In reality, that 54Mbps is more than halved due to how much is actually used for actual data traffic)

I honestly feel bad for him, there must be a lot of people out there who may not take him seriously with comments like that:o

bealtine · 16-01-2011 5:24pm

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

I can't believe he doesn't know that wifi can't manage more than 54mbps, which is a very obviously printed speed on every 802.11G wifi router out there!

Even if he was using an N router he would hardly get anything like the speeds advertised on the box:)

Lebow · 18-01-2011 9:17pm

Hi, Adrian Weckler here.

Sorry, must have neglected to mention that the router was 'N'. And that the the machines used were an iMac and a MacBook. Both new. Both 'N'.

Not sure why a service's wi-fi speed shouldn't be mentioned; vast majority of people out there would not know the fall-off using wireless.

Fair point to make for punters? If not, perhaps, for the experts here.

watty · 18-01-2011 10:10pm

Most of the time "N" is no faster than G. Only gives better speeds if there is only one client and it is also N and distance is short LOS.

Macs are less than 6% of Irish users.

Any test of Broadband more than 6Mbps should be on 100Mbps ethernet. Any test of more than 30Mbps Broadband needs 1Gbps ethernet verified to run at more than 300Mbps.

WiFi isn't part of ANY broadband service. That's a Router feature.

lynchie · 19-01-2011 11:22am

Lebow wrote: »

Hi, Adrian Weckler here.

Sorry, must have neglected to mention that the router was 'N'. And that the the machines used were an iMac and a MacBook. Both new. Both 'N'.

Not sure why a service's wi-fi speed shouldn't be mentioned; vast majority of people out there would not know the fall-off using wireless.

Fair point to make for punters? If not, perhaps, for the experts here.

How can you be 100% sure the fall off was not due to interference?
How can you be sure that the iMac and MacBook are able to pull 100Mbs over their N connections? Have you got a router in the same room that was used as a baseline comparison for speed over the N connection to prove it was the UPC supplied router that was the cause of the drop off?

Lebow · 19-01-2011 11:54am

Watty, Lynchie,

1. Using an ethernet cable, I got 108Mbs.
2. Plugging out the ethernet cable and using the wireless (N) router, I got 61Mbs.
3. Standing up and walking about 15 metres to a room across the house, it fell to 30Mbs. On the same laptop.

'6% of Irish users use Macs': that supposed to mean Macs can't get full speed? That would be strange, indeed.

Think it's not on to point out the big fall-off in speed over wifi to tech-novice punters?

Odd.

bealtine · 19-01-2011 12:30pm

Even though the router is rated at 300Mbps it is impossible to get anything approaching that speed with the router, the normal throughput for an N rounter is about 100Mbps in perfect conditions, that is physically just beside the router and being the only one using the router at the time. This is somewhat the same as the often quoted mobile phone data headline speeds. As you can see if the real throughput is about 100Mbs and you have 100Mbps broadband there's a bit of a bottleneck if there is any interference at all speeds will drop way below the 100Mbps so it will look like you are not getting full speed. The only way to realistically test 100Mbps broadband is with an ethernet cable.

While I think it is important to point out that speeds fall off the further you are away from the router, the impression you gave in the piece was that this somehow was the fault of UPC. Perhaps I've misread the piece or the intent of the piece.

watty · 19-01-2011 1:53pm

Lebow wrote: »

Watty, Lynchie,

1. Using an ethernet cable, I got 108Mbs.
2. Plugging out the ethernet cable and using the wireless (N) router, I got 61Mbs.
3. Standing up and walking about 15 metres to a room across the house, it fell to 30Mbs. On the same laptop.

'6% of Irish users use Macs': that supposed to mean Macs can't get full speed? That would be strange, indeed.

Think it's not on to point out the big fall-off in speed over wifi to tech-novice punters?

Odd.

You need to make it clear that the WiFi is NOTHING to do with the Broadband supplied. Either review WiFi products or Broadband products. Don't confuse people by mixing the two. Remarking that in general WiFi may only work to 20Mbps and depends on the Client Device more than the Airpoint in the Router, that for High Speed Broadband from any supplier, it's to support many users, multiple wifi points, or a single user via ethernet cable.

Macs are irrelevant to the Review as real broadband works with ANYTHING that has TCP/IP and Ethernet, and the vast majority of folk don't use a Mac. Are you reviewing Fast Broadband Product or a Mac? Focus. I can run 100Mbps Broadband on Windows For WorkGroups 3.11 with 133MHz Pentium I. To go faster I need 1Gbps cabled ethernet on P4 or better CPU.

Fast Broadband
The main value of any broadband more than about 6 or 7Mbps is to support Multiple users (5 to 6 Mbps per user) or ISP based IPTV/VOD. There are few websites that will download much more than about 4Mbps. There is little or no advantage to more than 5Mbps for Web browsing for a single user.

30Mbps will allow 5 or 6 people viewing YouTube at once. A 5Mbps connection is only good for 1 or 2 users watching Web Video.
Because of how WiFi works (no QOS usually), a single Airpoint is only really good for ONE true HD stream (i.e. from Bluray or Broadcast, not "fake" Web HD streaming") or 4 to 6 people watching Web video (Rte player, YouTube etc) if the Broadband is better than 30Mbps.

20Mbps or More Fast Broadband, especially 100Mbps is really only needed for Medium to large Business, bunch of Students/Adults or other heavy video/Download users.

The Data cap needs to be about 20Gbyte per 10Gbps of speed minimum (i.e. 200Gbyte for 100Mbps) for light users and 100 Gbyte per 10Mbps for heavy users (i.e. 1 Tbyte for 6 heavy users on 100Mbps or large Business).

Unless you have ISP permission and you are a security & IT guru, don't even think about "fast broadband" for self hosting. The speed is also usually the wrong way round. Use a Datacentre and the Fast Broadband for live SQL connection to Data centre if you need real time Hosting.

WiFi "Review"
Most gadgets with WiFi can't go much faster than 20Mbps. Many still only do 802.11b 11Mbps (less than 5Mbps duplex). If you have ONE device in use that is 802.11g (54Mbps) your WiFi is limited to about 22Mbps or less.

In our "normal" Semi-detached house we have 8Mbps Broadband.

But anything needing performance is on our 1Gbps switches (peak traffic of maybe 7Gbps if machines peering). It means LAN network gaming (all on ethernet cable) doesn't kill Broadband or Wifi. We have two wifi points to give coverage. One peaks at at about 40Mbps duplex (802.11a,b,g and turboG) and the other at about 20Mbps duplex (802.11b,g). Wifi speed drops rapidly with more users and range. So for 4 or 5 users having 2 x 802.11g (54Mbps) wifi points will work better than one 802.11n (250Mbps) WiFi point.

WiFi is almost always limited by the power, aerial, performance and WiFi version of the netbook, laptop or gadget rather than the Airpoint in the Router. Speed tends drop worse than 1/2 for doubling user numbers. Speed can be slightly less than 1/4 for doubling distance to Airpoint.

The "switch" (four ports usually) in a combo router/WiFi airpoint, or worse Modem/router/WiFi airpoint usually can't cope with much more traffic than the Boardband and WiFi. So we only use one port on the Router and use separate fully spec 1Gbps ethernet switch for all the ethernet cables and cable to second airpoint. Never use WiFi Repeaters, that makes speed drop to less than 1/2 and doubles latency, at best. Always cable airpoint WiFi back to the switch or Router.

lynchie · 19-01-2011 2:24pm

bealtine wrote: »

While I think it is important to point out that speeds fall off the further you are away from the router, the impression you gave in the piece was that this somehow was the fault of UPC. Perhaps I've misread the piece or the intent of the piece.

This was the impression I got from reading it too. One could argue that a non tech savy person might infer from the article that if they didn't get the full 100Mbps that it was UPC's fault and that they were not getting what the paid for etc. While I agree most people use the wireless features on their routers it is important for end users to know that any service being delivered by an ISP is only measured by the throughput delivered to the router and that wireless speeds are not guaranteed from router to their device.

Lebow · 19-01-2011 6:15pm

Watty,

Think there may still be a bit of confusion as to the context of the service and the review.

This is the service: UPC sells a broadband service advertised at 100Mbs. The service is the pipe and the hardware (not simply the pipe). The hardware includes the router, which is provided by UPC.

That is 'the service'. I reviewed 'the service'.

'The service' delivered over 100Mbs on ethernet and between 30Mbs to 60Mbs on wifi. Most people (believe it or not) would be unaware that broadband slows over wifi. I pointed this out. Specifically that it slowed by up to 70%.

I also pointed out that 30Mbs is still a good speed. But it is not 100Mbs. Whether 100Mbs is only needed by small business etc -- as you argue -- is totally beside the point. Either the service delivers 100Mbs or it does not. It does over ethernet. It does not over wifi.

It really is as simple as that.

I wrote:

"Don't get me wrong; 30Mbs is a great broadband connection. But it's a long way off 100Mbs. In fairness to UPC, broadband speeds always fall off a little over wi-fi. To me, 70 per cent seems like a lot, though."

Sorry, but that IS a lot. There are other routers that probably wouldn't have resulted in such a fall-off. But UPC supplied me (and others, presumably) with THAT router. Surely, then, it falls back on them? Even somewhat?

As for suggestions that I should make allowances that it is over a Mac that I am reviewing it, sorry; it really, really shouldn't make a jot whether it's a Mac or a PC. Broadband operators don't differentiate between the two when making speed claims. Neither will I in a review. (Besides, Macs are hardly inferior to PCs when it comes to fast broadband.)

Anyway, I'm sure we're all busy here. So back to work.

bealtine · 19-01-2011 6:58pm

Lebow wrote: »

Either the service delivers 100Mbs or it does not. It does over ethernet. It does not over wifi.

It really is as simple as that.

I wrote:

"Don't get me wrong; 30Mbs is a great broadband connection. But it's a long way off 100Mbs. In fairness to UPC, broadband speeds always fall off a little over wi-fi. To me, 70 per cent seems like a lot, though."

Well I see your point but that doesn't make it right:)

In fairness to UPC, no router will deliver 100Mbs no matter who supplies it...that's just a fact of life and the laws of physics.

Just like the nonsense that mobile phone companies use to sell their products
with their 7.2Mbs and so on speeds simply doesn't make it true.

Being surprised that wifi doesn't deliver 100Mbs throughput is the point at issue here and you should make that clear in your article.

watty · 19-01-2011 7:04pm

No-one anywhere can provide wifi that "really" does 100Mbps. 802.11n is 90% hype. Yes in conditions of perfect signal, no other WiFi nearby you can get about 125Mbps full duplex. In the real world the speed you got was very good. Your article and last post suggests a fundamental misunderstanding between what a Modem/Router is and ethernet on Cat5e and a WiFi Airpoint that happens to be built-in to the Router/Modem and internally "bridged" to the internal switch.

Re-read what I said about WiFi above. WiFi is not the product or Service. WiFi can't replace wired ethernet. If you have 10 users on 802.11n 250Mbps WiFi, they will likely get lower speeds than 10 users with 10Mbps Ethernet on Cat5 to a Switch. The Switch will handle 100Mbps, or 1Gbps (or even 10GBbits of peering traffic) if it's a 16 port 10/100/1000 Ethernet Switch with 10 users.

I'm sure if you use 3 other WiFi Points cabled to the Router, the Router/Modem will provide the full 108Mbps total to 4 users, an average of 25 Mbps per user or WiFi point. It's not reasonable to expect better than that.

Our Server can manage a sustained 350Mbps file transfer to one of our Workstations. I doubt you can sustain more than 30Mbps typically on 802.11n WiFi, getting 60Mbps would suggest sitting within cable distance of the Airpoint /Router and no-one else on WiFi. In really really perfect conditions, yes you can get higher on 802.11n. But it's not very common, especially if any other ISM band equipment. Since 2009 the 5.8GHz Video Senders legal. So you are competing with other WiFi points and 2.4GHz or 5.8GHz "stuff". 802.11g uses 1/3rd roughly of the 2.4GHz channels to get 54Mbps or 108Mbps. The 802.11n on 2.4G tries to use all the channels to get the speed.

Don't confuse WiFi with Ethernet or Routers or Broadband.

Lebow · 19-01-2011 9:02pm

Look, here's the actual service info: http://www.upc.ie/broadband/hundred/

Check the literature. Check the conditions. Check everything about it.

Now show it to someone who doesn't have major tech nous (90% of the country.). Ask them whether they think the service they're reading about means 100Mbs broadband over wireless, too.

If they genuinely walk away with the impression that you're suggesting -- that wifi and the router is clearly something separate to the service they're reading about and that 100mbs over wifi is clearly not what's intended -- then I'm wrong and the article was misguidedly crafted.

Fair enough?

bealtine · 19-01-2011 9:19pm

Lebow wrote: »

Now show it to someone who doesn't have major tech nous (90% of the country.). Ask them whether they think the service they're reading about means 100Mbs broadband over wireless, too.

Right that is the impression given.Blame marketing departments.

100mbs over wifi is clearly not what's intended -- then I'm wrong and the article was misguidedly crafted.

That's the whole point of the thread.

Lebow · 19-01-2011 9:30pm

Selective/misleading portion of a quote, there. Show the whole quote for true context.

bealtine · 19-01-2011 11:13pm

Lebow wrote: »

Selective/misleading portion of a quote, there. Show the whole quote for true context.

Seems to be little point in pointing out the obvious yet again, simply because you don't want to listen. So thread closed as far as I'm concerned.

whadafook · 19-01-2011 11:23pm

A wireless router is provided to allow a user connect to the service. It is not part of the service. If you call UPC with an issue relating to speed the first thing you'll be asled to do is connect directly to the router via Ethernet.

PogMoThoin · 19-01-2011 11:35pm

whadafook wrote: »

A wireless router is provided to allow a user connect to the service. It is not part of the service. If you call UPC with an issue relating to speed the first thing you'll be asled to do is connect directly to the router via Ethernet.

As do Eircom or any other provider, even on a 1 Mbit package they demand You use ethernet.

I don't see where that service info is misleading, they're not advertising wireless as part of the service. The only mention to wireless is that a free wireless router is provided

Cabaal · 21-01-2011 9:10am

PogMoThoin wrote: »

As do Eircom or any other provider, even on a 1 Mbit package they demand You use ethernet.

and only right,
Far too often have I come across users complaining of slow speeds and after looking into it to find it was an issue with wireless, ethernet is the only way to be sure

I don't see where that service info is misleading, they're not advertising wireless as part of the service. The only mention to wireless is that a free wireless router is provided

Agreed, if people assume that UPC are some how responsiblefor all the enviromental variables (interference with wifi) and PC configuration/hardware issues in their home affecting UPC's actual provided speed then thats the users fault.

If it works properly over ethernet then UPC have provided the service as is and its not their fault if the user assumes incorrectly.

cgarvey · 25-01-2011 8:45am

I take it that it's this thread that warranted the

http://twitter.com/adrianweckler/status/28018267905851392 wrote:

"Ireland Offline used to be a respected, serious lobby group. What happened?"

tweet?

UPC's marketing of WiFi with this service is ill-advised, but not explaining the blame apportioned to UPC for WiFi's failure is irresponsible to the non-tech-savvy.

bealtine · 25-01-2011 12:50pm

cgarvey wrote: »

I take it that it's this thread that warranted the tweet?

UPC's marketing of WiFi with this service is ill-advised, but not explaining the blame apportioned to UPC for WiFi's failure is irresponsible to the non-tech-savvy.

I suppose that's what you get when you let a lawyer review technical things.
We need more engineers to convert to journalism so the issues can be clearly
communicated to the masses...

Lebow · 25-01-2011 1:27pm

Eamonn,

Which "lawyer" are you referring to?

Adrian

bealtine · 25-01-2011 1:37pm

Lebow wrote: »

Eamonn,

Which "lawyer" are you referring to?

Adrian

My point is clear we need more journalists from a technical background, especially those that review technical subjects, that can understand the issues and clearly communicate those issues to the public.

Lebow · 25-01-2011 2:14pm

Yes, but who is the "lawyer" you were referring to?

bealtine · 25-01-2011 3:28pm

Lebow wrote: »

Yes

If you agree with my premise what do you plan to do about it?

Lebow · 25-01-2011 5:04pm

bealtine wrote: »

I suppose that's what you get when you let a lawyer review technical things.
We need more engineers to convert to journalism so the issues can be clearly
communicated to the masses...

Er, stop being a "lawyer"? (Which I'm not: where did you dig that one up (genuinely curious)? And are you going to acknowledge that?)

Lebow · 25-01-2011 5:08pm

bealtine wrote: »

If you agree with my premise what do you plan to do about it?

On this point, nothing. I don't write articles for a Slashdot market. I write for a mainstream, mass-market audience. And mainstream readers of a mainstream publication don't understand that a broadband provider doesn't take responsibility for the kit they put into a house. (Even if you think this is for 'clueless' people.)

watty · 26-01-2011 12:01am

Then explain they are only providing a connection
Explain that 20 Mbps to 100Mbps is for more than one person
Explain that true IPTV/VOD isn't ever over the Public Internet (that's only Web TV, different thing) but only from the ISP.
Explain what WiFi is for and the inherent limitations of WiFi.

Talk about and relate the data caps to the Real world usage.

Explain why 20Mbps to 100Mbps makes no difference for web browsing unless a lot more than one person using it.

Your article didn't explain anything. An arts student given 100Mbps for an afternoon could have written it.

BTW I read slashgear and engadget. Mostly that's gadget drool and no journalism, no research, facile and shallow. In fact I used to read gizmodo too. All you needed for your article to fit right in at gizmodo was a NSFW link and a few Apple product references.

Tech journos are clueless

Comments