[Inkling]

I agree with those who question whether the WiFi spectrum can handle the traffic demands if cable systems go away. On the second floor of the main library of the University of Washington a few months back, my MacBook could see no less than 24 WiFi links.
Quite possibly, people with laptops are using WiFi for light use but connecting an ethernet cable for an occasional large file download. Take away that Ethernet, and things could get bad fast.
A suggestion. The current Ethernet connection is perhaps the worst connector on many laptops. It's good for what it was designed for: something cheap and that wouldn't disconnect easily from hundreds of immobile corporate desktops. But it's lousy for those with a mobile lifestyle. Someone should come up with a replacement that safely disconnects like the power plug on MacBooks. And they need to open source it to the world.

[cv]

If I understand correctly, consumer-grade broadband in some countries (Japan, South Korea, some of the Scandinavian countries) is approaching the saturation limit of a 802.11n wifi network.
Gigabit Ethernet leaves plenty of headroom for these faster connections.
802.11n might be adequate for most users here in Amerika, but it's probably too slow already in countries with Broadband That Doesn't Suck™.

[hillstones]

""Many students are clueless about what to do with a patch cord to begin with. They grew up with wireless," he says."

Wow. Apparently the author thinks college students are idiots. They won't know what to do with an Ethernet cable? I think students know how to use a computer, and they know what the Ethernet port is for.

Most companies refuse to use wireless because of the security issues and it is not as fast as Ethernet. Most companies are also cheap and buy bare-bones PC's without wireless. At my last job, my iPhone picked up a wireless network from another suite in the building called, "YouveBeenHacked." Those IT fools had no idea their network was hacked because they never had a clue that their SSID name changed.

[doctor sid]

This thread or shall I say the post are a little bit ridiculous. It's not like a law is going to be in place outlawing all ethernet. Its going to be based on a user by user or company by company decision. Companies that really need gigabit Ethernet or any type of hard wired network will keep them if so required. If you don't need cabled ethernet, than it really doesn't matter if you are happy with your wiFi for now.

So for you to say that anyone using wired ethernet is not worth it or not needed, if you are not using it yourself or do not use it to its full capacity, you certainly can not speak up for those of us that do.

And someone with a "mobile lifestyle" don't even need to worry about it, since you wont be needing wired ethernet anyway. Its about like a person with out having any children giving advice on raising children.

[jlmerrill]

Ethernet is fine for the backhaul, but not for the client connection. I'm a graduate student and nothing frustrates me more than having to find a desk and cable to plug into. WiFi offers a much better, much more economical solution for everyone. Saves networks costs, allows for better use of facilities, and enables students/faculty to work where and when they need to. There is no way I'd go to a school that forced their students into computer labs, rather than giving them a wireless connection.
I've been doing quite a bit of research on this - the problem WiFi has is that most architecture can't sustain the quality of service, the speeds, the capacity, etc that a wired network can. I did discover on vendor who appears to have designed an architecture patterned after Cellular and Ethernet -- the Xirrus Wi-Fi Array. Rather than only have two radios in an Access Point and tying all those to a central controller, Xirrus integrates up to 16 radios along with a controller and directional antenna system. This allows for greater bandwidth to be shared across more users. Seems smart -- anyone out there have any experience deploying Wi-Fi Arrays vs Access Points?

[derekc]

Answer: No.
Why:
1) Superior transmission quality. There is no 1000Base-T or better WiFi speed.
2) Superior security of Ethernet networks versus WiFi.
3) The Internet is cabled. Only access points are WiFi.
4) Most broadband 'modems' are Ethernet cabled to local WiFi routers.
--Etc.
The concept of 'The End Of Ethernet?' is used merely to grab reader attention. Currently, it is not a legitimate question. Instead we're seeing a shift to 'good enough' WiFi distances and speed for the portable and local desktop computers niche, pushing aside Ethernet cable access. Otherwise, Ethernet remains irreplaceable, obviously.

[hayesk]

jlmerrill said:

Ethernet is fine for the backhaul, but not for the client connection. I'm a graduate student and nothing frustrates me more than having to find a desk and cable to plug into. WiFi offers a much better, much more economical solution for everyone. Saves networks costs, allows for better use of facilities, and enables students/faculty to work where and when they need to. There is no way I'd go to a school that forced their students into computer labs, rather than giving them a wireless connection.

It makes sense in a student situation, but most workplaces aren't like that. I'm not sure why you think it's more economical - maybe at your end, but I'm not convinced it's cheaper at the infrastructure end. You still need to connect access points.

There are problems to overcome. Security, Reliability, and Support are still worse in WiFi than ethernet. Until that's changed, I still want Ethernet at my workplace. WiFi right now is a complement to Ethernet, not a replacement.

[XSemperIdem5]

I attend and work at a Cal State so I can speak from experience about our wireless. It's only failed me a few times and we have decent coverage all over campus. I work with both wired and wireless.

[dediger]

As much as I hate to say it, I believe that a number of students do not know what the Ethernet port is for in their dorm room. I've been at two universities and have seen this phenomenon for myself. The problem is a lack of education on the part of IT to the students. The message is simple, if you are at your desk, use a cable. If you are elsewhere, use wi-fi. It's easy to switch back and forth.

Due to cost (and student tampering), university IT rarely installs the density of access points they need to adequately cover a residence hall for wireless-only. Likewise, I can't say how many brand new classrooms I have walked into with an Ethernet port at every desk and three wireless APs in the room. I have NEVER seen anyone plug in for a 75 minute lecture.

To save money, network designers have to start taking a more careful look at usage patterns before going ahead with installation. Temporary or mobile environments call for wireless-only. Fixed workstations and desks should stick to Ethernet. If I am at my desk 8 hours a day, there is no reason why my laptop should be connected to the WLAN. By doing so, I am needlessly infringing on others' ability to use that access point.

[lostsoul125]

True that some Wi-Fi companies do exert the desired bandwidth such as an ethernet wired connection, but a Wi-Fi company by the name of Xirrus can give you the bandwidth like an ethernet switch. At my company, we are currently deploying a Xirrus Wi-Fi Solution and have no complaints with their bandwidth, signal strength, and range. Their team and their product is solid that I would vouche for them anyday.

I really don't think anyone should suffer their bandwidth just because they want to go wireless. I mean the point for going wireless is to achieve what a wired network can do, but wirelessly (if that's even a word). In this day and age, almost every company uses the internet to work, some more heavily than others. Speed, bandwidth, connection, etc. is especially vital to my company, especially with meetings with our clients.

I truly believe if you are looking for a top notch Wi-Fi provider, it is worth it to check out Xirrus. Great for businesses!

[lostsoul125]

I agree with jmerrill, going wi-fi is more economical. When you factor in cable drops and mobility, a wi-fi solution overpowers a wired network. Desktop switches require A LOT of wires where as Xirrus (the current solution my company is working with) requires a whole lot LESS wires and switch ports!

Our company was running a wired network, but our IT guys thought we should make the next step and go into Wi-Fi. We spent months researching for the best solution, thats when we came across the fellas at Xirrus. We received a free site survey almost instantly. While other companies were charging for surveys, Xirrus was free, so it was only right for us to check them out.

[mogil]

i have wifi and it's great for the most part and i have alot of things connected to my internet connection at my house i find it better to have little things like cell phone run wirelessly but my mac mini my directv dvr and my xbox stay direct line . i have noticed with the mac that it runs so much faster direct than wireless , but when i had my components all over the house the xbox worked fluidly with the mac form 2 stories away transferring my movies and media to the xbox to watch what ever i downloaded