this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2024
82 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37602 readers
540 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] beefcat@beehaw.org 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Average ping isn't really the problem with wireless, it's packet loss. But my concern wasn't WiFi, which has gotten pretty good, though still prone to issues with certain home designs and building materials. My concern was cellular networks. 5G reception at my house with two different major carriers (AT&T and T-Mobile) is just OK at best, and I measure plenty of packet loss and lag spikes. It's not a problem for my phone, but I would find that unacceptable for my home internet.

I don't think we will ever reach a point where wireless technologies are as good as a hard connections. All the neat tricks we use to eek more bandwidth out of wireless spectrum like time division multiple access are equally applicable to both copper and fiber optic lines. And those copper and fiber optic lines have the benefits of having much more spectrum available to use, not having to share spectrum with nearly as many devices, and not having usable spectrum limited by line-of-sight. They also benefit from not needing to share nearly as many clients over the same medium, since each individual wire is it's own medium, rather than sharing the same RF medium as every other wireless device in your locale.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

There is no packet loss on mine. If I ping 20 packets, I get 20 packets. 100%

[–] beefcat@beehaw.org 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

20 packets is a very small sample size.

ping also won't necessarily capture all lost packets over wifi. Many are lost and re-transmitted by the wifi hardware without anything higher in the stack being aware.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Look, man. Keep trying to spin things as hard as you can, but my wifi doesn't lose packets, and "higher than the stack" hiding dropped packets is pure baloney, since that would still show a substantial increase in ping time. Stop trying to make yourself feel vindicated for buying expensive internet.

[–] beefcat@beehaw.org 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Hey man, I'm just speaking from 15 years of industry experience. Like I said, if you're happy with the performance, that's great. But I can objectively measure (and feel) the difference, so don't go trying to tell me my personal experience is somehow invalid. People should know that there is, in fact, a difference. You're not even addressing what I said about the latency and just getting hung up on packet loss.

Also my internet is not expensive. My city has a municipal fiber network, and I only pay about $50/mo for symmetrical gigabit service. I don't need to "vindicate" myself here. I don't think people should have to settle for wireless internet to get away from Comcast when fiber is a faster option without compromises.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Industry experience in game lag? Ok. I guess I have 25 years experience starting with the original starcraft.....

[–] beefcat@beehaw.org 1 points 7 months ago

Industry experience in networking