I have read so many article of this site in which some of them were very interesting and inspiring.This article has good title with good description.i am very happy that i found this site. I have bookmarked this site to visit again and find out the new post.I just want to say, is a wonderful article http://www.customessaywritingservices.org/
All I ask is wireless HDMI. It's not just the wires, but the reliability and sensitivity to EMP from lightning. The 40v surge standard just isn't high enough.
Everytime lightning strikes within 500 ft, half the HDMI ports in the house either fault, requiring power resests or die, sometimes taking the conencted devices with them.
My windows 7 notebook just crashed when I installed the latest "Patch"
If my external backup hard drive had the 60 Ghz chipset then it could do backup and restore functions. One hard drive could do backups for a handful of computers in a cubical area network (CUAN, CUBAN,? ...CAN all ready taken.
Another solid market opp for 60Ghz.
Put in all the software protection crap needed in the docking station or or the hard drive to offload the user CPU, battery, memory.
The goal of those "personal area net" UWB schemes, and of the 60 GHz schemes that have replaced UWB, is to have a wireless equivalent of links such as HDMI. So you can go to "dumb" displays, without having to support the decoders in the displays (which are subject to early obsolescence, among other things).
So IEEE 802.11ad is simply saying, let's incorporate those use cases in the new standard. Of course, actually supporting a network interface, 802.11 style, is quite a bit more complicated than just a point to point 60 GHz link. But nevertheless.
In this use case, the idea is to allow flat panel displays hanging on walls to be free of cables. Cables which are otherwise needed for your cable box, or DVD player, game box, what have you.
1080p 30fps uncompressed HD video takes 1.5Gbs
Blueray: 60fps 3Gbs
Can 11ad do that?
What's wrong with video compression? The AV feed into your home is already compressed at least once.
WiFi-Display will be happy with 11n.
My take on this is, the original 60 GHz proposals were for "personal area networks," i.e. 10 meter range or so, and were oriented towards the same tasks that previously the much-hyped ultrawideband techniques were supposed to fill.
Now the IEEE 802.11ad work has also adopted 60 GHz, but their goal is to equal the range performance of all other 802.11 variants. So the thinking is, you used the lower 2.4 or 5 GHz frequency bands to locate the 60 GHz users, and then you use beam forming to get the range.
Yes, it does seem that the IEEE wants to make 802.11ad the next evolutionary step. And the much greater bi rate should help support more use cases, e.g. even sending uncompressed HDTV, e.g. from a receiver to a display, without wires.
I must missed something here. All these WiFi 11ac 11ad etc. provides ample bandwidth for AV streaming in home, blah, blah. But majority consumer has 1.5Mbs to 6.0Mbs downstream from Internet. Unless consumers create HD contents themselves in house, which is occasionally at best.
I still use 11G on the DSL modem/router. I subscribe 3Mbs but AT&T give me less than 1.5Mps effectively and AT&T make little web (news) video clip painful to watch so AT&T can sell UVerse to me.
What is the point of 11ac 11ad?
I am assuming that the range limitation is a function of both the transmit frequency and the power. Given the high frequency being used does the current "in-room" limiting come from the walls or distance? I am guessing walls, given the comment about rain attenuation. I could see a future product like 3D TV to headsets for "surround theater" experiences - in a room. The 60Ghz carrier would have enough bandwidth to support a number of users per room. Is this the future of movie theaters?
60GHz has it's own pros and cons. It doesn't work outside whene it's raining because the attenuation is too great. The fact that it doesn't work greater than room range is actually a benefit - you can set up independent networks in adjacent rooms with no interference or possibility of "eavesdropping". This makes the networks inherently secure - a huge advantage. Now consider the application of a 60GHz link for an entertainment network...
Unless we have new applications that demand such high speed, this may not be necessary. Currently the most popular use of WiFi is to connect to a router or some peripherals. None of this require a 3Gbps connection.