802.11n or wait for Wifi Certified 802.11ac?

[stjohn0la]

Started looking at wireless routers (currently have a wired router), because I want to access my network with my Galaxy 2S phone and laptops.

Doing some research and found that 802.11n is currently the best, but that 802.11ac will be much faster and that the first 11ac routers just hit the market.

I looked at 802.11n routers, I feel that the WD My Net N900 HD Dual-Band Router might be the best bet for me, since it was designed specifically to accelerate movies, video and gaming, which I want.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... =wd%20n900

It is the 802.11ac routers that seem more complex. First there is the issue of range, which seems like it might be less then the 11n routers, but they are much faster.

The other issue is that the 'Wifi Certified' testing won't begin till early next year, which means that these first 802.11ac routers are not Wifi Certified.

This article has more info on this:

http://pusz4frog.wordpress.com/2012/08/ ... ac-router/

Even though the WD N900 802.11n router is great, I feel it is best to wait on 802.11ac till the Wifi Certified routers come out.

Am I crazy for wanting to wait till early next year to buy an 802.11ac router?

Sould I get the WD N900 11n router now?

[Major_A]

Even without an AC adapter the range will still be better than a traditional Wireless N. Hell I know people still running Draft N routers that perform just as well as the certified models. It's really up to you, but if you are going to invest might as well invest toward the future.

[Major_A]

How many square feet do you need to cover? Even with something like this it would give you WiFi but not much range.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6833704037

[KnightRid]

the so called "range" is almost worthless unless you live in a 100% open walled house or live outside with no hills, trees, etc. All of these companies who say their device will bounce through any material, etc, are full of horse doo-doo If they want to prove otherwise, send me one and if I can get a signal in my bedroom from where I have my router, I will remove this statement (gone through 5 different and no luck yet so dont hold your breath).

I have had numerous routers in my house that will not give a signal to my upstairs bedroom (approx. 50ft to the front of the house and 1 floor up). "range" is a neat thing to look at but you will be better served by looking at the throughput of the router itself and whether or not you have the wireless card in your device to be able to use it (what phone has 802.11ac? tablet? laptop?...) Also make sure you get a gigabit router for wired connections.

You can always buy multiple devices to use as relays to bounce the signal to hard to reach areas of the house.

[Major_A]

Updating my router did help with range. Going from a Belkin Surf (N300) to a Linksys E 2500 (N300 + N450) did help with range. Guess everyone's experiences are different. That's also why I asked how many square feet needed to be covered.

[KnightRid]

Updating my router did help with range. Going from a Belkin Surf (N300) to a Linksys E 2500 (N300 + N450) did help with range. Guess everyone's experiences are different. That's also why I asked how many square feet needed to be covered.

but like i try to tell people, the square feet doesnt matter depending on your house or structure. Throw in water pipes, sewage pipes, various electronic wiring, steel beams, double layer drywall, etc and that "range" means nothing because it just wont get there.

If you have a straight forward layout with not much in the walls between the router and where you are then, yes, the range would increase by moving to a better router but most times it is the structure causing problems (from my experiences around here anyway - lots of older homes)

[Major_A]

House here was built in 1998 so I don't have to contend with thatching or lots of copper.

[KnightRid]

House here was built in 1998 so I don't have to contend with thatching or lots of copper.

you are so lucky! lol Wanna trade houses?