If you don't connect to the internet via ethernet, you are literally wasting connection speed

What if your overlords won't let you have Ethernet?

Higher throughput

connect yourself by putting copper cables on a power strip and connect each cable to an ear

And where do your cables route that the connection might be compromised?
Fucking kids...

wut

so your shitposts reach me even faster?
fuck it

that gay little plastic thing that keeps it in always breaks off

Wow dude thanks now I can watch rick and morty in HD and buy fortnite vbucks at the same time with no lag!

>have 30mbit/s connection
>top download speeds at around 4mbyte
>decide to check out 5GHz because why the fuck not
>top download speeds now reaching 6mbyte
what is this sorcery

Probably just fewer networks within range @ 5 GHz.
My apartment building is so full of wifi networks I can barely manage 10 mbps over wireless and even that's a bit unstable.
I think I can hear some subhuman glass tapper raging at his phone and/or YouTube even now.
The apartments' built-in tubes are 100 mbps.

topkek

5GHz basically has higher speeds, but shittier range. So if you live on a big property, or in a big house with the router in the, say, basement and your PC in one of the top bedrooms, that is where 2.4GHz gives much better coverage at the cost of slight speed reduction.

you're still going to get a slower connection that you would using a wired connection

T480s owner (release year 2018), even my laptop has an Ethernet port in it.

That's the same as my wifi cable

Range extenders do exist, and the lower range of 5GHz is actually a feature if you live in an apartment building - the channels are less cramped with neighbors.

Attached: file.png (494x639, 155K)

Attached: 562.png (680x681, 158K)

So buy a chinkshit USB3.0/USB-C adapter for a few bucks...

Might as well use 2.4 if you need an extender to properly use 5. Not sure what you mean by the "lower" range of 5 being a feature - if you mean the smaller wavelength allows more connections to exist before the chance of interference then yes, you are right.

There is literally nothing to argue about, you could have a fiber card or .11ac on an 80GHz channel but your speed is going to be throttled by your ISP anyway

that being said WiFi is the only sensible choice for enterprise, but people are too afraid to use anything that isn't cisco - and cisco wireless sucks ass

>not using this
the absolute state on Jow Forums

Attached: 518eHTXEv-L._SL1000_.jpg (1000x1000, 37K)

You're ignoring the fact that lots of folks have storage devices or other components on an internal wired LAN.

my ethernet cable is too short so i have to put my router in the floor

And since that's the only length they make...

The difference in speed between 2.4 and 5 is not slight, do not misunderstand this. the difference between the theoretical max transit rates of 11n (2.4 and 5) and 11g (2.4) is somewhere around 400mbs. 5 is always worth it

oh look, what's this?

Attached: s-l300.jpg (300x300, 19K)

What is this

its true that 5ghz corresponds to a smaller range, yes, but in apartment buildings 5ghz channels will still cover one another - what I think was meant by "smaller channels" is that there are many more non-overlapping channels than there are in the 2.4 band, which allows for more 5GHz APs in a given area before channels interfere with one another

Right, what I meant was wireless is the only sensible choice for user access to the network; user traffic lands on a wireless controller and is then spit out the back onto the LAN, which can be fiber or 10gig or whatever

There is literally no difference between WiFi and ethernet speeds because the speed out of my wall is only like 15Mbps on a good day
I barely play gayems let alone online ones so latency also doesn't matter

is a wifi cable really faster? whats ethernet?

fuck cisco desu
doesn't really do anything that a chink d-link equivalent can't do for cheaper

No. it is poor quality.

Do you honestly think that anyone here would have the mental capacity to operate a TOOL?

I can only wish...

the absolute state of Jow Forums

move out of your overlords basement

based AND CATpilled

this

Attached: 1537248585977.png (421x486, 276K)

You know, I had read about this, and it's not an issue for me because I'm in an apartment, but today I went out, checked my phone, and it was connected to my wifi network which is on the 8th floor. Pretty impressive.

Attached: fuckingcat.jpg (565x600, 55K)

>wasting connection speed
internet link speed 10 Gbps
WiFi speed 300 Gbps

wasting speed

Attached: f5b812af187a947fe8886ab0deb03121.jpg (236x482, 22K)

Line of sight has a lot to do with it as well. My uncle owns a large property and he can connect with ease if there's a clear line of sight to the house. When he's around the other side where there's trees and sheds in the way, it's practically impossible, despite the "same" distance.

Wsh my phone had a good ole' e-port for when shit is going down in Clash of Clans.

> WiFi speed 300 Gbps
Even ad is up to 7Gbps in lab environments. You can count on something-up-to-2gbps on ac if you're the only one client and there's no interference.

peak Jow Forums right here

Attached: 1528427530000.jpg (586x580, 470K)

> he doesn't encrypt his cables
ISHYGDDT

Attached: server_spaghetti_1[1].jpg (550x367, 148K)

Yeah sure i'll just shell $35,000/month for t2 networking.

Fibreoptic cable that connects via SFP.
For industial networking.

wifi is ethernet...

A Copper (not fiber, the poster is actually retarded) SFP Direct-attach cable.

0000
waste of perfect digits

Attached: 37952074_283497089077818_8384914396844916736_n.jpg (1080x1350, 125K)

sounds like a sticky client - next time that happens try running a speed test. if there's no noticeable difference from what you experience in the apartment then your AP is drawing way more power than it needs to, or your phone is using way more power to keep the connection up

beamforming is basically what your're talking about...cool shit, but shouldn't really be relied on for extending coverage

Maybe I should block my router in every direction except my computer's

>your AP is drawing way more power than it needs to
How would I fix this? I'm a huge jew when it comes to electricity bills

all that coverage wouldn't necessarily be "re-purposed" and pushed out whatever hold you leave in front of the AP... your range on the unblocked side is going to remain the same, all you'll do is cripple the coverage on the other sides. worst case, the AP decides it needs to draw more power to pick up the slack.

Unfortunately there isn't much, most consumer networking equipment doesn't allow for that kind of control; from you or the manufacturer. its a result of consumer networking gear being made cheaply, because the average consumer doesn't understand or care how their internets work.

>looks like any run of the mill SPF+ cable
>the guy belongs on a mental institution

Ok whatever you say your royal highness, have fun networking your furryporn-filled NAS to $300 cables for absolutely no benefit.

SFP only attached via cables in direct attach mode.
Which is via twinax copper cable.

There is no such thing as an 'sfp fiber cable'

No it obviously goes via a converter module? My point was that it looked like a fibre cable hence why i said "
Fibreoptic cable that connects via SFP".

A transceiver is the word you're thinking of.
Which will usually terminate with an LC connector.

5 doesn't suffer if the microwave is turned on.

Not exactly.