you will see it in standard x86/amd64 platform laptops fairly soon, here's
an Intel network adapter card:

https://www-ssl.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/product-briefs/tri-band-wireless-ac17265-brief.pdf

On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 10:17 PM, Jay Weekley <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Are there any consumer devices that have a 60 GHz adapter?
>
> Ken Hohhof wrote:
>
>> And 4K video takes what, something like 25 Mbps?  So you can watch 200 of
>> them at once!
>> And notice it only has gigabit ports.  Shouldn�t it have at least one
>> SFP+ port for 10 gig wired?  Maybe this is for the person who has their own
>> media server in their house (but hates wires).  It had better be in the
>> same room with the router, since 60 GHz is not going to penetrate walls
>> very wall.
>> Perhaps people are going to have gaming and multimedia PCs that stream
>> the raw video over the home wireless network to their tablet or some sort
>> of thin client.  Kind of along the lines of the wireless TV receivers you
>> get with satellite and cable now, or an extension of the Chromecast concept.
>> *From:* Bill Prince <mailto:[email protected]>
>> *Sent:* Friday, January 08, 2016 1:19 PM
>> *To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] TP-Link Talon AD7200 first AD router
>> Very funny!
>>
>> Interesting statement:
>>
>>     There�s quite a few technical reasons as to why the jump to
>>     60GHz is a good thing, but the most important for the average
>>     consumer is speed. The 5GHz band maxes out at 1,733Mbps, but the
>>     new 60GHz band can achieve wireless transfer speeds of up to
>>     4,600Mbps. So streaming 4K video without a network cable? Not a
>>     problem.
>>
>> Oh right. Like all of us have 4.6 Gbps to the home... or even 1.7 Gbps...
>>
>>
>> bp
>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>>
>> On 1/8/2016 10:12 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>>
>>> Well, you gotta admit, it looks cool.� Price?
>>> �
>>>
>>> http://gizmodo.com/the-first-802-11ad-router-makes-your-wi-fi-network-almo-1749163152
>>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to