12-02-2008 12:46 AM
I am close enough to the router. One thin wall, very short distance.
Signal strength very strong
Now one interesting fact. I put the router on "N only", and there was no more connection
Maybe I need to upgrade the wireless driver on my x61? (How?)
or some settings are wrong? or the N protocols don't match?
All indicates that the connection is G only (how can I be sure?)
From what I understand, my router works on 2 frequencies at the same time (2.4 and 5.8 (?)), and only the higher frequency provides a N connection. From what I understand this allows to connect on both N and G at the same time. Now I don't know if the x61 wireless can connect on the higher frequency.
Looking for further advice from the experts
12-02-2008 03:52 AM - edited 12-02-2008 03:57 AM
I have a very recent lenovo x61 tablet, with intel wireless wifi link 4965agn, my router is a
Linksys Wireless-N Gigabit Router with Storage Link WRT350N
I was using a similar combination (until I upgraded my router to a WRT600N) and I was able to establish a connections at up to ~130Mbps. It wont connect any faster than that as the WRT350N only operates on the 2.4GHz Wi Fi band.
I suggest resetting both the 4965AGN card and the WRT350N to basic defaults. Then set your WLAN SSID in the router, followed by setting the link encryption to WPA2 with AES for both the router and 4965AGN card.
12-02-2008 10:33 AM
Easiest would be to install the latest network card drivers from the lenovo homepage and resetting your router.
Lenovo driver: Go to support and enter your model in the field specified then select drivers&downloads and find network drivers. Install the package by first unzipping it (automatic) then going into C:\drivers (remember where it unzips the files to) and finding the right directory and clicking install.exe. Restart.
Router reset: on the back of your router theres a pentip sized hole, put a pen into it and hold the bottom down for 10 seconds, the router will be back at factory settings.
Although, what are you worrying about? 130m/bits per second is more than you'll ever need concidering your internet can deliver maximum 20 m/bits per second if you have the best connection type (fiber optics are faster, but who has that?) and conditions are optimal. Getting your computer to connect at 300 m/bits per second to the router is in essance, pointless.
12-02-2008 05:02 PM
Although, what are you worrying about? 130m/bits per second is more than you'll ever need concidering your internet can deliver maximum 20 m/bits per second if you have the best connection type (fiber optics are faster, but who has that?) and conditions are optimal.
The quoted bandwidth figures for WiFi connectivity systems are all raw link speed. As such they do not include any impacts from link level protocol and encryption overheads, retries etc etc.
The practical throughput figure of a 130Mbps WiFi link for most users is just about able to keep up with the actual data traffic capacity, including ovreheads) of 20Mbps DSL (or similar) WAN link running at full rated speed.
In my experience with a 30Mbps+ HFC domestic cable connection here in Sydney, a 130Mbps WiFi link was definitely be a bottle neck when running onto a remote server that had capacity connection to the Internet.
Getting your computer to connect at 300 m/bits per second to the router is in essance, pointless.
It is not at all pointless right now for local traffic on the user side of the router, such as transfering files between a laptop and a dekstop, or connecting to a local media server etc.
Further, with DOCSIS 3 capability now being implemented for HFC cable (albeit in very limited way right now), and VDSL for copper pairs, there will certainly be WAN connections available in the not too distant future which have the ability to more fully load a 300 Mbps WiFi link.
12-04-2008 09:28 AM - edited 12-04-2008 09:28 AM
Nice reply, although a little bit too technical for me. However, I will do my best to reply.
The essence of your post as I understood it was that under certain conditions the reduced Wlan speed could prove to be a problem and that is correct. But what you forget is that a very small part the users out there are actually going to notice anything concidering that the average internet connection has a speed of under 10mbits per second under good conditions and is connected to the computer on a G or G+ router. Under those much more average conditions the speed of the Wlan card is not relevant.
Further I'm convinced these problems are not with the LAN cards but with the routers themselves, which are proberly of cheaper consumer brands and are themselves causing the slowdown the cards are being blamed for. When it comes to your example of the remote server, factoring in what an average consumer might use I have this to say: expecting to run a remote server flawlessly on a 40$ piece of router is not realistic.
While you are correct, I don't think much of it applies to the average computer user. (Which we Lenovo users thankfully are not since we have the common sense to pay for good quality computers. I work in an electronic retailer and daily have to explain to people that: no, a 500$ Compaq is not an ideal gaming, video, business, whatever machine )
12-04-2008 07:06 PM
But what you forget is that a very small part the users out there are actually going to notice anything concidering that the average internet connection has a speed of under 10mbits per second under good conditions and is connected to the computer on a G or G+ router. Under those much more average conditions the speed of the Wlan card is not relevant.
It will depend on where you are in the world......perhaps it more valid for where you are, but its less valid for where I am.
Further I'm convinced these problems are not with the LAN cards but with the routers themselves, which are proberly of cheaper consumer brands and are themselves causing the slowdown the cards are being blamed for.
Most recent routers have quite high WAN/LAN througput, though older ones definitely have limits in this respect, as a lot of Australian users discovered when moving to higher speed ADSL2+ and HFC DOCSIS 2 links.
The Linksys WRT600N I am currently using is rated for 100Mbps rating plus on WAN/LAN traffic throughput.
While you are correct, I don't think much of it applies to the average computer user.
The trouble with sweeping statements is that they are very often only valid in quite limited/specific contexts, whereas this is a global forum as so deals with actual, wide ranging contexts!
12-05-2008 12:58 AM
Sounds like you Australians have good internet! I can tell you that here in Sweden the average connection is rated at 10-24 but typically deliver between 4-10 caused by overloaded lines and overselling of capacity.
But lets get back to the point, could this slowdown actually be caused by the intel wireless cards? As I have stated before I find this very unlikely as these are high quality cards from one of the biggest companies in the industry. One way to test it would be to get a secondary USB or PC-card and test wether that gets a better connection in the same spot. If it does not the problem is most certainly with the routers. Get a better router people, is my advice.
(Speaking globally, it's a little bit silly since most people on the globe doesn't have an internet connection and this whole discussion is irrelevant to them.)