For all you video buffs, we come to the critical 99% Zap tests. We nearly decided not to include these results in this article because they’re so ridiculously one-sided. Even still, there are some (disappointing) surprises here.
Right off the bat, the big question: What on Earth happened to Cisco? How do you have 1 Mbps performance pockets at arm’s length? Aruba didn’t. Ruckus sure didn’t. This is embarrassing.
For the rest of our 2.4 GHz 99% tests, Aruba gives up its fleeting advantage, joining Cisco at the 1 Mbps pity party. But at least nobody lost a connection. That’s something.
When we switch over to the 5 GHz band, there’s more oddness. Ruckus exhibits none of the location 1 black holes found with Aruba and Cisco. Why? We’re not sure. This is much worse from Aruba and Cisco than I expected. So I grabbed the trusty Wi-Spy Spectrum Analyzer to scan location 1 for interference.
Wi-Spy results showed nothing out of the ordinary. In fact, the conclusion that both of the Aruba and Cisco products are unusable for video streaming is inescapable, although not unexpected. Actually, these results are typical for 802.11n products, which is why you haven’t seen many carriers or manufacturers marketing WiFi for video. Yes, there are a few exceptions, but the proof is in the pudding, not the PR. It’s simply been impossible to sustain a quality experience. Once more, recall my shock at the beginning of this piece.
- Open-Mouthed Amazement
- Beamforming Basics
- Inside On-Chip Phased Arrays
- The Client That Could Be
- On-Chip Challenges
- Ruckus And On-Antenna Phased Arrays
- Can You Hear Me Now?
- Test Gear: Ruckus 7962
- Test Gear: Cisco Aironet 1142 And Aruba AP125
- Test Environment
- Test Apps And Methods
- Zap In 2.4 GHz, Average
- Zap In 5 GHz, Average
- Zap At 2.4 And 5 GHz, Minimum
- Chariot At 2.4 GHz
- Chariot At 5 GHz
- Angelini Weighs In On Beamforming At Home