Look out world ... here comes Li-fi! (100 times faster than wifi)

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by jswinden

And then there is this: What if you have a BillionBps speed but the website servers you visit are slower than molasses? Well that BillionBps speed will do you no good. The weakest link in the chain is the slowest server being accessed, so no matter what speed you have the other guys will slow it down with their snail speed servers.

The main benefit of a faster connection is that it allows you to do more things simultaneously without speeds slowing down; particularly useful in a family environment where, for example, a couple of people might be watching different video streams while someone else is browsing the web.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The main benefit of a faster connection is that it allows you to do more things simultaneously without speeds slowing down; particularly useful in a family environment where, for example, a couple of people might be watching different video streams while someone else is browsing the web.

All this on a phone?

Li-fi '100 times faster than wi-fi' at shine of a light presented at Mobile World Congress

"Li-fi has been demonstrated by French start-up Oledcomm at the world's biggest mobile fair, Mobile World Congress, in Barcelona.

As soon as a smartphone was placed under an office lamp, it started playing a video."

[HarryT]

The discussion had moved on to consider the benefits of a faster Internet connection.

[murg]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The discussion had moved on to consider the benefits of a faster Internet connection.

It has?

That's just one of the factors behind this technology.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

And like fjtorres correctly said, the problem is not the wifi, but getting internet into my house fast enough.

I realize it's hard to believe, but connecting to the the Internet is not the only use of a LAN!

There's many people (not to mention businesses) that move around a LOT more data locally than they send or receive over the Internet.

So there's a plenty of value for a multi-gigbitbit wireless technology right now, and if it's adopted, then when the last mile catches up, the egg will find the chicken has been waiting for it.

ApK

(ETA: I just realized there are a page and a half of posts I didn't read before posting. Sorry if this was already addressed.)

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by ApK

So there's a plenty of value for a multi-gigbitbit wireless technology right now, and if it's adopted, then when the last mile catches up, the egg will find the chicken has been waiting for it.

ApK

(ETA: I just realized there are a page and a half of posts I didn't read before posting. Sorry if this was already addressed.)

Now if you are talking 400gbit/s what is mentioned for lifi - that is truly upractical at home (wired or wireless) for now with a handful of devices even without considering internet. To put it in prospective 400gbit/s is twice the speed of the maximum burst transfer rate of DDR4-6400 - that is around 25GByte/s. You do the math how long it will take to write to disk, even if you have an ssd connected through pcie for say only a minute at full speed (which not even the ram can keep up at perfect best).

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Now if you are talking 400gbit/s what is mentioned for lifi - that is truly upractical at home (wired or wireless) for now with a handful of devices even without considering internet. To put it in prospective 400gbit/s is twice the speed of the maximum burst transfer rate of DDR4-6400 - that is around 25GByte/s. You do the math how long it will take to write to disk, even if you have an ssd connected through pcie for say only a minute at full speed (which not even the ram can keep up at perfect best).

A network, though, particularly in a large company, doesn't only have a single data transfer going on at any given time. Larger bandwidth becomes much more useful if you're considering 100, 500, or 1000 computers all talking to each other simultaneously.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Now if you are talking 400gbit/s what is mentioned for lifi - that is truly upractical at home (wired or wireless) for now with a handful of devices even without considering internet. To put it in prospective 400gbit/s is twice the speed of the maximum burst transfer rate of DDR4-6400 - that is around 25GByte/s. You do the math how long it will take to write to disk, even if you have an ssd connected through pcie for say only a minute at full speed (which not even the ram can keep up at perfect best).

This is the "640K should be enough for anybody" mindset.
You need to be a bit more farsighted, considering Moore's Law is still working.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by HarryT

A network, though, particularly in a large company, doesn't only have a single data transfer going on at any given time. Larger bandwidth becomes much more useful if you're considering 100, 500, or 1000 computers all talking to each other simultaneously.

That is a theoretical numbers game. Scaling up to multiple hundred computers under the same physical domain is not only a bandwith (speed) problem, but also a traffic problem (e.g. finding an unused slot). That is where you physically seperate the network into small sections and connect them through a fast switched backbone. Also becomes a security issue - you wouldn't want ALL company traffic exposed to everybody in the network.

[MikeB1972]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

That is a theoretical numbers game. Scaling up to multiple hundred computers under the same physical domain is not only a bandwith (speed) problem, but also a traffic problem (e.g. finding an unused slot). That is where you physically seperate the network into small sections and connect them through a fast switched backbone. Also becomes a security issue - you wouldn't want ALL company traffic exposed to everybody in the network.

So you wouldn't like to shine a light on security issues?

Again, sorry, bad puns seem to increase with alcohol intake.

And this slidey swipey keypad gets harder to use, had to switch to typing individual letters, bed time.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by ApK

This is the "640K should be enough for anybody" mindset.
You need to be a bit more farsighted, considering Moore's Law is still working.

That same law is still working for wifi. When do you think wired gigabit eithernet is becoming mainstream? It is been available for quite a while, why isn't everybody using it at home already for every wired connection?

It is not a "640k should be enough", but a "this is way too expensive to upgrade".

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by MikeB1972

So you wouldn't like to shine a light on security issues?

Again, sorry, bad puns seem to increase with alcohol intake.

And this slidey swipey keypad gets harder to use, had to switch to typing individual letters, bed time.

For security alone and not simply bandwith lifi would be perfect - shut the blinds, and nobody can access from outside.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

That same law is still working for wifi. When do you think wired gigabit eithernet is becoming mainstream? It is been available for quite a while, why isn't everybody using it at home already for every wired connection?

Isn't everyone? I am. Don't most recent pcs and routers have gb?
I pulled out a spare router with 100baseT the other day and it seemed ancient.

It is not a "640k should be enough", but a "this is way too expensive to upgrade".

New tech starts expensive. Moore's law again. But anyway, I'm not advocating for lifi, just for the development of tech that may seem like far more performance than is needed at the moment.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by ApK

Isn't everyone? I am. Don't most recent pcs and routers have gb?
I pulled out a spare router with 100baseT the other day and it seemed ancient.

Yes, it would appear that way looking at brand new off the shelf routers, even the really cheap ones. But does everybody have? I personally have not upgraded my router in years (6-7 years maybe? Can't remember). There is only two cable plugged in: internet and one stationary computer, everything else is wifi. I am still waiting for anybody to provide fiber optics to my curb - stuck with cable and their slow upload rates by design. I would upgrade in an instant if it means I can ditch that cable modem. Until then I will keep my router.

New tech starts expensive. Moore's law again. But anyway, I'm not advocating for lifi, just for the development of tech that may seem like far more performance than is needed at the moment.

Understood. To me lifi is a step backwards since it is not truly wireless, so not a replacement for wifi. You still have to hardwire the lamps.

[Shane R]

Originally Posted by jswinden

Yep! And in the USA good luck with that. Most providers want your firstborn child just for 20 Mbps speed and then it slows down a lot or just goes out on occasion. And with fiber optics like that used by AT&T U-Verse, if a construction crew anywhere within a few miles of you cuts the line, everyone loses WiFi for a very long time (perhaps days) while the AT&T repair crews try to figure out what happened and where.

Fiber cuts, at least where I dwell, get repaired very quickly. But I live in an area ringed with business complexes, so perhaps the consumers benefit from the commercial contracts AT&T has with those businesses.

I had U-Verse for 24 months (and then the price skyrocketed) and it was the most stable Internet/Cable service I ever used.