[HN Gopher] Wireless is a trap (2020)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Wireless is a trap (2020)
        
       Author : behnamoh
       Score  : 445 points
       Date   : 2022-05-12 19:10 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.benkuhn.net)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.benkuhn.net)
        
       | jhugo wrote:
       | > For instance: most people, when their video call stutters,
       | blame their Internet service provider. That's understandable,
       | since most ISPs are overpriced oligopolists with barely-usable
       | software and horrible customer service. However, every time I can
       | remember helping someone track down the source of their
       | connection problems, the culprit has turned out to be their wifi.
       | 
       | Can confirm. I work on videoconferencing infrastructure, and
       | easily 90+% of the end-user quality problems we investigate are
       | caused by the end-user's WiFi. It's very difficult from a
       | customer support perspective too, because it's common for WiFi to
       | have latency and loss problems that are severe for real-time
       | video or audio but not so noticeable for bulk TCP transfers (like
       | most speed tests) or web browsing. So communicating the issue to
       | users is hard.
        
         | crackercrews wrote:
         | Opposite experience here. It's always the provider, and when
         | the provider fiddles with settings on their end it fixes the
         | issue.
        
           | jhugo wrote:
           | You'd be in that 10% then :)
           | 
           | I'd also suspect people on HN might tend to have paid more
           | attention to their WiFi setup than the average user.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | SkeuomorphicBee wrote:
       | I tried Bluetooth headphones a decade or two ago and at the time
       | it was unusable. Then recently I thought to myself: it has been
       | almost two decades, wireless audio is probably a "solved problem"
       | by now, especially with its newfound notoriety after apple
       | ditched audio cables. So I just bought some new Bluetooth
       | headphones, and I'm thoroughly underwhelmed, it is nearly as bad
       | now as it was then, high latency, audio drops (even some failures
       | to connect at all, with no way to debug). Bluetooth headphones
       | are the new printers, they fail (partially or completely) at
       | their job half of the time and yet people just accept that as a
       | fact of life and go with their days.
        
         | pvillano wrote:
         | my use case for Bluetooth headphones is noise cancellation on
         | public transport/airplanes. for listening to music latency
         | doesn't matter, although for me it's enough that I can't use
         | wireless headphones to play games on my Switch
        
           | thfuran wrote:
           | They also often only support shitty audio.
        
       | shmerl wrote:
       | No question about it. WiFi can't come even close to wired
       | connection, especially in latency.
        
       | archi42 wrote:
       | This is a true techy topic :) But the author proably mostly has
       | expierence with bad environments (like apartment buildings with
       | lots of competing WiFis) and/or cheap wireless devices or those
       | which have to do severe compromises (e.g. style or size or
       | battery runtime over RF performance).
       | 
       | These were the issues I had:
       | 
       | 1. SO's cheap wireless mouse produced WiFi interference ->
       | massive packet loss
       | 
       | 2. Small 2.4Ghz USB dongles plugged into USB 3.0 port (e.g.
       | Logitech's wireless dongle or USB WiFi for RPi) -> USB 3.0
       | interference render the dongle unusable
       | 
       | 3. The HTC 10 has a metal casing -> incredibly poor BT RF
       | performance, causing massive drop outs (especially bad with my
       | FiiO Q5 DAC/headphone amp, which has a massive aluminum case)
       | 
       | 4. Client stays on AP with very poor signal (barely in range)
       | instead of jumping to different AP -> retransmissions cause
       | massive degredation for all other clients
       | 
       | 5. Lots of APs running at full power in an apartment complex,
       | paired with a router/AP that had low WiFi performance anyway ->
       | bad everything
       | 
       | All but the last can be solved relatively easy (okay, I didn't
       | swap the HTC10 due to BT, though that really annoyed me; it's
       | time eventually came when the battery lasted half a workday
       | without using the phone for anything). Especially coordinated
       | WiFi APs (like Unifi) are great. And even the last point was a
       | non-issue both in our last apt (one well placed UAP for testing)
       | and our new old house (four UAPs).
        
       | zw123456 wrote:
       | I would not call it a trap, I would call it a trade off. But I am
       | quibbling over semantics. I would reference Shannon here
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon%E2%80%93Hartley_theore...
       | which essentially says the following: C ~= B * SINR ( see the
       | link for exactness ) C is the capacity of the link (think bps) B
       | is the amount of spectrum ( how many Mhz can I get across the
       | medium ) and SINR is Signal to Interference and Noise Ratio
       | 
       | If you think about this, of course, wireless will be limited
       | spectrum, there are only so many Mhz that is made available for
       | whatever wireless standard you are thinking about, Wifi, 4G, 5G,
       | Bluetooth, whatever.
       | 
       | And, obviously, wireless will struggle with Noise and
       | Interference.
       | 
       | Wired solutions, whether shielded twisted pair (e.g. CAT6) or
       | Coax, or Fiber or Waveguide, whatever, will do much better on
       | SINR, you have thermal noise sure, but generally, it would be a
       | much quieter medium.
       | 
       | Also, you would not have the FCC saying you only get X Mhz,
       | whatever you can get across that medium you get to use.
       | 
       | Thinking about all of these factors then of course, Wired will
       | generally win out, all things being equal.
       | 
       | The Trade off, is that wireless is more convenient.
        
         | xeyownt wrote:
         | It is more convenient on the short term.
         | 
         | On the long term, if you look for reliability and hassle-free
         | setup, you lose the benefit of convenience.
        
         | kuschku wrote:
         | When you're using 100% of the spectrum on your wires, you can
         | just put down a second shielded cable. When you're using 100%
         | of the spectrum of the air, that's it.
        
       | musicale wrote:
       | > Qt included a component which would poll for networks every 30
       | seconds whenever a "network access manager" was instantiated,
       | causing pretty much any Qt app using the network to degrade your
       | wifi for ~5 out of every 30 seconds.
       | 
       | This intrigues me and makes me wonder:
       | 
       | 1. Why should it need to do this?
       | 
       | 2. Why should this degrade the wireless network performance? (I
       | don't recall the details of wi-fi but shouldn't it be able to do
       | this passively without disrupting anything?)
        
         | foobarian wrote:
         | 2. if it needs to send/receive at the lowest bitrate (used for
         | discovery/broadcasting) that takes up a ton of wall clock time,
         | which is equivalent to a lot of bandwidth at the highest
         | bitrate.
        
         | hedgehog wrote:
         | 1. If you want the machine to switch to stronger / more
         | preferred networks when available it needs to know about them
         | somehow.
         | 
         | 2. The radio in most (all?) WiFi radios can only tune to one
         | channel at a time, scanning all channels requires retuning to
         | each one, which takes a little time.
        
         | ogoffart wrote:
         | > 1. Why should it need to do this?
         | 
         | I vaguely remember from the time (~10 years ago) is that this
         | was a requirement for phones (eg, when Qt is used on a Nokia
         | phone) that the network request go to the interface preferred
         | by the user (so not to use the cell network when wifi is
         | available). Anyway, the whole thing was implemented in a
         | "bearer manager" plugin, and that thing was quite buggy.
         | https://doc.qt.io/qt-5/bearer-management.html
         | 
         | I think apart from people running Qt on phone, this had
         | virtually no use. And yet this was enabled by default on all
         | platform, and causing lots of troubles. What we ended up doing
         | for the application we were shipping was to make sure that this
         | plugin was not included in the final package.
        
       | chaostheory wrote:
       | One con for Bluetooth that wasn't mentioned is security. It's an
       | issue if you have this setup in a people dense space.
        
       | richardfey wrote:
       | The further problem with the Logitech device can be explained by
       | driver or firmware updates: the driver may upload a firmware blob
       | when device is powered up and if the combination of the two is
       | not well tested you might get some unwelcome surprise. Another
       | more mundane reason for jankyness could be related to I/O
       | saturation: your mouse will not necessarily be prioritised when a
       | variety of workloads are being handled by your OS.
        
         | Pxtl wrote:
         | This. I love Logitech hardware but G hub is software cancer.
        
       | bowsamic wrote:
       | I've never had any of these issues, except for Bluetooth latency
        
       | adamch wrote:
       | This is really noticeable with video chat. I never use Bluetooth
       | when talking with my family... between the Texas - Australia lag
       | and the Bluetooth headphones - Android phone lag, it's enough to
       | impair conversation.
       | 
       | Now the problem is just how to manage all the cables that come
       | from having a gaming PC and work laptop that use the same
       | keyboard and monitor. I have a KVM switch but I can't hide it
       | under the desk if I want to press it.
        
         | formerly_proven wrote:
         | > I have a KVM switch but I can't hide it under the desk if I
         | want to press it.
         | 
         | Why not? I bolted mine to the underside of the table roughly 20
         | cm (about 13/20 ft) back from the edge, it's both invisible and
         | the button is trivial to find without fumbling.
        
         | hug wrote:
         | Most KVMs have a keyboard shortcut that will let you switch,
         | commonly double-tapping scroll-lock and then hitting 1 or 2 for
         | the first or second input.
        
       | walnutclosefarm wrote:
       | My broadband access has been wireless ethernet, over a roughly 5
       | mile hop from the nearest tower, for roughly 20 years. I'd still
       | be using 14.4kpbs modems over copper telephone wire without it.
       | From the post in the South pasture where we pick that up, it's
       | wired to the two dwellings on the place, and pure wireless after
       | that, including extension APs in two more outbuildings, and a LR
       | outdoor AP. Rarely have any trouble with any of it. Of course, I
       | don't have to worry about my neighbor's router causing
       | interference - the nearest neighbor with broadband is half a mile
       | away, most of which, from a line of site point of view, is
       | through dirt. Before I retired, I was CTO for a hospital where we
       | ran 14,000+ APs on roughly 100 sites, serving 100,000 or so
       | employees, patients and visitors daily. I regularly used it at a
       | restaurant across the street from one of our buildings. The
       | service was highly reliable and available nearly everywhere.
       | (And, believe me, if you took away a surgeon's wifi that she or
       | he used to do quick email and other updates between surgeries,
       | you'd know it in short order.
       | 
       | So, yeah, wifi can require some management, but the thought of
       | running all those laptops, phones (you couldn't rely on cell
       | service - which of course is another form of wireless - inside
       | most of the buildings - worked some places, not others), and
       | portable medical devices only on wired ethernet is a non starter.
       | 
       | As for other forms of wireless - Bluetooth and BLE have their
       | issues, but you get an awful lot in return.
        
         | franklyemphatic wrote:
         | If you mess with a doctor's icon placement you hear about it.
         | If a computer they use looks old I hear about it. So, yeah.
         | Don't mess with wifi.
        
       | nerdbaggy wrote:
       | AX has BSSID Coloring which really helps improve performance when
       | multiple APs are on the same channel. Still have the saturated
       | channel limitation but that rarely happens on 5Ghz
       | 
       | https://www.extremenetworks.com/extreme-networks-blog/how-do...
        
         | Avamander wrote:
         | Anecdotal personal experience, but I don't think it would take
         | 802.11ax to improve available bandwidth, just better AP
         | hardware.
         | 
         | I replaced a high-performance n/ac router with years old
         | leftover enterprise AP. Price-wise the enterprise AP would've
         | cost as much 2nd hand.
         | 
         | It improved the situation in a very very crowded airspace in
         | every measurable metric (~10-50%). Better latency, average,
         | minimum and maximum speeds, connection stability, packet loss
         | and even security (PMF support). All that on the same standards
         | and other conditions.
         | 
         | My suspicion is that consumers are being sold bottom of the
         | barrel hardware and new protocols just rise the bar on what s*t
         | they can get working.
        
       | renox wrote:
       | Yes! On my part of the bed video streaming with an IPad works OK
       | but often this isn't the case for my wife! How am I supposed to
       | fix this???
        
       | ryukoposting wrote:
       | I yearn for the day that I will get to work at a company that
       | gives me a wired connection at my desk.
        
         | tablespoon wrote:
         | > I yearn for the day that I will get to work at a company that
         | gives me a wired connection at my desk.
         | 
         | It boggles my mind that any company _wouldn 't_ do that. Wifi
         | sucks so bad and offices are so dense with people. The cube at
         | my office have several network drops each, across many
         | different cubicle systems. I figured they were standard
         | equipment.
        
           | ryukoposting wrote:
           | Startups.
        
       | ggm wrote:
       | I convinced my 8yo offspring that crawling like an alcatraz
       | escapee over the under-house dust, asbestos, DDT, and probably
       | decaying possum was "fun" and we did it together.
       | 
       | OTOH he got the most fun using the power tools drilling the
       | holes.
        
       | keithnz wrote:
       | I have everything wired except my headset (Technics EAH-A800),
       | which works well, I haven't had any problems with it. Network
       | cable vs Wifi is a REALLY different experience in terms of
       | performance and ping, which I care more about for gaming than for
       | work.
        
       | areoform wrote:
       | I bought a Homepod Mini on sale some time ago, and it's one of
       | the worst experiences I've ever had. It continuously stutters. It
       | stops working. I realize just how magical it is that it works at
       | all. But the realization that it needs WiFi to stream music to,
       | despite having bluetooth, has been quite depressing. I don't
       | think the product will ever work without jitter given the amount
       | of overlapping WiFi signals in my area.
       | 
       | It's a bit like the butterfly keyboard of speakers. A wonderful
       | idea in theory. But it makes you wonder if anyone at Apple has
       | ever tried using it an apartment building, a dusty environment,
       | or some place that isn't a pristine lab or upper middle class
       | suburbia
        
         | benhurmarcel wrote:
         | Yes I wish the Homepod could use an ethernet adapter on its
         | power supply, like the Chromecast does.
        
         | lstamour wrote:
         | I set up a second wifi hotspot in the same room as the HomePods
         | and they still struggle to connect to wifi. At this point I've
         | given up and assume it's like the Apple Watch - the wifi works
         | when it wants to. It's annoying that Apple makes both products
         | that work great with wifi and products that don't work great -
         | and the ones that don't work great with wifi often lack
         | Ethernet connectivity options or I would use that instead. At
         | least my watch can connect to cellular. It's disappointing when
         | you find yourself wanting 5G home speakers to ensure proper
         | internet connectivity...
        
         | turtlebits wrote:
         | I have a stereo pair of Homepods and they work perfectly. Maybe
         | the wifi channel of your AP is congested? Surprisingly, the
         | Homepod also works when there is no wifi available.
         | 
         | It still boggles the mind why there is no wired input though.
        
           | bob-44 wrote:
           | On my home network, the HomePod Mini's demand to use both
           | IPv4 and IPv6 is what I'm thinking is contributing to the
           | unreliability of my stereo pair. My ISP doesn't provide me an
           | IPv6 address, so my home router and pihole both seem to
           | struggle with the HomePod Minis. My original HomePod doesn't
           | have this issue.
           | 
           | What I'd really love is if my HomePod Minis stopped assuming
           | the primary HomeKit Hub role and instead let my Apple TV
           | connected via Ethernet handle all of the requests. There's no
           | way to select a device to be the primary hub as far as I can
           | tell.
        
             | danaris wrote:
             | ...Why does a lack of _external_ IPv6 address cause a
             | problem _within_ your home network?
             | 
             | (I'm genuinely willing to believe it _could_ , because I've
             | seen stupider problems personally, but it does seem like a
             | weird one.)
        
               | bob-44 wrote:
               | My consumer mesh router takes an all or nothing approach
               | for IPv6 settings, which causes problems, and there's no
               | customization of IPv6 DNS settings.
               | 
               | I've been meaning to take an old Netgear router, put dd-
               | wrt on it, and then put that between my cable modem and
               | the mesh router.
        
       | paradox242 wrote:
       | Since the migration of most employees to working from home I've
       | run into this on a nearly weekly basis in IT where wireless works
       | until it doesn't. Corporate networks can be challenging enough to
       | tune in an environment where you have a lot more access and
       | control than someone at their home. Often this is in a dense
       | urban setting where their setup consists of connecting to the
       | cheapest wireless equipment their ISP could buy.
       | 
       | Once the usual quick checklist items are exhausted,suggesting
       | that maybe we ought to just run a cable before getting into
       | troubleshooting buggy wireless drivers, old hardware that doesn't
       | support modern 802.11 amendments, or conducting a full spectrum
       | analysis are often dismissed, or even if they are open to it, no
       | one seems to own an Ethernet cable these days or their gateway is
       | in a closet, basement or some other inconvenient location.
       | 
       | Someday I hope that installing Ethernet jacks throughout the
       | house becomes as commonplace as it once was to do the same for
       | phone lines, but to many it is an afterthought as they are used
       | to their crappy wireless.
        
       | vvanders wrote:
       | I often joke that I have an amateur radio license and only use
       | wired earbuds for conference calls.
       | 
       | The 2.4ghz ISM bands are just noisy, sometimes all it takes is a
       | poorly shielded microwave to take out everything in a 50 yard
       | radius.
        
       | DeathArrow wrote:
       | I like speed on my desktop and there's no way I can have 10Gbps
       | link with wireless.
        
       | qq66 wrote:
       | I wanted wired Ethernet in my office but didn't want to punch
       | holes in the wall. Luckily I have an old "central vacuum system"
       | that as far as I can tell has never been even powered on, many
       | years before I bought the house.
       | 
       | I tied a ping pong ball to a piece of string and used a vacuum
       | cleaner to suck it through the pipes, then used the string to
       | pull a stronger rope and then the Ethernet cable. So now my
       | Ethernet goes from my office to the wireless router via the
       | vacuum ducting.
        
         | Forge36 wrote:
         | I love how you ran the wire. Equal parts brilliant and
         | rediculous.
        
           | Lapsa wrote:
           | Reminds me of my dad who connected to ISP through antenna
           | made out of Pringles can. Surely he found a recipe somewhere
           | but everybody was in awe regardless.
        
             | neilv wrote:
             | They have a name now:
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantenna
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | Those were all the rage in the early 2000s. We siphoned off
             | a coffee shop about 1/4 mile down the street from our
             | apartment with one.
        
         | zw123456 wrote:
         | for those who do not have old pipes to use, most of us have
         | coax, there is something called MOCA, simply go onto amazon or
         | whatever and search. it allows you to run your ethernet over
         | the cable tv coax in your house "over the top" of any cable tv
         | you have runnning on it. cable uses the first 800Mhz of
         | spectrum on the coax, moca rides above 1ghz so they can
         | coexist. You can extend ethernet from any coax outlet to any
         | other coax outlet. not hole punching, not central vacuum or
         | whatever.
        
           | nvgeele wrote:
           | If you do already have telephone and/or coax cabling in your
           | home, it might be easier in the long run to just replace it
           | to be honest. Ethernet sockets and cables are cheap, and
           | don't consume power.
           | 
           | I was looking into MOCA, but eventually I decided against it
           | due to pricing and latency concerns. In the end, I opened up
           | the coax socket at my router, tied an ethernet cable to the
           | coax cable, went to my office (room above the room where the
           | router is), opened up the coax socket, pulled out the coax
           | cable, and voila, I now had an ethernet cable in the duct.
        
             | occoder wrote:
             | And you don't even have to lose the coax cabling. If you
             | tie _two_ ethernet cables to the coax cable, pull them both
             | through the duct, you can then pull the coax cable back in
             | place.
        
             | ridgered4 wrote:
             | Unfortunately, I bet a lot of this kind of cable is stapled
             | down along the run. And with enough twist and turns I'm not
             | confident the existing wire wouldn't break while being
             | pulled, even without the staples.
        
             | vetinari wrote:
             | It's not that simple everywhere, We have brick walls,
             | replacing cables means lot of dust and repairing those
             | opened walls... provided you don't damage anything already
             | there.
             | 
             | So here I'm feeling adventurous for pushing 10 GbE over a
             | run of Cat5E for the next decade or more.
        
           | keeganpoppen wrote:
           | oh man this is why i read HN; i had no idea that this
           | existed-- somehow-- and am the kind of person that runs
           | ethernet cables all over the house rather than compromise in
           | any way (powerline SUCKS ASS); and also i happen to currently
           | live in a house with 1.2 trillion coax jacks, but no cat5/6
           | wiring to speak of, so this seems like it completely solves
           | my problem in the best possible way. i don't know if i could
           | possibly be more excited than this (i wish i were kidding
           | more than i am).
           | 
           | yeah, sure, if i got a bunch of _really_ fancy wireless
           | equipment, that could probably swing it too, but would also
           | require getting new WiFi cards to actually be able to take
           | advantage.
        
             | zw123456 wrote:
             | I learn about in the last house I had which was in FiOS
             | (fiber) available area and I of course ordered it and when
             | they were installing it I asked the guy a bunch of
             | questions and one was "who are you getting the signal
             | across my Cable TV Coax" and he told me they were using
             | MoCa so I googled it later and thought wow, that's
             | interesting.
             | 
             | Then Later I moved to this place and there is no FiOS but I
             | have mm-wave 5G (2Gbps) but there was no Ethernet cable in
             | the house so I thought, hey, I know, I will use that MoCa
             | thing, and it worked like a charm, got my signal from the
             | CPE antenna unit mounted on my Garage (best signal) down to
             | my lab in my basement.
        
           | girvo wrote:
           | > You can extend ethernet from any coax outlet to any other
           | coax outlet. not hole punching, not central vacuum or
           | whatever.
           | 
           | Man that would be perfect, except the main coax is already
           | being used for my internet as is. I wish HFC for the NBN
           | would hurry up and die already.
        
             | DenseComet wrote:
             | MoCA and cable internet use different frequencies so you
             | can still use them. I'm currently using those adapters with
             | comcast.
        
               | girvo wrote:
               | Interesting. I'll look into it and see whether it's
               | possible.
               | 
               | While my highly-tuned Wifi 6 setup at home is honestly
               | quite excellent (even for my competitive FPS gaming
               | needs, and even wireless VR has been brilliant), it would
               | be nice to ditch it for higher reliability.
               | 
               | Problem is, I'm pretty sure my rental has a single coax
               | socket for cable TV (which is used for my NBN internet
               | connection now). I'll have a look though!
        
               | danachow wrote:
               | Also Ethernet to bridging MoCA does add on about 3-5ms of
               | latency round trip. Whether this is of any concern is
               | another thing, it probably isn't for most - but it is
               | something to know.
        
             | zw123456 wrote:
             | As I mentioned in the top post that it runs over the top of
             | docis which is what the cablecos use which is 800Mhz and
             | below and Moca is above 1Ghz so they coexist.
        
               | girvo wrote:
               | Yeah fair enough, though I think the bigger challenge for
               | me is that most places I've lived in, in Australia, have
               | a single cable connection point in the lounge room and
               | that's it (for Foxtel). Though I'm going to check!
        
           | ranger207 wrote:
           | Wow, running Ethernet over coax like it's the 80s again.
           | Nothing new under the sun I guess
        
             | bregma wrote:
             | Everything but the termination.
        
               | zw123456 wrote:
               | https://www.ieee802.org/3/ethernet_diag.html
               | 
               | very famous diagram !
        
             | zw123456 wrote:
             | Ya, well, Moca 3 is pretty new BTW, and it's not your
             | mommy's ethernet over coax, you are thinking of old timey
             | ieee802.3 this is full on OFDM modulation over coax, RF'ey
             | stuff like Docis. Fios uses this to get your signal in over
             | your house cabling.
             | 
             | I use it to get my mm-wave 5G 2Gbps signal from my antenna
             | on my garage over the same coax my cable TV runs on to my
             | lab in my basement and have a wifi AP for the rest of the
             | place.
             | 
             | Ya, sorry, I stream but I still like my cable, shrug :)
        
           | Geezus-42 wrote:
           | Make sure you put a filter on the outside of your house if it
           | is hooked to the cable system so you don't create feedback
           | and screw everyone else around you who are using the cable
           | system.
        
           | gabereiser wrote:
           | There is also Ethernet over powerline via powerline adapters.
           | I run these in my apartment. From the router you plug a
           | "host" adapter into an outlet, plug in the ethernet cable.
           | Now you have a source. Throughout the rest of the apartment
           | or house you plug-in a receiving adapter (there's a little
           | sync button to sync it to the host) and plug in an ethernet
           | cable as an output. Plug that into a small switch if you need
           | more connections. Repeat throughout your home. It's just as
           | cool as MOCA.
        
             | KennyBlanken wrote:
             | Ethernet over powerline adapters cause enormous RF
             | interference for HAM radio operators. Please do not use
             | them.
        
               | gabereiser wrote:
               | Really? Because I have an ICOM transceiver and have no
               | interference at all.
        
               | fluctor wrote:
               | Might depend on your shack/feedline/antenna location,
               | too. As in every other part of ham radio, YMMV.
        
             | vvanders wrote:
             | Nooo, please don't use that.
             | 
             | They basically turn all the electrical wires in your house
             | into a giant antenna and radiate broadband noise.
             | 
             | I honestly don't know how the damn things are even legal by
             | the FCC given how noisy they are.
        
               | Johnny555 wrote:
               | _They basically turn all the electrical wires in your
               | house into a giant antenna and radiate broadband noise._
               | 
               | And they do it very poorly, I've never been able to get
               | powerline networking to work well. I had trouble reaching
               | the Wifi node in my office from the bedroom on the far
               | side of the house, I thought powerline networking was the
               | answer, but the link was not that fast (around 10mbit),
               | with very variable latency, anywhere from 5msec to
               | 100msec, and around 2% packet drops. Both outlets were on
               | the same leg of my home power panel, I verified it at the
               | breaker box.
               | 
               | I finally ended up putting up a couple Unifi Nanostation
               | M2's (the bigger ones with the 10dBi antennas) aimed at
               | each other through the walls to act as a point to point
               | network, and it was faster and more reliable. Still not
               | super fast, I get like 30mbit, but latency is a nice
               | constant 7msec, with little packet loss.
               | 
               | But in a previous house, the walls were real plaster with
               | metal lath behind acting as a faraday cage, and I had no
               | choice but to use powerline networking (it was a rental
               | house, so I couldn't easily run ethernet)
        
             | hackcasual wrote:
             | I would choose MOCA over Powerline. Powerline trips AFCI
             | breakers, is really sensitive to other devices and wiring
             | quality, add even in best conditions seems to perform worse
             | (in my experience).
        
             | elabajaba wrote:
             | Powerline sucks. It's slow (in most houses you're lucky to
             | get 100mbps throughput even with high end "2000mbps"
             | adapters), and it tends to suffer from bad jitter and
             | latency spikes to the point where it's more like bad wifi,
             | while MOCA is generally pretty close to ethernet in terms
             | of having basically no additional jitter or ping spikes
             | (only real downside is the cost of the MOCA adapters, and
             | that it's a shared link between all the adapters so you're
             | limited to eg. 2.5Gbps combined on all MOCA links, which
             | isn't a problem for most people).
             | 
             | Also, for the cost of either powerline or MOCA adapters you
             | can buy a big roll of CAT6 CMR and a fish bit and run
             | ethernet through the walls (just do a good job on the
             | patches if you're renting).
        
               | wonnage wrote:
               | I've gotten a pretty reliable 400-500mbps over a "2gbps"
               | powerline adapter. Granted this was in small 1-2br
               | apartments, but you're probably dealing with only one
               | coax jack in the whole place and it's not feasible/worth
               | it to run your own cabling.
        
               | elabajaba wrote:
               | Imo, in a small 1-2br apartment it's easy enough to run
               | ethernet and hide it along the walls, either by tucking
               | it under the moulding if you have carpet, or using cable
               | hiders.
               | 
               | I'm also just laser focused on good consistent latency
               | though after years of suffering awful cable internet and
               | trying to minimize all latency that I could control
               | (https://i.imgur.com/i84mIsD.png was what it was like
               | during the day in 2020 in the first wfh period. Luckily
               | I've only been getting consistent spikes up to ~200ms
               | throughout 2021 /s).
               | 
               | edit: That ping was on hardwired ethernet with no load as
               | well, and Rogers (realistically the only ISP where I live
               | in Canada because my available Bell DSL connection is too
               | slow) was throttling uploads to 4mbps.
        
               | ninjin wrote:
               | My go-to solution for routing ethernet while renting are
               | 3M Command Hooks. They are remarkably strong, while being
               | easy to remove - albeit a tad bit on the expensive side.
        
               | zw123456 wrote:
               | I am using MOCA 2.5 go get my 2Gbps over my coax, MOCA 3
               | does 10Gbps.
        
               | function_seven wrote:
               | I have to begrudgingly agree with you. A couple years ago
               | I plopped a couple powerline adapters on either end of my
               | house. They're on different circuits, but the same phase
               | of the panel.
               | 
               | It worked great. I got a consistent 80Mbps through them.
               | I was happy and probably commented here or elsewhere
               | about how they _can_ work, or,  "don't dismiss it, it
               | might just be the trick."
               | 
               | Well, now they're pretty flaky. They still work just
               | enough for me to keep using them, but other WiFi issues
               | I'm having are convincing me that I gotta stop being lazy
               | and run some cable to all my rooms. (I even have a
               | crawlspace! It will be relatively easy if I can just get
               | cracking on it.)
               | 
               | I don't know what changed between then and now. Phone
               | chargers on the circuit? That random smart plug I bought
               | last year? My A/C cycling in the summer? Doesn't matter.
               | Powerlines are a hostile environment for high-speed data.
        
             | Fradow wrote:
             | I use those and have a generally positive view on them, but
             | from personal experience, the adapters tend to de-
             | synchronize, and re-synchronizing them is a pain (first of
             | all because you need to actually access them, but since
             | they are ugly they are generally kept hidden in hard to
             | reach places).
             | 
             | They are also the other issues people reported.
             | 
             | IMO, they are fine in a rental where you don't have a lot
             | of options and don't expect too much, but if you have a
             | choice, use a better alternative.
        
             | zw123456 wrote:
             | yup although not sure you get the speeds you get with MOCA
             | 3 ?
             | 
             | 10Gbps !
             | 
             | :)
        
               | gabereiser wrote:
               | Oh for sure there's no way I'm getting those speeds. I
               | don't have that need though. A simple 1Gbps is enough for
               | me. While advertised as 1Gbps adapters, I get at max
               | 800Mbps which is fine. I don't suffer from stuttering or
               | packet loss as reported by others. I also don't have a
               | bunch of RF interference as reported by others. So I'm
               | happy with them and will continue to use them.
        
           | einichi wrote:
           | I had no idea MOCA existed. Thanks for this.
        
             | zw123456 wrote:
             | Good Point, I bet a lot of people are not aware of it as an
             | option, I just submitted this link as new
             | 
             | https://www.techreviewer.com/tech-answers/moca-vs-ethernet
             | 
             | I think it is a pretty decent review of the pro's and con's
             | of using Ethernet cable vs. Ethernet cable. Perhaps others
             | not reading this thread could also benefit from the
             | knowledge.
        
               | walterbell wrote:
               | Yes, thank you. Ordered -70db MoCA point-of-entry filter
               | for $5.
        
         | SkeuomorphicBee wrote:
         | I'm so glad that in my country we build houses with ducts for
         | cables, with two separate duct networks (one for AC power, and
         | one for "telephony"), when it comes time to change technology
         | we just push those spring-tipped cable guides through the ducts
         | and then pull the new wire (or even just use the old outdated
         | wire as a guide to pull the new one). I've installed Ethernet
         | cables and even replaced AC wire (to a wider gouge or more
         | phases) on rentals with no need for any McGyver shenanigans.
        
           | stratosmacker wrote:
           | What country is this so I can read more and/or move?
        
             | Ruphin wrote:
             | I think in most (West-) European countries there are strict
             | regulations/requirements that require ducts/pipes for any
             | kind of power line. When my house was built (35 years ago)
             | there were already regulations in place that required
             | separate ducts for each group, separate groups for wet
             | rooms (kitchen, bathroom) with grounding, etc.
             | 
             | Overall I found the standards of electrical work in Europe
             | is significantly higher than US counterparts. In modern
             | buildings every outlet and line has mandatory grounding,
             | and GFCI is built into the fuse box on every power line for
             | any building that's less than 30 years old. That really
             | came in handy once when I accidentally hit a power line
             | when drilling through the ceiling. I can't imagine doing
             | any kind of renovation work without GFCI on everything.
        
         | hamilyon2 wrote:
         | Can't you use 220/110v power wiring to also transmit ethernet?
         | Seems a bit simpler than laying new cable.
        
           | mhandley wrote:
           | Yes, in principle. In practice I found all the TP-Link
           | ethernet-over-power equipment I used to use to me even less
           | reliable than the WiFi I was trying to supplement. It would
           | work fine for a while, then just lose sync, and I'd have to
           | go round unplugging and replugging everything to get it to
           | sync again. In the end I ran cat-6, but it took me a long
           | time to conclude it was worth the effort. Now my only regret
           | is I didn't decide to do it 10 years earlier.
        
           | Symbiote wrote:
           | Depending on your wiring, the performance can be terrible.
           | 
           | I have one of these, advertised as 2000Mb/s but actually
           | doing about 80, and in a small apartment. Every 6 months or
           | so it connects to my _neighbour 's_ system without me doing
           | anything.
        
         | dreamcompiler wrote:
         | Off-topic but since you brought it up, does anybody ever use
         | builtin central vacuum systems? I have several friends who have
         | houses built during the era when these things were popular but
         | none of them ever use the systems.
        
           | ethbr0 wrote:
           | They made more sense before high efficiency motors
           | miniaturized & high capacity lithium ion batteries existed.
           | 
           | Old vacuums were _heavy_.
           | 
           | Now, they're more useful to repurpose into shop vacs.
        
             | a9h74j wrote:
             | I also once heard a vacuum cleaner salesman say (and yes,
             | that used to be a thing) -- we know we can make vacuum
             | cleaners less noisy (drop the universal motor IIRC), but
             | people buy vacuum cleaners assuming the noise == power.
        
               | jjeaff wrote:
               | I have actually heard that some manufacturers purposely
               | make their vacuums louder for this reason.
               | 
               | I have a Miele and it is much quieter than any other
               | vacuum I have heard.
        
               | a9h74j wrote:
               | Imagine if a Prius or Tesla instead had as much noise/HP
               | as a conventional vacuum cleaner.
        
           | WalterGR wrote:
           | Everyone I've known that has them dispenses with the hose and
           | uses it only as a - sort of - magic trash can for small
           | objects.
        
           | ajmurmann wrote:
           | My house has this. I've only used it when something was wrong
           | with the alternative. I love the idea, but the hose is huge
           | and ours has a minor defect where it turns itself off if you
           | plug the hose in completely. Roomba and then a handheld Dyson
           | for details is much more convenient
        
           | brandon272 wrote:
           | Yes! Use mine all the time. Strong sustained suction and much
           | quieter. Less frequent bag emptying. Air quality seems
           | better. Hose is a pain to deal with, but not a big deal as
           | long as you have somewhere to store it.
        
           | lreeves wrote:
           | Yeah I definitely do, the hose is stupidly clunky but as
           | someone with allergies the big advantage is there's no pass
           | through of fine particles into the room you're vacuuming.
        
             | oh_sigh wrote:
             | There are systems these days where the hose retracts up
             | into the vacuum tubing in the wall, so you just pull out
             | however much you need and then let it feed back into the
             | wall when you're done.
             | 
             | This is what I have and it's great. I also have a toe kick
             | adapter, so I can use a regular broom and sweep the dust to
             | a little port under a kitchen cabinet and it automatically
             | sucks it up.
             | 
             | I don't have allergies, I just never liked the way it
             | smells so dusty after using a vacuum cleaner inside.
        
           | JadeNB wrote:
           | > Off-topic but since you brought it up, does anybody ever
           | use builtin central vacuum systems? I have several friends
           | who have houses built during the era when these things were
           | popular but none of them ever use the systems.
           | 
           | I grew up in a house with one. I haven't lived there since
           | 1998, but, yes, we used it all the time. As my sibling
           | commenter lreeves says
           | (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31361950), it's good if
           | you have allergies.
        
           | theshrike79 wrote:
           | On the plus side, all of the noise and dust goes Somewhere
           | Else.
           | 
           | On the minus side the long-ass hose is a huge pain.
           | 
           | In the 2020's you can just get a robovac for daily cleaning
           | and a smaller unit for manual stuff.
        
           | brk wrote:
           | Our house, built in 2004, has one. We've never used it. The
           | closet that has the vacuum in it also has some other
           | equipment and is a bit of an IDF for my home network.
           | Strongly considering removing the vacuum unit entirely and
           | using the ducting as conduit per the above comment!
        
         | Ruphin wrote:
         | I recently did some renovation work and the house had unused
         | telephone (and COAX cable) wiring running to most rooms.
         | Decided they would probably remain unused forever, so I
         | replaced everything with cat6. You can usually use the old
         | cables to pull through the new one. It's a bit of a chore and
         | may require some specialised tooling for certain outlet
         | brands/types, but it's so nice to just have ethernet outlets
         | everywhere.
        
         | muxneo wrote:
         | This is quite interesting idea!
        
         | wpietri wrote:
         | Now that's a proper series of tubes.
        
         | mro_name wrote:
         | Like the beetle with honey on its antennae, pulling the
         | thinnest first thread. Thanks for sharing!
        
         | closeparen wrote:
         | If you are thinking about doing this make sure you use plenum-
         | rated cable, otherwise in addition to packets your Ethernet
         | cables will also be an excellent transport for fire.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | conk wrote:
           | I'm under the impression the concern is more about smoke
           | being emitted during a fire which would then filter into a
           | room and obscure escape paths.
           | 
           | This is more of an issue in a commercial building where you
           | have lots of people who need to move through potentially
           | narrow escape routes than it is in a home where every major
           | room will have multiple means of egress.
        
         | tablespoon wrote:
         | > I wanted wired Ethernet in my office but didn't want to punch
         | holes in the wall. Luckily I have an old "central vacuum
         | system" that as far as I can tell has never been even powered
         | on, many years before I bought the house.
         | 
         | Lucky you, you had a preinstalled system of cabling conduit :)
         | 
         | Before I had my basement finished, I installed a bunch of PVC
         | conduit for the network wiring, so it would be possible to
         | upgrade or add to it in the future.
        
           | a9h74j wrote:
           | Same intent here. I don't know what cable I will eventually
           | upgrade to, but the first step will be easily-snakable
           | conduit to every room.
        
         | rkagerer wrote:
         | The great thing is you can upgrade the cable in future for
         | newer technologies (eg. over a decade ago I bought used
         | Mellanox equipment cheaper than 10G and ran fiber drops).
        
         | Cthulhu_ wrote:
         | I have a fairly modern house (built mid 2000's) but for some
         | reason wasn't built with ethernet; what was there was phone and
         | coax cable lines, going through these yellow PVC tubes embedded
         | in the wall.
         | 
         | In theory it would be a matter of tying an ethernet cable to an
         | existing coax cable and pull through, but in practice, eek. I
         | don't believe those lines are continuous, or there may be
         | debris or kinks in it somewhere in the wall. In the end it took
         | an electrician half an hour and an improvised cable pump to get
         | it through.
        
           | Lightbody wrote:
           | You should double check that they didn't actually run CAT5e
           | and just terminate using RJ11. My old house (built in 2007)
           | did that.
        
         | gonzo wrote:
         | Internet as a series of tubes!
        
         | tzs wrote:
         | The various people who have replied to you with their own cable
         | solutions is interesting. Mine seems downright uncouth by
         | comparison.
         | 
         | I just ran mine up near where the wall meets the ceiling. When
         | inside I look down a lot more than I look up so the ugliness of
         | the cable doesn't bother me.
         | 
         | Here's part of my Ethernet cable run [1] through the living
         | room. The other cable in that picture is a speaker cable for
         | one of the home theater rear speakers.
         | 
         | [1] https://imgur.com/gallery/uZ0VvtM
        
           | PretzelPirate wrote:
           | Perhaps there's a market for ethernet cables with LED wraps
           | so you can run your cables near the ceiling AND have cool
           | lighting effects in your house.
        
           | Cthulhu_ wrote:
           | There's cable gutter kits you can probably get at your local
           | DIY store to make that look a bit neater if you're looking to
           | improve. They're usually stick-on so no drilling or anything
           | required.
           | 
           | There's also decorative ones that run along your floor, I
           | forgot the English name, but they're a bit bigger than the
           | usual ones and can hold a number of cables out of sight.
        
             | vetinari wrote:
             | You mean baseboards? Checking them is a good idea; some do
             | have a space for running a cable. So if there's no need to
             | go over a corner, it might be an option.
        
           | bee_rider wrote:
           | They are sharing their stories because they are more clever
           | than the rest of us.
           | 
           | I had a cable going diagonally across the wall for ages
           | before the SO put their foot down and demanded something
           | slightly more aesthetically pleasing. Now it follows the trim
           | at least.
        
             | a9h74j wrote:
             | I've imagined utility in making a crown molding be a c.a.
             | 10cm angled piece with space behind, for just these
             | reasons.
             | 
             | Held with screws of course, or otherwise removable and
             | replaceable.
        
               | Ekaros wrote:
               | And if you don't want it to look especially great surface
               | mounted trunking is decent enough and affordable.
               | Actually it is very common here. Small rectangle mounted
               | either to ceiling or floor of the wall.
        
               | theshrike79 wrote:
               | You can find crown molding with room for cables in it off
               | the shelf, at least around here.
        
           | mananaysiempre wrote:
           | You can also just own it, cables are not inherently ugly. I'm
           | not saying go full on Centre Pompidou, but a couple of dirt-
           | cheap adhesive clips in an appropriate colour can go a long
           | way (though not if your walls are plastered). The setup in
           | 8-Bit Guy[1]'s old studio is a good inspiration.
           | 
           | (Sometimes the clips can be a bit _too_ cheap, in which case
           | tearing off the original crappy adhesive and using some of
           | that insanely-strong double-sided 3M tape helps.)
           | 
           | [1] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8uT9cgJorJPWu7ITLGo9Ww
        
         | AussieWog93 wrote:
         | Our Ethernet cables go out the windows and around the house.
         | Joys of renting!
        
           | wrycoder wrote:
           | Around here, the cable installers nail the cables around the
           | outside of the cheap houses and just punch holes through the
           | walls to access the interior.
        
         | robotnikman wrote:
         | Other alternatives I've found to work are Ethernet over power
         | (varies depending on how well your house is wired though) and
         | ethernet over coax using MoCA adapters (if your house was
         | previously wired with coax for cable TV these work great)
        
           | aidenn0 wrote:
           | I've used Ethernet over Power, and it sucks except under
           | ideal conditions. The pre-G.hn versions are quite slow.
           | 
           | G.hn is fast, but all of the G.hn devices I've found seem to
           | use the same chipset (and presumably similar firmware, since
           | the configuration pages have identical options, but different
           | branding), and the chipset seems to buffer a massive amount,
           | which means a single hiccup while using a high-bandwidth
           | application makes the network unusable for a while.
           | 
           | Example: while streaming video over a G.hn adapter, I was
           | running ping. There was a brief hiccup, and then ping times
           | exceeded 20 seconds (!!), finally recovering after a few
           | minutes. I eventually ran a program that ran on devices
           | connected to each side and would reboot the adapter if ping
           | times exceeded 500ms. This made the network _far_ more
           | reliable.
        
             | gabereiser wrote:
             | This hasn't been my experience at all. I use TP-Link
             | adapters and don't see any ping interference or latency. I
             | think it also has a lot to do with how in phase your power
             | is.
        
               | aidenn0 wrote:
               | Which TP-Link adapters? They don't seem to make a g.hn
               | and the last ones of them I tried were AV1000.
        
               | gabereiser wrote:
               | It's the AV1000s. I don't seem to have the issues you all
               | are reporting with them. No packet loss. No latency
               | beyond a reasonable 1ms. My apartment's power lines are
               | clean, properly grounded, and perfectly in phase I guess.
        
               | aidenn0 wrote:
               | AV1000 worked reliably for me, but at 40mbit
        
               | christoph wrote:
               | I've used the TP-Link AV2000's for a few years, they're
               | OK for me, sure I'd rather have proper hard wired
               | ethernet, but I also prefer not punching holes in
               | walls/ceilings all over my house. It's ridiculous they
               | get marketed as 2000Mbit though, best I've ever got is
               | close to 200Mbit and I'm in a fairly ideal set up for it.
               | Also, never mix lower adapters like 500's, as this seems
               | to cap the whole network at the lowest common
               | denominator, even when they're not in use.
        
               | adhesive_wombat wrote:
               | I use the TP-links too, but sometimes, every few weeks,
               | they fall over and one of them needs a power cycle. I put
               | them on the same circuit so they don't have to traverse
               | the consumer unit to talk to each other.
               | 
               | I could have put Ethernet in, but adding a wire under the
               | floor was vetoed in the interests of not making a mess.
               | 
               | Don't listen to them! Run that Ethernet!
        
               | mhandley wrote:
               | I had the same issue, except it was usually every couple
               | of days they'd need replugging to resync. Only regret
               | from running ethernet recently (yes, it was messy) is
               | that I didn't do it 10 years ago.
        
           | bin_bash wrote:
           | MoCA adapters are crazy expensive though
        
             | ocdtrekkie wrote:
             | In my case I used just a single pair of them to get wired
             | Gigabit up to my second floor from the basement. Based on
             | my layout and needs that got me everything I couldn't
             | easily handle with Ethernet runs.
             | 
             | Ethernet runs are cheaper in parts, but MoCA adapters are
             | crazy effective at avoiding large drywalling jobs.
        
             | themitigating wrote:
             | A gocoax 1gbit is $60
        
               | ILMostro7 wrote:
               | But you need (at least) two, in order to be useful at
               | all.
        
               | themitigating wrote:
               | Hi, yes that's true but to compare pricing you need to
               | think of the cost of cat6 cable, which isn't much. Also
               | the time to run the cable.
               | 
               | This is assuming you have coax rg6 or better already in
               | the wall
        
             | mason55 wrote:
             | It's true but you might not need that many. Our house was
             | built in 2000 and every room is wired with coax but no
             | ethernet. With some strategic placement I was able to get a
             | hardwired switch in my office + two hardwired wifi APs with
             | just two MoCA adapters - $300 well spent.
             | 
             | It would be pretty expensive to turn every coax run in my
             | house into a hardwired ethernet switch but well placed
             | hardwired APs obviates the need to do that.
        
               | chrisweekly wrote:
               | Yeah; I'm about to upgrade the backhaul on my Orbi mesh
               | system to be wired, via extant coax nodes in good
               | locations.
        
             | chime wrote:
             | Hard to compare what "crazy" expensive is but I bought a
             | pair of these for $90 https://amazon.com/dp/B01MRV4WA1. For
             | the 3 places in my house I wanted to wire with Ethernet, I
             | was done under $300. Patching drywall, paint touch-ups, new
             | cables, and the overall time and headache would have cost a
             | lot more. I was done in a matter of minutes using old coax
             | and these adapters.
             | 
             | In my case, I didn't build a MoCA network, just used these
             | devices point-to-point. If you go full MoCA, think of it
             | like a distributed hub - no switching, no routing, no
             | security. In fact you should put filters to prevent
             | neighbors from listening in using their own MoCA adapters.
             | For me, point-to-point worked. YMMV but Ethernet over Coax
             | is definitely worth looking into for upto 1gbps speed,
             | which is plenty for wifi, netflix etc.
        
               | walterbell wrote:
               | _> In fact you should put filters to prevent neighbors
               | from listening in using their own MoCA adapters._
               | 
               | Wow. Who knew that inbound cable internet has outbound
               | data capability? Thanks for posting.
               | 
               | Is this a suitable filter (-70db)?
               | https://www.amazon.com/GLP-1G70CWWS-Filter-Eliminate-
               | Multi-R...
        
               | trelane wrote:
               | > Who knew that inbound cable internet has outbound data
               | capability?
               | 
               | The physical medium isn't directional, so there's no
               | reason to assume it would not transmit and receive. A
               | coax cable is equivalent to three wires with better
               | isolation from the environment (and with one "wire"
               | usually used for ground).
               | 
               | There's an asymmetry in commercial broadband over coax,
               | but Im not sire why that is precisely. Perhaps someone
               | familiar with DOCSIS etc. could say.
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | garaetjjte wrote:
           | Note that Ethernet over power should also work on coax, or
           | really any other cable. (connect adapters to the wire and
           | feed it with eg. 48V power supply)
        
             | ta988 wrote:
             | Not really the newer ones use the 3 wires (phase, neuter
             | and earth). I have one and reach 400-600Mbps in a really
             | old building with really long and shitty cabling. Ping is
             | 5ms more than pure Ethernet though.
        
         | throwaway09223 wrote:
         | I once wired up an apartment for ethernet using the old rj11
         | (telephone) wires. The phones were all run with cat5e so it was
         | very easy. If you're only doing 100bt you only need two pairs
         | for full duplex, leaving two other pairs to run two phone
         | lines. There are a lot of homes built using cat5 for the phone
         | systems with 2-3 unused pairs in each cable. All I did was swap
         | out the faceplates for rj11/rj45 combo plates and rewire.
         | 
         | Of course these days you might just give up the land line
         | entirely to get gigE over all 4 pair and just remove the old
         | rj11 jacks.
        
           | toast0 wrote:
           | > If you're only doing 100bt you only need two pairs for full
           | full duplex, leaving two other pairs to run two phone lines.
           | 
           | 10base-T and 100base-Tx both use two pair even for half
           | duplex.
        
             | 300bps wrote:
             | Cat5 has four pair.
        
               | e12e wrote:
               | Yeah, 1 pair for signal, one for shielding. Cat3 and
               | Cat5/5e/6 aren't the same - but I think you can
               | practically get up to 1gbps over Cat3 - 10gbps is
               | unlikely.
        
               | throwaway09223 wrote:
               | The "shielding" is done by measuring the difference in
               | signal between two wires in a pair -- that's why twisted
               | pairs are used. There isn't a dedicated pair for this
               | purpose.
               | 
               | You need only _one_ pair to run half duplex 10 /100bt
               | (contrary to what's stated above), and two pair to run
               | full duplex 10/100bt. In FD, there's one pair each for
               | tx/rx. 10/100bt are very similar in this regard.
               | 
               | The different cable categories mostly relate to the wire
               | quality and the number of twists in each pair.
               | 
               | gigE is very different and uses all 4 pairs.
        
               | e12e wrote:
               | Right you are! Twists for shielding, two pairs for duplex
               | - which means that since the 90s on, you practically
               | always want two pairs pr connector to enable duplex (be
               | it 100mbit or faster). Ed: but probably 4 for gigE.
        
           | slyall wrote:
           | Around 20 years ago the Internet suddenly became a thing but
           | you had big hotels that were not pre-wired with RJ45 and the
           | owners did not to spend lots of money running new cables.
           | 
           | One solution was to use the existing phone line in each room
           | and put an ADSL modem on it. They got Internet (and kept
           | analog phones) in every room by just upgrading the endpoints.
        
         | kirrent wrote:
         | My wired ethernet triumph was in my current rental. There's an
         | old under-floor evaporative air-conditioning ducted system
         | which is no longer used. I bought a $40 remote control car with
         | large rubber wheels and a low CoG, strapped a GoPro and a head
         | torch to it so I could stream video to a phone, and tied on a
         | piece of string. The mission was to get from my study to the
         | kitchen which is about 10m all up.
         | 
         | It was more of a challenge than expected. The ducting had
         | ramps, multiple corners, debris/rubbish, and a mouse skeleton
         | to navigate around. All of this wasn't helped by the terrible
         | latency and needing to move the phone to different places to
         | reduce distance and attenuation through the floor. I got stuck
         | quite a few times but could always use the string to pull back
         | a bit when I got wedged on a rock. Sometimes I just needed to
         | gun it to get over an obstacle.
         | 
         | In the end, the car and ethernet cable were cheaper than a good
         | wireless card or POE kit, and I got to give away the car to a
         | kid.
        
           | account-5 wrote:
           | I love how you had to use wireless to solve your wireless
           | problems.
        
             | OJFord wrote:
             | All new tools have to be made with the old ones.
        
               | HWR_14 wrote:
               | I mean, he was running a string under the floor connected
               | to the RC car. He could probably have piped the video
               | (and maybe power) over a thin enough wire to go
               | completely wired.
        
           | klenwell wrote:
           | > It was more of a challenge than expected. The ducting had
           | ramps, multiple corners, debris/rubbish, and a mouse skeleton
           | to navigate around.
           | 
           | My uncle worked for a company that designed and installed
           | commercial ductwork. The joke he liked to tell while they
           | were going in: "Make sure Bruce Willis can get around in
           | there."
        
             | mxuribe wrote:
             | As a fan of the Die Hard movies, i got this reference
             | immediately! lol :-D
        
           | turdnagel wrote:
           | Have you ever seen Blue Streak? There's a scene with a remote
           | control car just like that.
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUGjZQtXkr4
        
           | chrisweekly wrote:
           | Stories like this make HN what it is. Thanks for sharing!
           | Love it!
        
           | all2 wrote:
           | Can we have this as a video game? This would be hysterical to
           | do multiplayer. Maybe old style MarioKart balloons or
           | something.
        
             | numlock86 wrote:
             | Do you mean "Mario Kart Live"?
        
           | KineticLensman wrote:
           | I visited an old Victorian National Trust house in the UK
           | where the owner had used his rabbit-hunting ferrets to help
           | install electric wiring under the floors rather than rip up
           | the expensive wooden floors and panelling
        
             | fnands wrote:
             | At Fermilab they used a ferret (in a diaper!) to clean out
             | the beam pipes:
             | https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/felicia-ferret-
             | particl...
        
             | dspillett wrote:
             | Ferrets were often used to drag cables to the right place.
             | It is apparently an urban myth that Boeing did this in jet
             | manufacture, but they were used in other similar contexts.
        
         | Arrath wrote:
         | Very clever!
        
       | fabioyy wrote:
       | anyone have tried to use fiber? is there a fiber to ethernet
       | conversor? ( to connect the playstation for example )
        
       | chrismcb wrote:
       | I dunno my wireless just works. Two people in the house running
       | meetings on wireless. TV is on wireless. Everything seems fine.
       | My wireless keyboard acts up sometimes, but I blame the keyboard
       | not wireless. I do run wires when I can, but that is mostly just
       | the equipment near the modem Perhaps it's because we are in the
       | suburbs and the house is fairly open. Or maybe I just have my
       | wireless setup properly.
        
       | tempnow987 wrote:
       | I love wired connectections.
       | 
       | The LATENCY is noticeably better. If you are on a zoom call with
       | both parties on headsets and on wired connections (so no echo
       | cancellation needed) or other audio connections I find it
       | noticeably better (less stepping on each other etc).
       | 
       | I have AT&T's fiber product (2 Gbps) and the office has their biz
       | product (300 Mbps) and latency between is good and to google et
       | al is great (< 10 ms in almost all situations).
        
         | nezgar wrote:
         | Wired ethernet resolves most of my own teams/zoom/webex etc
         | anxiety that any glitches in anyones meeting video or audio are
         | probably NOT caused by my own connection....
        
         | nomel wrote:
         | At home, my WiFi vs Ethernet ping is just a few ms different.
         | For data, my WiFi 6 devices (most of them now) are faster over
         | WiFi.
         | 
         | But, at work, there's hundreds of ms difference between
         | ethernet and WiFi. I assume it because most offices use mesh
         | networks now, and none here are WiFi 6.
         | 
         | So, network setup and router quality definitely play a part. My
         | AP was ~$200, used for streaming VR.
        
       | 1ncorrect wrote:
       | Wireless network links should be exclusively the domain of
       | nomadic, temporary or sacrificial endpoints.
       | 
       | If the device is expected to be used in a fixed spacial or
       | temporal manner, or you care about the data conveyed across the
       | link, constrain its path as much as possible with a waveguide.
        
         | walterbell wrote:
         | Yes, even WPA3 remains vulnerable to various attacks.
        
       | mro_name wrote:
       | also having a dedicated place for work is a bliss. Nearby the
       | outlet.
        
       | alexvoda wrote:
       | It's too late now. We are already entering the age of laptops
       | without headphone jacks.
       | 
       | If only people listened earlier.
        
       | amelius wrote:
       | Wired would be so much better if it were just a replacement for
       | wireless, where you just plug a wire between two points, and they
       | start communicating without any configuration necessary if the
       | two points already had a wireless communication going.
        
         | falcolas wrote:
         | It... usually does? For example, I can plug in an ethernet
         | cable to my router and computer, and it works perfectly fine.
         | And if I unplug, it's still connected, just by wifi.
        
           | timando wrote:
           | Now try with an SSH session open
        
             | tedunangst wrote:
             | I blame the wifi. I can ssh from one wired machine to
             | another just fine, but when I unplug the cable the wifi
             | doesn't seamlessly take over. This is clearly the fault of
             | the wireless.
        
               | the_third_wave wrote:
               | If you configure things so that the wifi adapter gets the
               | same IP address as the wired connection you should be
               | able to continue communicating with those machines. SSH
               | uses TCP which is connection-oriented so as long as the
               | connection can be made it should work (bar problems with
               | MTU etc.). You might experience a stall before the
               | connection becomes alive again but it should work.
        
               | ChadNauseam wrote:
               | I think it's a problem with the TCP/IP stack somehow. If
               | I try the same thing when downloading something from
               | chrome, the download fails. If I'm loading a website I
               | get a "connection interrupted" error. Really there's no
               | reason that my device shouldn't have its own IP and treat
               | wifi and ethernet as two different routes to my device.
               | Remember "IP routes around damage"?
        
               | Nextgrid wrote:
               | NAT, among other things, breaks that.
        
               | Nextgrid wrote:
               | Nothing to do with Wi-Fi, the same would happen if you
               | had 2 Ethernet connections.
               | 
               | Your Wi-Fi and Ethernet are both network interfaces with
               | their own IP addresses - those addresses don't move when
               | you switch between interfaces. If you established an SSH
               | session while on Ethernet and then unplugged it, that
               | session will not carry over to Wi-Fi unless you change
               | your Wi-Fi interface's IP address to the wired one's and
               | that both networks are on the same L2 segment (typical
               | for home networks, but not always the case for
               | enterprise).
               | 
               | A potential solution is either MPTCP (which will
               | establish multiple connections over all interfaces and
               | can tolerate the loss of all but one of them) or to VPN
               | into your router and use the VPN link as your default
               | route - this means that the VPN connection might drop and
               | reconnect but your IP address to the other hosts (which
               | is actually the one of your VPN gateway) will remain
               | constant, so traffic flow will be restored as soon as
               | your VPN reconnects even if your local IP changes.
        
             | falcolas wrote:
             | It's been literal decades since I configured this (and
             | carried it forward with the rest of my dotfiles), but
             | there's a configuration setting that makes SSH
             | reconnections of existing sessions seamless. No, I don't
             | know what it is off the top of my head, let's call it an
             | exercise left to the reader.
        
             | mmwelt wrote:
             | Wouldn't be a problem if you have a Wireguard connection to
             | your router.
        
             | pxx wrote:
             | You should be using mosh regardless.
        
       | layer8 wrote:
       | TIL why Bluetooth is called Bluetooth:
       | 
       | > It was the epithet of King Harald Bluetooth, who united the
       | disparate Danish tribes into a single kingdom; Kardach chose the
       | name to imply that Bluetooth similarly unites communication
       | protocols.
       | [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluetooth#Name_and_logo]
       | 
       | Another thing, not mentioned in the article, is that microwave
       | ovens tend to interfere with Bluetooth in my experience.
        
         | kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote:
         | Tom Scott had one of his usual informative videos on this
         | 
         | https://youtu.be/VdmQp9M9jUo
        
         | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
         | Not just your experience. I worked for a company that made a
         | lot of wireless devices. We had a pretty open-plan office and
         | learned not to test anything around lunchtime.
         | 
         | Seriously. There were many times that I was working on
         | something that suddenly had a spike in the receive failure rate
         | and I'd look at the time and realize that somebody was heating
         | up their lunch in the microwave.
        
         | JonathonW wrote:
         | And WiFi. And anything else that might happen to operate in the
         | 2.4 GHz ISM band (like some cordless phones, back in the day).
        
         | falcolas wrote:
         | It absolutely does. Especially if folks are in the habit of
         | opening the door before the microwave shuts itself down.
        
       | jchw wrote:
       | A little pro-tip for those about to run wires through your walls:
       | use shielded cables. Also, probably don't run them anywhere near
       | AC wire. Some people recommend a full stud between them, whereas
       | the NEC allows them to be run next to eachother as long as there
       | is at least 50mm of clearance.
       | 
       | I think this is usually recommended for safety reasons, to
       | prevent mistakes from causing high voltage to get into your low
       | voltage runs and become a shock hazard or potentially start a
       | fire. But, I have noticed empirically that running a bit too
       | close with the wrong cable does absolutely result in some serious
       | interference issues. So... your wired connections are not free of
       | signal issues either, especially if you want to neatly run them
       | in-wall.
       | 
       | edit: also, worth noting that this is a highly U.S. centric piece
       | of advice. I mean I'm sure it applies elsewhere, but both
       | electrical systems and construction differences probably make
       | some of the details very different, and I'm not cultured enough
       | to know exactly which and how.
        
         | fulafel wrote:
         | Ethernet on copper cabling doesn't seem to be keeping up,
         | shielded or not, previous and current gen ethernet (10g/100g)
         | over copper is really power hungry or nonexistent.
        
           | jchw wrote:
           | Consumer devices hardly even have 10Gbit, and often don't
           | even have WiFi 6. Even if they did, my NAS running on
           | spinning rust is not bottlenecked on network bandwidth even
           | slightly, and affording the amount of switching fabric
           | necessary to sustain 10Gbit across all my devices is not
           | economical right now.
           | 
           | I mean, this might be different for fiber in some regards,
           | but I doubt that is terribly economical either.
        
             | thfuran wrote:
             | How is your nas not bottlenecked by 1gbps? I'd expect
             | pretty much any modern single hdd to have a sequential read
             | speed over 120 MBps, let alone an array.
        
               | jchw wrote:
               | Well, I have a few comments.
               | 
               | - It is true that a modern HDD has over 120 MBps
               | sequential read, but not by much: 4GiB WD Reds are
               | probably somewhere around 150-160 MB/s.
               | 
               | - Sequential speeds aren't really that practically useful
               | for me. While I do have some large files, most workloads
               | are going to involve smaller files and a lot more
               | seeking.
               | 
               | - When using a filesystem with parity, like btrfs or zfs,
               | you definitely have some overhead for writing and
               | checking parity. I'm sure it's still very fast, but it is
               | overhead, and NASes don't tend to be the most cutting
               | edge compute boxes.
               | 
               | - Even if some RAID configurations might improve
               | performance, the configuration I am using has a fair bit
               | of overhead. I suspect you need something like RAID 0 or
               | 10 for maximum performance, but those setups are
               | inflexible compared to RAIDZ or Synology SHR.
               | 
               | - As it is now, my NAS is unable to saturate the network
               | bandwidth using Samba alone. It just never reaches a
               | gigabit. Part of this is probably related to Samba or the
               | CIFS protocol, but honestly I don't know if it has the
               | raw CPU muscle.
               | 
               | All in all, I am not too concerned about it. It is
               | possible that I could yield better performance with 10
               | GbE, but I don't think it would matter for most of my use
               | cases. Plus, disk resources are definitely being consumed
               | by background tasks as it is.
        
             | fulafel wrote:
             | Consumer NAS and laptops[1] do have it and with SSDs the
             | story is different.
             | 
             | [1] Or more accurately, as laptops dropped builtin ethernet
             | ports, the kind of ethernet you use got decoupled from the
             | laptop model.
        
               | jchw wrote:
               | My M1 Mac Mini only supports 1Gbit. My Synology NAS only
               | has 1Gbit ports, and while I do have the 10Gbit interface
               | card for it, using that prevents you from using NVMe
               | cache, and with SATA, even a good SSD will have trouble
               | saturating SATA due to the exact reasons NVMe exists. My
               | phone is too old for Wifi 6, My surface laptop 4 has Wifi
               | 6, but no thunderbolt port; just a _single_ USB 3.1 port.
               | Technically enough for 10 GbE, assuming you didn't need
               | absolutely anything else on that port.
               | 
               | Then you need 10Gbit network equipment. A 10Gbit switch
               | with more than 8 ports is going to be expensive and
               | consume a pretty ridiculous amount of energy. It would be
               | difficult to argue that there is any truly "consumer
               | grade" 10GbE equipment; almost all of it comes in sizes
               | designed to fit in racks... Wifi 6 APs exist, but my AP-
               | HD isn't, because it wasn't purchased that long ago,
               | still works, and I have had no good reason to replace it.
               | Not to mention the actual speeds I get on WiFi are never
               | even close to the theoretical speeds, making it seem
               | unlikely it could even saturate my 1GbE setup in
               | practice.
               | 
               | Although I do have some 10GbE equipment, even directly
               | connecting devices together I have found that many of my
               | devices, of which many are consumer-grade, already
               | bottleneck elsewhere and can't even come close to
               | saturation. So as of today, 10GbE does not seem to be a
               | huge win for most users, even if they do own some
               | equipment that can do it.
        
         | walterbell wrote:
         | Some of the "shielded" ethernet cables on Amazon are
         | questionable.
         | 
         | Monoprice sells double-shielded (SFTP) enterprise-grade cables
         | directly.
        
           | thfuran wrote:
           | Pretty much everything sold on Amazon these days is
           | questionable. A lot of their Ethernet cables are definitively
           | trash though.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | wwweston wrote:
       | This is one reason why I'm still down on Apple's decision to
       | remove 1/8" audio jacks from iPhones: they took away a decades
       | old "just works" standard that wasn't subject to interference or
       | battery or latency issues and replaced it with something that
       | fundamentally is. Their efforts at filing down the sharp edges
       | here with the airpods (and they have done as well as anyone could
       | expect and more) don't change the fundamentals.
       | 
       | "Get a dongle" -- maybe I will when I finally give up my original
       | iPhone SE, but I'm not going to be cheerful about paying an extra
       | $30 for the privilege along with the overhead of keeping track of
       | an additional thing.
        
         | TimTheTinker wrote:
         | If I'm not mistaken, removing the 1/8" audio jacks was
         | significant in enabling the IP67+ water resistance ratings
         | iPhones have these days.
         | 
         | That rating comes in handy for those who have butter fingers
         | like me and drop their phones in water once in a while.
        
           | ozfive wrote:
           | Couldn't a rubber gasket on the 1/8" jack help with water
           | resistance?
        
             | tablespoon wrote:
             | > Couldn't a rubber gasket on the 1/8" jack help with water
             | resistance?
             | 
             | Couldn't the jack itself be made to be water resistant?
             | Seal it up and use relatively inert metals for the
             | contacts.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | throwaway821909 wrote:
               | Yes, there are plenty of phones that have IP68 & 3.5mm
               | without any rubber flaps etc., not to start a flamewar
               | but it's strange to me that a lot of people seem to think
               | they would be a necessary tradeoff... Apple had other
               | reasons to get rid of it.
               | 
               | https://www.gsmarena.com/sony_xperia_1_iii-10712.php
               | https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_s10-9536.php
        
           | boolemancer wrote:
           | I have a phone from 3 years ago with both an IP68 rating and
           | a headphone jack. There's zero reason that Apple couldn't do
           | the same, they just wanted to convince a lot of people to buy
           | $150 headphones.
        
             | BenjiWiebe wrote:
             | My Galaxy S5 is IP67, has headphone jack and user
             | replaceable battery. 8 years old.
             | 
             | If it was possible then it's possible now.
        
               | nomel wrote:
               | IP67 is "up to" 1m. IP68, on the iPhone12, is 6m. That's
               | a very significant difference.
        
               | eptcyka wrote:
               | S10 had a jack and an IP68 rating.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | the_third_wave wrote:
           | I'm still using a number of Motorola Defy phones from
           | 2010-2011 which are IP67+ rated (30 minutes at 1.5m water
           | depth). Needless to say they have 3.5mm headphone as well as
           | micro-USB connectors. The solution to this problem lies in a
           | simple rubber plug which closes the hole when the connector
           | is not in use.
           | 
           | Does it work? Well, one of the phones used to be my
           | daughter's. She forgot to take it out of her pocket when she
           | put her trousers in the washing machine so it ended up going
           | through a full wash and spin cycle. It still worked, there
           | was no water ingress in the phone itself. The earpiece did
           | seem to have gotten damaged so I replaced it (5 new earpieces
           | for $2.50 incl. shipping, I still have 4 left...). This phone
           | is now used as a media player, running mpd which can be
           | remotely controlled from other phones in the network. It
           | connects to my jobsite radio (an oversized and overweight
           | boombox I made around an old car MP3/CD/Radio with 2x40W
           | speakers with bass reflex and a SLA starting helper/power
           | pack) using that 3.5mm jack.
        
           | daurnimator wrote:
           | My Sony Z3 Compact back in 2014 had IP68 and a headphone
           | jack.
        
           | mackrevinack wrote:
           | no sony had waterproof headphone jacks a really long time
           | ago.
           | 
           | a lot of their phones still have headphone jacks as far as i
           | know. seems like they are the only decent company left in
           | that regard
        
         | aldebran wrote:
         | The only reason they did that is to sell more AirPods. And it
         | worked. They're making billions by selling high margin wireless
         | earphones.
        
           | mackrevinack wrote:
           | there was an obvious trend with other phone manufacturers as
           | well. as soon as they made their own brand of wireless
           | headphones/earbuds, the headphone jack was removed from their
           | phone.
        
         | bee_rider wrote:
         | It is so annoying.
         | 
         | I got the dang dongle. Now, I want to listen to a podcast while
         | doing to bed. Of course, because cellphone batteries only last
         | like 24 hours, I have to charge overnight.
         | 
         | So now I've got some big fancy inductive charger, so I can
         | leave my charging port open, to attach a dongle. But hey at
         | least Apple saved $1 and got to remove the only non-proprietary
         | port on the thing.
        
           | quickthrower2 wrote:
           | For me I think it has just reduced my podcast consumption.
           | Too much hassle now.
        
           | Gareth321 wrote:
           | No no, friend, you just need to buy this additional $35
           | accessory. Problem solved!
           | 
           | https://www.apple.com/shop/product/HLJV2ZM/B/belkin-35-mm-
           | au...
        
             | bee_rider wrote:
             | That might have been an option.
             | 
             | I had some adapters with the plug built in like that, they
             | were notably lower quality than the one without the plug,
             | but it could be that the ones I got were just some no-name
             | junk brand.
        
         | nomel wrote:
         | I have an anecdotal possible reason they were motivated: I
         | broke four screens due to my wired headphones pulling the phone
         | out of my hand/off a surface.
         | 
         | I now use AirPods, and it's, mentally, very different, since my
         | head is no longer part of my phone.
        
           | w-ll wrote:
           | I've had wired headphones save my phone from a drop
           | 
           | -\\_(tsu)_/-
           | 
           | I also use air pods now and am fairly certain this water
           | fountain i walk past daily has a short causing some sort of
           | arc that interferes with bluetooth as they always cut out
           | walking past it.
        
             | rapind wrote:
             | > I've had wired headphones save my phone from a drop
             | 
             | Same, an embarrassingly large number of times actually.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | wpietri wrote:
         | Yeah, for me it's the "additional thing". I have a few
         | different pairs of headphones depending on location and
         | purpose. They're cheap, effective, and easily replaced if they
         | fail. Having another doodad is just not appealing, whether I
         | try to keep one on the phone at all times or buy a bunch that I
         | add and remove from the headphones depending on what I'm using
         | them for.
         | 
         | I've stuck with the Pixel A series precisely because of the
         | headphone jack. I'm sad to see that once again Google is trying
         | to remove it:
         | https://www.theverge.com/2022/5/11/23067702/google-pixel-6a-...
        
           | girvo wrote:
           | My solution was to just leave the lighting-to-3.5mm adapter
           | attached to my headphones, rather than my phone. But I was
           | lucky enough that I had two dongles spare and only two sets
           | of wired headphones I cared about. Works well though.
        
             | harha wrote:
             | If they at least had USB-C, then you could use it on your
             | laptop (or at least try, never sure if any USB-C adaptors
             | ever work)
        
               | sdoering wrote:
               | They do. At least mine on a MacBook Pro as well as a
               | Lenovo Yoga and a Dell XPS 13.
               | 
               | I bought a totally cheap no name one when I got a company
               | phone without audio jack. Since then I have used it on
               | many different machines as well as (Android) phones. The
               | adapter stays with the headphones as I just would loose
               | it otherwise.
               | 
               | Edit: Typo
        
         | turtlebits wrote:
         | If you need to move around, wired headphones suck. IME,
         | interference and latency are non issues with BT. Otherwise, the
         | lighting to 3.5mm dongle works perfectly.
         | 
         | At my desk, i do have wired headphones, but they are plugged
         | into my TB dock.
        
           | kitsunesoba wrote:
           | Yeah, at my desk I use a decent pair of cans (HD6XX or K550
           | depending on situation) hooked up to a nice DAC/amp since
           | there, cords aren't much of an annoyance. Especially the type
           | on larger headphones which is thicker and far less prone to
           | tangling.
           | 
           | Away from the desk though? Bluetooth all the way. Even if I'm
           | just lounging on my bed bluetooth is better because there's
           | no wires for the cat that will most assuredly be in my lap to
           | chew.
        
             | dataqat wrote:
             | Just out of curiosity, what bluetooth do you use? There is
             | no bluetooth options on the market that don't actively
             | physically hurt my ears in a way that wired headphones
             | never ever have.
        
               | kitsunesoba wrote:
               | Prior to the pandemic it was mostly AirPods Pro, but now
               | that I spend most of my time at home it's a pair of
               | AirPods Max. In the past I've also used a pair of Sony
               | WH-1000MX3 which were pretty comfortable.
        
           | Sebb767 wrote:
           | > IME, interference and latency are non issues with BT.
           | 
           | Depends on your usecase. Music and Zoom is fine, but for
           | competitive gaming I'd always go wired.
        
             | recursive wrote:
             | Music might be fine for listening, but it is emphatically
             | not fine for playing. It's completely unusable. It's like
             | trying to talk while listening yourself 100ms delayed.
             | Probably fine for competitive gaming if you're just
             | spectating too.
        
               | vonseel wrote:
               | While off-topic, somehow Apple has screwed this up in the
               | M1 MacBook Air built-in audio hardware too. I wanted some
               | monitoring while playing acoustic the other day so I
               | opened logic and rather than connect my expensive audio
               | interface, I just wanted to use the built-in mic and
               | headphone output to monitor myself playing and singing in
               | real time. For some reason there was still an audible
               | delay even though I wasn't using plugins and had the
               | buffer set very low. I'm pretty sure it was in low
               | latency mode... you shouldn't have to use an external
               | audio interface just to do real time monitoring like that
               | such a simple use case.
        
               | recursive wrote:
               | I've been under the impression this whole time that you
               | need a specialty audio interface if you ever want to do
               | near-real-time (<10ms) monitoring or recording. I'd been
               | lead to believe years ago that default consumer audio
               | hardware just cannot do it.
               | 
               | So did that work prior to M1?
        
             | girvo wrote:
             | AptX low latency apparently makes it better (35ms is the
             | "guarantee"), but I've honestly not tried it. I'm not going
             | to make my 400FPS on a 240hz monitor low latency gaming in
             | Valorant worse by going wireless for audio.
             | 
             | Though I do use a wireless mouse (G Pro X Superlight) and
             | it's brilliant, though it's wireless adapter is attached to
             | a cord that lets me plug it in to keep going if I forgot to
             | charge it, so its the best of both worlds.
             | 
             | Really, its only my mouse that I move around enough for
             | wireless to be worth it in competitive gaming.
        
               | usednet wrote:
               | I played competitive FPS games for years at high ranks
               | with a Bluetooth headset before learning of the delay. I
               | did not notice. However, for a while I switched to a
               | Bluetooth keyboard and until I realized the input delay
               | was severely impacting my performance. Wireless mice
               | (non-Bluetooth) on the other hand have low enough latency
               | that most pros are fine using them.
               | 
               | Some advice for Bluetooth headset gamers - Bluetooth
               | completely breaks the audio for some games like
               | Battlefield 1. The only solution is to go into device
               | manager and disabling Handsfree Telephony on your device.
        
         | reaperducer wrote:
         | _I 'm not going to be cheerful about paying an extra $30_
         | 
         | $9. Not $30. If you're going to grind a three-year-old axe, at
         | least get your figures right.
         | 
         | https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MMX62AM/A/lightning-to-35...
        
           | wwweston wrote:
           | Thank you, I will now discount the economic fraction of my
           | not-cheerfulness about dongles by about 70%.
           | 
           | The axe grinding, however, was brought up by Mr Kuhn. This is
           | simply one instance of it, and the economic fraction isn't
           | even the biggest part.
        
           | samatman wrote:
           | I wish I had only bought three of those tiny things...
           | finally ended up sugruing one of them to the lav mic.
        
             | _carbyau_ wrote:
             | :-) I don't know what a lav mic is. Upon trying to figure
             | out what lav meant my mind went to "lavatory".
             | 
             | Google clarifies: Lavalier(aka Lapel) Mics. I know my
             | mental model should drop my first jumped to conclusion but
             | I find it childishly amusing.
             | 
             | So now I assume you have a lapel microphone specifically
             | set up in your toilet for zoom calls that happen to catch
             | you out.
        
               | Gigachad wrote:
               | It's a mic that clips on to your shirt like the ones news
               | reporters use.
        
         | AA-BA-94-2A-56 wrote:
         | The "dongle" is apparently a pretty good for the price audio
         | DAC. I'm generalising with my lack of knowledge, but a semi-
         | decent DAC can improve audio quality and boost volume.
         | 
         | I usually just go wireless, although it has its problems
         | especially with Spotify.
         | 
         | But if I decided to go wired, I would have no qualms about
         | going wired with the Apple USB-C audio jack dongle.
        
           | gkop wrote:
           | Yes and it's under $10, much less than $30. (I think Apple
           | subsidizes it)
        
             | moffkalast wrote:
             | Honestly if you're paying $600 for a phone, they ought to
             | just throw that into the package when you get it.
        
           | eptcyka wrote:
           | How would you connect a usb-c dongle to an iPhone?
        
             | frosted-flakes wrote:
             | The equivalent Ligtning model.
        
           | javajosh wrote:
           | Do you have a reference? I've always assumed the Apple 1/8"
           | USB-C dongle was passive.
        
             | joecool1029 wrote:
             | It's active. I use them for my android devices. They'll
             | also work as a soundcard on any laptop/desktop with usb-c
             | ports. Durability sucks but if it lasts 6 months I'm ok
             | with picking up a new one from Walmart for $7. Both my
             | phones and my IEM's cost around 100x more. When measured
             | against that, it's a good value.
             | 
             | There's a quirk that requires a script to uncap the volume
             | on Android but it's the best IEM DAC I've heard under $200.
             | I don't think they subsidize it. It's just economies of
             | scale at work. Here's a Head-Fi review and analysis of it:
             | https://www.head-fi.org/showcase/apple-usb-c-to-3-5-mm-
             | headp...
             | 
             | Edit: More context on 'fixing' the Android volume capping
             | issue for it (quirks are common for devs to add at usb-
             | audio driver level in kernel, but this is something
             | different with Android's defaults): https://forum.xda-
             | developers.com/t/guide-magisk-apple-usb-c-...
        
         | bodge5000 wrote:
         | Based off my experiences with my iPad, I'd really like an
         | iPhone, but whether its for reasons of practicality or just
         | principle at this point I refuse to cave to "just use a dongle"
         | or any of that. The few times I've used wireless audio its
         | presented me with a load of problems (having to charge
         | something Im not used to having to charge, connectivity issues,
         | poor audio quality, you know the drill) with the only upside
         | being I can move further away from the thing that fits in my
         | pocket.
         | 
         | I'm willing to use the equivalent of a dongle with my PC (audio
         | interface), but obviously thats a very different use case. I'm
         | just glad laptops haven't decided to take the "brave" action
         | yet.
        
       | FooHentai wrote:
       | Good wireless is expensive, and not maintenance free. This is at
       | least true in any business setting. At home, wireless is simply
       | fantastic for mobile devices, but wiring in fixed items (PC,
       | consoles, TVs) is 100% the way to go.
       | 
       | Also, being conscious of what's in the air space is as crucial as
       | the quality of your wireless equipment. It's all for nought if
       | your microwave, AV sender, bluetooth headset or crappy 2.4Ghz
       | wireless mouse is shitting into the same airspace as your network
       | connection.
       | 
       | I say all of this as someone that pushed HARD to switch our
       | office from wired to wireless when we moved. Aside from the
       | direct cost saving (~200k in wiring alone) the side benefits of
       | things like not having to use a crappy 'presentation PC' in each
       | meeting room was a complete revolution. You just bring your
       | laptop, and it's not even going to shit itself roaming from wired
       | to wireless because boom, you were on wireles the entire time
       | anyway. Same principle about wiring in fixed items applied
       | though, we put fancy ipad meeting room control stuff in, and
       | dropped extra on ethernet adapters for them because they're fixed
       | devices, wireless is not a good choice for that despite ipads
       | being wireless devices primarily.
       | 
       | Lack of visibility is probably the biggest shortcoming for
       | enthusiast-level home wireless. I've had good outcomes buying ex-
       | business Aruba gear and repurposing it for home use, but it's
       | power hungry and you need to know what you're doing to get it off
       | the ground. But being able to actually see what's sitting in the
       | spectrum and watch the impact of things like turning on the
       | microwave for ten seconds is a game changer.
        
       | Night_Thastus wrote:
       | I feel the exact opposite. When I was younger, I thought wireless
       | anything was terrible. Slow, inefficient, finicky, requiring
       | constant charging.
       | 
       | But since then I've realized things have changed. It's incredible
       | how much wireless and battery technology have improved in the
       | last 10+ years.
       | 
       | If you want to perform at the top level in most games, you _need_
       | a wireless mouse. It allows for significantly easier and freer
       | movement than a wired mouse, even with a bungee. Charges can last
       | for weeks, and due to faster charging can charge in an hour or
       | two.
       | 
       | And as my list of equipment and peripherals grows, I find myself
       | wishing more of them were wireless so I don't need to deal with
       | them getting tangled, needing to re-route them, them being too
       | short if I raise a desk up, etc.
       | 
       | However, there are some exceptions:
       | 
       | * Internet. The reliability problem has largely been solved if
       | you have decent quality equipment. (I have a Ubiquity Wifi 6
       | lite, and it works great) However, the delays are still there,
       | and some houses/apartment layouts and materials just aren't
       | workable. I think people overall underestimate WiFi though, as
       | most setups are very poorly done. The crappy WAP in your comcast
       | router/modem/switch/wap combo box is terrible and will never
       | perform well no matter what. But a good dedicated setup with WAPs
       | spread and placed properly will do amazing.
       | 
       | * IEMs. There are no standards for transferring high-resolution
       | uncompressed audio wirelessly right now (BlueTooth cannot do it),
       | so the only way to get the best experience is a wired IEM. This
       | isn't true for all digital audio transfer, like streaming. That
       | can be done wirelessly just fine over wifi. (IE, wirelessly
       | sending audio to a Raspberry Pi, when then sends it to a DAC,
       | etc)
       | 
       | The moment such a standard exists for IEMs, I will gladly swap
       | over. The wires constantly get tangled, are too short, get
       | damaged, or rub against things while moving leading to
       | undesirable sound coming into the ear.
        
       | panny wrote:
       | >June 2020
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23589798
        
       | wodenokoto wrote:
       | > Any program on your computer can ask your wireless card to
       | enumerate the nearby networks. This causes it to go into "polling
       | mode," where it spends less time transmitting data and more time
       | listening for routers advertising their network info
       | 
       | Except for the Wi-Fi widget I click on when I want to choose Wi-
       | Fi network, what software needs this access? I can think of two
       | use cases:
       | 
       | - A Wi-fi diagnostics application.
       | 
       | - Data collection to co-relate Wi-Fi networks and locations.
       | 
       | I don't see why the OS doesn't simply refuse going into to
       | polling except for white listed applications, because out of the
       | box there is only one application that needs to ask for polling
       | (my wi-fi widget) and I don't care if Google Maps wants to geo-
       | tag the wifi in my surroundings, so just give it the list from
       | the last whitelisted poll. And if I need a Wi-Fi diagnostic tool,
       | then I am an advanced enough user to figure out how to white list
       | it.
        
         | mod wrote:
         | A lot of smart devices create their own local wireless network
         | for setup, and manage the process of switching between them.
         | 
         | Pretty valid use case IMO.
        
       | leokennis wrote:
       | Counter point:
       | 
       | - I can move houses and just put all my WiFi mesh nodes anywhere
       | and I'm online again.
       | 
       | - I can play music from my phone while cooking, and use the phone
       | besides my stove to view the recipe simultaneously
       | 
       | - I can browse photos and create a photo book online sitting next
       | to my wife on the couch, instead of sitting at an uninspiring
       | desk in the working from home room
        
       | magic_hamster wrote:
       | Wireless is an added bonus to my router which we mostly use
       | wired. It's nice to have for guests and mobile devices.
        
       | grujicd wrote:
       | I have another problem with bluetooth - sharing. With a cable you
       | always know the device is connected to you and you only. With bt,
       | another person's device can overtake your audio even if they
       | don't mean to. They were paired once and now simple notification
       | sound can take over your bluetooth speaker. These invisible
       | connections from multiple devices are hard to track and often
       | cause problems.
        
         | bmicraft wrote:
         | I don't know what kind of headphones you have but none of mine
         | can be "taken over" while music is playing. Most don't do that.
        
           | grujicd wrote:
           | Most of my problems are with JBL Charge 4, which I often
           | share with friends. Multiple phones get paired and connected
           | during a day. Notifications definitely can stop currently
           | played music from another phone in this case.
        
         | theshrike79 wrote:
         | This is 99% a UI/UX problem, not a bluetooth or wireless issue.
        
         | HWR_14 wrote:
         | I find bluetooth sharing to be a feature. I can make my
         | headphones enumerate which devices they are connected to. They
         | can also connect to both my computer and my phone
         | simultaneously, so I can be using the computer audio mostly and
         | have my phone override the audio input/output when a call comes
         | in.
        
       | a-dub wrote:
       | lol. been saying this since 2007.
       | 
       | although wifi works pretty well in professional installs these
       | days and bluetooth earbuds were a godsend with masks.
       | 
       | bluetooth connections are still unacceptably flakey though...
       | even with top shelf name brand gear.
        
       | pkulak wrote:
       | My covid project was wiring my house with Cat-6. Getting wires
       | through existing walls is an art form, and pretty rewarding when
       | you get a run working! I'm by no means a pro now, but I do own a
       | 6-foot drill bit.
        
         | test6554 wrote:
         | Hello ladies!
        
       | swah wrote:
       | I haven't had problems with Bluetooth in a while - love my TWS
       | earbuds, RF mouse, BT mouse and BT/RF keyboard. Those devices
       | last for months/years on two AA batteries (other than the
       | headphones of course). I will concede that the audio delay
       | degrades the call experience a bit.
       | 
       | Wifi on the other hand... I have no idea if its interference or
       | the modem. It worked fine for months, then all of sudden my
       | connection went to 2Mbps. And my Chromecast can no longer connect
       | to it, etc..
        
       | sgtnoodle wrote:
       | I ventured under my 120 year old house to make a couple Ethernet
       | runs. It took a lot of meditation on my part to bear doing it. On
       | one run, I needed my wife to pull on a fish line from above, but
       | then she had to feed the baby, and so I watched an episode of
       | star trek on my phone for half an hour while wedged between wood
       | stilts.
       | 
       | 6 months later, I got a notice that the cable I used was recalled
       | for a bad UL rating. Monoprice had to pay a contractor had to
       | come out and replace it. When coordinating the work, I warned the
       | company that it was a very dirty job that would require two
       | people. They sent an older guy out all alone, and he poked around
       | for half an hour then left, saying he would come back with PPE
       | and a helper. A couple weeks later the same guy came back alone
       | and unprepared again. Finally the third time he came back with a
       | much younger guy and bunny suits, and they redid the runs.
       | 
       | I had stapled the cables up every couple meters, and followed a
       | Manhattan path based on where I could crawl to. they just fished
       | it in a straight line, and left it resting in the dirt. They
       | presumably billed Monoprice several thousand dollars...
        
         | humpday69 wrote:
         | What is a "bunny suit" in this context? The web results make me
         | wonder if there was miscommunication about hiring plumbers for
         | a "very dirty job" if you know what I mean.
        
           | can16358p wrote:
           | Now having read this comment, I can't think of anything _non-
           | dirty_.
        
           | mintplant wrote:
           | Something like this: https://www.nciclean.com/disposable-
           | bunny-suits.html
           | 
           | (For reference, I searched "bunny suit ppe" to find an
           | example.)
        
         | sgtnoodle wrote:
         | Oh, and they left the box of recalled cable that I hadn't
         | installed yet, so I have like 400ft of free but uninstallable
         | CAT6.
        
           | HWR_14 wrote:
           | Free but uninstallable CAT6 has some uses. I've seen quite a
           | few street artists use the thin copper wires to make art,
           | usually jewelry. But with 400 ft, I could see some art or
           | construction projects that make use of it as a physical not
           | electrical product.
        
             | sgtnoodle wrote:
             | It would be perfectly safe to run in a conduit or to bury.
             | It's just not rated to run between floors, but was stamped
             | saying it was. My home is single story, and I mentioned
             | that during the recall process, but the process was rather
             | rigid...
        
               | HWR_14 wrote:
               | What does "the process was rather rigid" mean? Couldn't
               | you just decline? (Although maybe it wasn't even safe for
               | your use.) But then, I don't even understand why it would
               | be safe to run _except_ between floors.
               | 
               | Also, did you try pushing back on the replacement
               | worker's work? It's a bitch to do, but I've gotten
               | companies to either redo their handyman's bad work or
               | just let me choose a vendor (which I would ask for after
               | the 2nd time he showed up.) Stapled Manhattan distance
               | wiring is not the same as diagonal through the dirt.
        
       | can16358p wrote:
       | Wireless (and LTE hotspots) gives me freedom to get my laptop and
       | work with wherever I like with my laptop.
       | 
       | I don't need cabled connections of any kind 99.9% of the time,
       | Wi-Fi, Bluetooth headset, and my laptop "just work". Any
       | stability and performance gain from using a wired setup is
       | negligible in daily life (apart from very specific tasks) and
       | convenience of wireless is far outweighing any gains of wires.
       | 
       | Been this way for many years with zero issues.
       | 
       | So yeah, I like this "trap".
        
       | nonrandomstring wrote:
       | Three notable things in this article are:
       | 
       | 1) wireless degrades by degree and is hard to debug
       | 
       | 2) it fails silently or just in non-obvious ways
       | 
       | 3) people generally have no idea how good it is supposed to work,
       | until they experience it working properly
       | 
       | I think there are many things, in life generally, but especially
       | in tech, where these qualities conspire to give people a rotten
       | time.
       | 
       | People will complain when things fail, or take action. "Graceful
       | degradation" seems like a feature, but it can keep you on a
       | slippery slope of increasing tolerance toward ever worse
       | performance.
       | 
       | The complexity, and fuzzy "connection to everything" means that
       | no one has to take responsibility. Maybe it's your neighbour? Or
       | the trees? Or the alignment of Venus and swamp gas on a full
       | moon?
       | 
       | Unless you have a full spectrum RF field meter and other very
       | expensive test gear microwaves are "black magic" to even great
       | engineers.
       | 
       | I'm sure when Apple met to discuss remotely degrading iPhone
       | performance the words "They'll never notice" were spoken.
       | Companies that sell complex services and oversell resources love
       | this combo of fuzzy, hard to measure, diffuse, naturally erratic
       | behaviour, broad tolerance, mixed with vague customer
       | expectations.
       | 
       | They prevent you from knowing, and comparing, what you should be
       | getting, and what you are getting.
       | 
       | Many recent development directions, 5G, secure enclaves,
       | encrypted updates and exfiltration (telemetry), are set to
       | increase the "random magic factor" and make gear even more
       | precarious and mysterious to the end user.
        
         | er4hn wrote:
         | I think your posting of this comment may have had a "graceful
         | degradation" for an improved user experience. Unfortunately it
         | has appeared twice with people commenting different things on
         | each thread ;)
         | 
         | edit: disregard this, I don't see the other thread anymore.
         | Maybe I was the one experiencing magic fuzz factors.
        
           | nonrandomstring wrote:
           | I blame bad wifi. :)
        
         | Nextgrid wrote:
         | > Unless you have a full spectrum RF field meter and other very
         | expensive test gear
         | 
         | You actually have that, at least for the frequency range that
         | matters: the wireless hardware in your computer.
         | 
         | Your wireless card absolutely knows how good/bad the RF
         | environment is - it wouldn't work without it. The problem is
         | that none of this information is exposed to the user.
         | 
         | The Wi-Fi "signal strength" meter is consistently useless on
         | basically every device I've tried. In fact, I wonder what would
         | it take to actually make it go down, since it's happy sitting
         | at max level even if you can't get a single packet through. I
         | guess it must be measuring RSSI, when the one that matters to
         | the user is "how many packets am I actually missing" which can
         | be obtained by keeping stats on TCP flows or pinging the
         | default gateway.
        
         | mypalmike wrote:
         | "I'm sure when Apple met to discuss remotely degrading iPhone
         | performance the words "They'll never notice" were spoken.
         | Companies that sell complex services and oversell resources
         | love this combo of fuzzy, hard to measure, diffuse, naturally
         | erratic behaviour, broad tolerance, mixed with vague customer
         | expectations."
         | 
         | I suspect Apple would prefer their products to be reliable
         | rather than erratic.
        
           | nonrandomstring wrote:
           | They quite deliberately decided to make them degraded (to
           | prolong battery life). And they were fined for it [1]. Nobody
           | mentioned erratic in that case.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51413724
        
             | ChadNauseam wrote:
             | True, although longer battery life makes a battery-powered
             | device more reliable too
        
             | jolux wrote:
             | Not just to prolong battery life, to prevent the device
             | from overdrawing the battery and shutting down when it
             | couldn't provide the same peak current as it could when
             | new.
        
               | schwartzworld wrote:
               | Other possible solutions could include: making batteries
               | easy to replace.
        
               | dijit wrote:
               | Not disagreeing.
               | 
               | This was likely a compromise from that design decision.
               | 
               | Since the slowdown was based on battery health and not
               | absolute age of the device it was (and is) still possible
               | to replace the battery.
               | 
               | But "the market" (ugh) seems to have decided that it
               | wants phones with integrated batteries, and touch
               | screens, and no physical keyboard, that are too big to
               | use with one hand.
               | 
               | So that's all we get.
               | 
               | Unless it's extremely niche.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | jolux wrote:
         | See, the alternative to what Apple did is having phones that
         | randomly shut down at peak load. I have had this happen to me
         | on a degraded battery in a cold Rochester winter. It's not fun!
         | It means I can't even trust my phone to be a phone anymore. I
         | think that is more of a "random magic factor" than things
         | getting slower.
        
           | Nextgrid wrote:
           | The right solution would be to degrade performance and _tell
           | the user_ about it, not do so silently.
        
             | jolux wrote:
             | I agree. They should have told the user to replace the
             | battery.
        
       | doommius wrote:
       | Yup. Also just mostly wireless equipment is super low quality.
       | It's easy to see this when living downtown in any larger city.
       | You'll easily be competing with 100s of other APs for the 2.4 ghz
       | wireless band. With tbr 5 and 6 ghz this is getting better but
       | there still isn't nearly enough channels.
        
       | nl wrote:
       | This "managed cables on my desk" is reason enough to stick with
       | wireless.
        
       | Duologic wrote:
       | I can really recommend cable sleeves/tubes, I use these on my
       | desk: https://www.amazon.com/Alex-Tech-10ft-Protector-
       | Sleeving/dp/...
        
         | cjohnson318 wrote:
         | Great suggestion. Q: Do these vacuum well? Or should I just
         | replace them every couple of years?
        
           | Duologic wrote:
           | I've bought them 2 years ago including a few spares, haven't
           | replaced them since (not sure what 'vacuum' means in this
           | context).
        
       | aheilbut wrote:
       | I just have a 50ft ethernet cable running across the floor.. 3
       | years and I haven't yet tripped.
        
       | 2143 wrote:
       | > For instance, on my Mac's built-in bluetooth, my mouse (a
       | Logitech MX Master) displayed noticeable jank--stopping, then
       | jumping, instead of moving smoothly.
       | 
       | Anecdata. On my Mac the MX Master 3 works flawlessly via
       | Bluetooth. However, it has janks when I use it on my recently
       | purchased ThinkPad running Linux.
       | 
       | > Similarly, when connected to Mac bluetooth, my Jabra Evolve 75
       | headset would frequently have the mic or sound drop. It (mostly)
       | worked fine on its own dongle.
       | 
       | Again, all my bluetooth headphones work fine on my Mac, but on
       | some (not all) of my Linux computers it sometimes work and
       | sometimes doesn't. I don't know if it's Linux or the hardware.
       | 
       | Also, on the aforementioned ThinkPad, when I connect a new device
       | via bluetooth the wifi disconnects and immediately reconnects 40%
       | of the time. Don't know what's up with that.
       | 
       | I've been using Linux long enough to take things like these in
       | its stride :)
       | 
       | (Btw, it was after I was issued a Mac by my employer that I
       | started using Bluetooth devices regularly; before that in Linux
       | it was mouse via IR-usb-thing, wired headphones etc.)
       | 
       | I agree with the general sentiment that wired devices are
       | inherently more reliable. But I don't know if we should
       | collectively move towards wired, or improve the reliability of
       | wireless.
        
         | notfed wrote:
         | > Again, all my bluetooth headphones work fine on my Mac, but
         | on some (not all) of my Linux computers it sometimes work and
         | sometimes doesn't.
         | 
         | The issue I'm currently dealing with is that my Bluetooth ZMK
         | keyboard works flawlessly on Linux but won't pair with a Mac. I
         | guess devices are nuanced.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | rkangel wrote:
       | I work the "Wireless and Digital Systems" division of my company.
       | Nobody distrusts wireless products like wireless engineers.
       | 
       | That said, I adore wireless headphones and would never go back.
       | Whether it's my earbuds to listen to podcasts while doing the
       | washing up, or my BT headset that I use during the day for work.
       | My BT headset (a Bose noise cancelling one) is definitely the
       | most frequent cause of call issues (now that I've fixed a
       | motherboard problem causing wifi dropouts), but it's still worth
       | it to be able to move around, still hear what's going on in the
       | call while I get a drink etc.again).
        
         | test6554 wrote:
         | Wireless is great enhancement as long as you can fall back to a
         | wired connection
        
       | mc4ndr3 wrote:
       | So use a landline phone.
       | 
       | Work at a desktop computer.
       | 
       | Listen to CD's, not broadcast radio.
       | 
       | Never use GPS.
       | 
       | Never use WiFi.
       | 
       | Never use RFID.
       | 
       | Never use Find my iPhone to recover devices.
       | 
       | Never use automotive remotes.
       | 
       | Never use TV remotes.
       | 
       | Never explore outer space.
       | 
       | Never explore underwater.
       | 
       | All must be wires.
       | 
       | Because wireless is a trap.
        
         | test6554 wrote:
         | Should I tether myself to he house when I go out to check the
         | mail or just never go outside.
        
       | alkonaut wrote:
       | Wi-Fi used to be bad around the 802.11b era. After 802.11n I
       | barely even see a need to upgrade. A cheap consumer router easily
       | covers my 2-floor house with a half dozen clients without any
       | dead spots.
       | 
       | I imagine concrete houses or congestion might be different but I
       | can't even find a reason to get a mesh system in my house.
       | 
       | Wireless mice and keyboards also work great. I use them even for
       | gaming where many swear by wired.
       | 
       | You can't hide a mouse cable thing like you can hide an internet
       | cable. It's literally on your desk no matter what you do, so the
       | upside of wireless there beats the downside. Same with wired
       | internet to a smartphone...
       | 
       | I still don't trust BT audio though.
        
       | roeles wrote:
       | > You might think this could be solved by having routers
       | automatically figure out the least interference-prone channel to
       | use, but many of them seem to be quite bad at this.
       | 
       | Partly because of the physics involved. The AP can't magically
       | sense the best channel for the clients, since it can't sense the
       | spectrum at the client's.
        
       | modeless wrote:
       | USB-C hubs or monitors with power delivery make this really easy
       | these days. One cable gets you everything. Power, display(s),
       | mouse/keyboard, Ethernet, and any other peripherals you need.
       | It's absolutely worth getting a USB Ethernet adapter. They work
       | way better than WiFi.
       | 
       | A wireless mouse is still worth it though. Logitech G305 is
       | essentially perfect IMO. Extremely reliable, extremely low
       | latency, months of battery life, reasonable price.
        
         | davidelettieri wrote:
         | I have MX Keys and MX Master 3 and couldn't be happier.
         | Bluetooth works with dongle and with integrated usb.
        
         | KennyBlanken wrote:
         | I have a wireless gaming mouse. It's never been anything but
         | completely reliable. The dongle is integrated into the charging
         | dock, which sits about two feet from the mouse.
         | 
         | I've never heard a single person complain about a wireless
         | mouse. The author is just a crank.
         | 
         | I would advise people to not get a Logitech mouse, however.
         | Their button switches are poorly made and fail much sooner than
         | any other manufacturer.
        
         | betwixthewires wrote:
         | What makes a wireless mouse worth it?
         | 
         | Also from what I've read, usb-c has a lot of interoperability
         | problems because the connector is a different standard than all
         | the different communications standards that it can be used
         | with.
        
           | smilekzs wrote:
           | My biggest gripe with wired mice is that the wire never seem
           | to cooperate --- it would drag on the table, be too stiff,
           | tangle, etc. Plus, latency for at least the dongled mice (not
           | the bluetooth ones) is low enough for me to notice.
        
       | Pxtl wrote:
       | Yeah, I still use a desktop with wired everything except headset.
       | I need my wireless headset, I pace in long meetings.
        
       | eafkuor wrote:
       | > That means that if I'm chatting with a friend in New York, the
       | audio data will take about 50ms to get from them to my computer,
       | and, say, 200ms--4x as long--to get from my computer to my ears.
       | Since high latency ruins the natural flow of conversations, I'd
       | like to eliminate as much of it as I can.
       | 
       | For whatever reason this isn't a problem for me. I work with a
       | laptop connected to my WiFi, use bluetooth headphones, and have
       | 2-3h of meetings per day. Not a problem whatsoever.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | test6554 wrote:
       | I built my house with this guy's new mindset. There's 2 Ethernet
       | jacks in every room. Even the closets, bathrooms, and garage. I
       | have 3 wifi routers with matching SSIDs as well, because we're
       | not animals... but everything can be wired if I want it to be.
       | 
       | Also, this guy's "cable management", haha.
        
       | causality0 wrote:
       | I ran a sixty foot HDMI cable and a powered USB extension cable
       | through my crawlspace from my office desktop to my living room
       | television. Relaxing on the couch is so much better than sitting
       | at a desk.
        
       | jrockway wrote:
       | Yeah, I've never really seen the appeal. Wires are just so
       | reliable. I am always in meetings with "sorry, my headphones
       | died, can you repeat that" or people mysteriously vanishing
       | because their laptop can't charge as fast as Zoom draws power and
       | their computer just dies. I have a wired mic, headphones, and
       | power, and it just never breaks.
       | 
       | Wireless is just temporary, if you have wireless headphones, you
       | have to plug in a wire to charge them. If your computer has a
       | battery built in, you have to plug it in every day to charge. So
       | it's just an extra chore that makes your life worse. Not that
       | exciting.
       | 
       | Maybe everyone fantasizes about being a digital nomad. I do not.
       | I have a great desk, chair, keyboard, and 3 monitors. I couldn't
       | work without them. If I want to see the world, I'll go do that
       | without bringing my computer. A vacation with your computer is
       | just work.
       | 
       | A question I'm asked is "what if there's a power outage" but we
       | have had about 10 total minutes of power outage here in Brooklyn
       | in the 10 years I've lived here (during Hurricane Sandy). My
       | thought is I just won't do any work if there isn't any power. We
       | waste an hour a day dealing with wireless not working, 10 minutes
       | every 10 years is no big deal. ("But what if it's the big one!?"
       | Then my ISP's backup batteries will also be drained and I still
       | can't work.)
        
         | mewse wrote:
         | > people mysteriously vanishing because their laptop can't
         | charge as fast as Zoom draws power and their computer just dies
         | 
         | This doesn't seem to have anything to do with your "wires are
         | more reliable" thesis, does it? A laptop with onboard devices
         | drawing wall/battery power would be drawing _more_ power than
         | if those devices each have their own separate batteries, right?
        
           | CrazyStat wrote:
           | >A laptop with onboard devices drawing wall/battery power
           | would be drawing more power than if those devices each have
           | their own separate batteries, right?
           | 
           | Not necessarily, because the laptop has to do additional work
           | transmitting Bluetooth/whatever for the wireless devices. In
           | any case, his thesis appears to include preferring a
           | permanently wired desktop computer to a laptop, as well as
           | preferring wired peripherals to wireless.
           | 
           | Personally I use mostly wired peripherals, but I am a sucker
           | for a wireless headset. Being able to stay on a call while I
           | walk over to the other side of the room to grab something is
           | a great freedom, and plugging the headset in at night is not
           | a big deal.
        
             | theshrike79 wrote:
             | The "additional work" required to transmit a Bluetooth
             | signal is insignificant compared to the amount of power
             | needed just for the display being on.
             | 
             | My current setup is two USB-C laptops, one for work, one
             | for personal use. When I switch from work mode to My Time
             | Mode, I just swap one USB-C cable from one to the other -
             | all the peripherals follow. Trackpad is wired, keyboard is
             | wired. Headphones wireless - I broke way too many wired
             | headphones by snagging them on crap while moving around.
        
               | CrazyStat wrote:
               | > The "additional work" required to transmit a Bluetooth
               | signal is insignificant compared to the amount of power
               | needed just for the display being on.
               | 
               | The relevant comparison would be the power required to
               | transmit and receive Bluetooth vs the power required to
               | power a wired peripheral (e.g. mouse, keyboard,
               | headphones) where the wireless version would have its own
               | batteries.
        
             | maccard wrote:
             | > I am a sucker for a wireless headset. Being able to stay
             | on a call while I walk over to the other side of the room
             | to grab something is a great freedom, and plugging the
             | headset in at night is not a big deal.
             | 
             | Agreed. My last job had a bi monthly all hands meeting at
             | 4pm on a Thursday, I used to just stick my headphones on
             | and make dinner during it.
        
         | ziml77 wrote:
         | Wireless headsets are something I understand because I'm
         | someone who never wants to go back to wired headsets. I always
         | hated being tethered to my device by my head. And when they
         | were off my head I would always end up snagging on the cord in
         | some way and pulling them to the floor. And I am often in calls
         | with people where I want to get up and grab something or even
         | do something else. It's very nice to be able to just stand up
         | and walk away from my PC while still being able to hear and
         | talk.
         | 
         | The fact that they need to be charged doesn't matter. My
         | current ones have a swappable battery with the battery that's
         | not in use able to be charged by slotting it into the wireless
         | reciever that sits on the desk. But there's also newer wireless
         | headsets that have 30-40 hours of battery life. So you only
         | need to plug them in overnight (or every few days depending on
         | usage).
        
           | mbeex wrote:
           | > Wireless headsets are something I understand because I'm
           | someone who never wants to go back to wired headsets.
           | 
           | That's also true for me. Ultimately, I think it's a matter of
           | using good judgment. All my major devices - even laptops -
           | run on cables by default, tablets/phones wireless of course.
           | For keyboards and mouses (OK, not WiFi in a strict sense) it
           | depends.
        
         | RajT88 wrote:
         | Crimping ethernet is a mandatory tech skill for every geeky
         | homeowner. It's not that hard, but there's a few things it
         | takes a while to figure out are really important. Once you do
         | that, you can do it really consistently.
         | 
         | Wireless is nice and all. Powerline ethernet is great when it
         | works out of the box, and a Kafkaesque nightmare when it does
         | not.
        
           | toast0 wrote:
           | You don't even need to crimp unless you really want to.
           | Everything should go to punchdown blocks, either on the room
           | jacks or a patch panel. Crimping is for the patch cables, if
           | you can find manufactures cables for less, no need to make
           | your own.
        
             | RajT88 wrote:
             | I guess I included punchdowns in that. Both punchdowns and
             | crimping have subtle things to do which are important to
             | make it consistent.
        
           | vonseel wrote:
           | I suspect the biggest barrier to most homeowners running
           | Ethernet besides not knowing that it's not that difficult is
           | insulated walls. Running some cables through walls without
           | insulation to the attic and making some drops is not problem,
           | but if you have insulation in the way the job is a lot more
           | difficult.
        
             | RajT88 wrote:
             | I do acknowledge that there are many small (big) barriers.
             | 
             | I am on my second home, the first was a condo where I had
             | no access to the "above" or the "below", only the "within".
             | 
             | Phone lines had been run, so I thought I could attach Cat5
             | to the phone lines and pull them through -- but the
             | previous owner had decided to wall up the phone jacks. No
             | idea where they were, and no access to the "above" part.
             | 
             | Let's just say - I tried a lot of things to figure out
             | where the walled up phone lines were, but never could get
             | to the level of confidence you would want before you start
             | knocking random holes in the wall in a property you own.
             | 
             | Powerline Ethernet was a godsend - for a while. Then one
             | day (7ish years) it started struggling, and eventually
             | couldn't stay connected. To untangle that was going to be
             | hundreds of dollars of hardware and research and/or
             | contractors (side note: have you tried asking an
             | electrician to assess Powerline Ethernet issues?) -- I went
             | wireless at that point.
             | 
             | New house maybe a year back after getting married (yay!).
             | Ran ethernet. Used these guys:
             | 
             | https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00404UATS
             | 
             | Yeah, I drilled some holes in the wood floor. I am not that
             | rich, nor is my neighborhood, it's a non-issue. Game
             | consoles, NAS devices and work computers have ethernet.
             | Everything else less hungry (or important) like a tablet or
             | mobile has wireless. Life is good.
        
         | ajmurmann wrote:
         | I absolutely love the idea of working for a month from one
         | place and a month from another. But the problems you call out
         | are very real and I'm honestly shocked that nobody had solved
         | them to take advantage of the fact that relatively wealthy
         | techies can now work from everywhere. Airbnbs will advertise
         | Wi-Fi and maybe a tiny desk with a kitchen chair. I'd pay a
         | premium for a place with Ethernet, a real desk, a real desk
         | chair and a proper, external screen. I worked for a few weeks
         | from my parent's house in Germany, but even that required need
         | to ship them a long Ethernet cable, a screen and keyboard ahead
         | of time. I don't want to buy all this every time I want to work
         | a few weeks remotely.
        
         | 112233 wrote:
         | > Wires are just so reliable.
         | 
         | Not in my experience. Ethernet cables have bern reliable, but
         | most have connector latches that self destruct.
         | 
         | HDMI cables are a lottery, and the prize is in no way related
         | to the ticket price.
         | 
         | mini/micro USB connectors go out in about year, depending on
         | use.
         | 
         | All 3.5 mm audio cables seem to have half-life of around 4
         | months, regardless of price. The only survivour cable came as
         | an extension with old Sennheiser earbuds.
         | 
         | In comparison, I have yet to experience those bad bluetooth
         | earbuds just stopping to work.
         | 
         | [edit] not to mention all the equipment with soldered-in cables
         | that are either too long or too short and cannot be replaced.
         | Hi, homepod mini!
        
           | kuschku wrote:
           | I've got ethernet cables that I've been using since 2011
           | without them breaking. My headphones are in fact from 2008,
           | all I've got to do is replace the leather pads every 5 years.
           | 
           | I'm still using the USB-C cables from my Nexus 5X today, no
           | problem with them.
           | 
           | With HDMI cables I just buy them, connect them to my GPU and
           | wait for the AMD driver to tell me the maximum bandwidth they
           | support. Super easy way to measure what they'll support and
           | what not. So now I've got a dozen that work at 4K 60Hz HDR
           | just fine.
           | 
           | On the other hand, I've never been able to get a single
           | bluetooth device to sync reliably for more than 5 minutes.
        
             | 112233 wrote:
             | > I've got ethernet cables that I've been using since 2011
             | without them breaking.
             | 
             | Me too. My problem is going to store and finding such
             | cables, that will last 10 years.
             | 
             | > My headphones are in fact from 2008
             | 
             | That reminds me. When I was complaining about 3.5 mm cables
             | in one music store, how my only good cable is from
             | earphones I bought ~20 years ago, the store person went,
             | like, "of course it won't break if it was made back then!
             | why do you expect to buy something like that now, they
             | ain't now making any"
        
             | maccard wrote:
             | > On the other hand, I've never been able to get a single
             | bluetooth device to sync reliably for more than 5 minutes.
             | 
             | That sounds pretty unbelievable to me - even the cheapest
             | crappiest Bluetooth devices can pair with the cheapest
             | crappiest USB Bluetooth adapter reliably for more than 5
             | minute's.
             | 
             | Headphones snag, the jacks get wobbly, theyre fixed lengths
             | (standing desks mean they need to be long enough to move
             | now so they're messy unless you do a bunch of extra work).
             | Ive got problems with interference with my wired mouse that
             | seems to cause stuttering if I use a specific usb port, but
             | maybe once every 2-3 weeks or so the port I do use just
             | doesn't recognize the device so I have to un plug it and
             | plug it back in. Bluetooth may not be perfect but it's
             | tidy, easy to use, well supported, reasonably reliable, and
             | good enough quality for 98% of my use cases.
        
               | kuschku wrote:
               | I'm not sure what's causing it, but I just can't get a
               | DualShock 4 to sync reliably. Or the WH1000MX3 from my
               | partner. And with the Jabra headphones I had for work, I
               | always had to use their dongle because it would never
               | sync reliably.
               | 
               | I'm intentionally already using https://ark.intel.com/con
               | tent/www/de/de/ark/products/189347/... as WiFi/Bluetooth
               | card on all my computers, but I still can't get anything
               | to sync reliably.
               | 
               | In the end I just gave up and now I use the dualshock 4
               | with cables. And for headphones, I'll continue using my
               | wired sennheisers from 2008 (I checked and updated the
               | year in the previous post as well).
               | 
               | The Dualshock 4 gets about a minute at best before I get
               | suddenly random input from it and it stops working.
               | That's with a genuine Sony DS4, second version.
               | 
               | I actually still use wireless mice, but only the ones
               | with custom dongles.
        
           | gmueckl wrote:
           | This post makes me wonder what I do differently. I've some
           | cables wired up here that are easily 5+ years old and I've
           | had micro USB charging ports survive daily plug/unplug cycles
           | for 4 years. My number one cause for cable-related
           | malfunction is when I don't plug something in correctly.
           | 
           | I think the mouse that feasted on cable insulation in my
           | backpack may actually have made it to second place. That's an
           | entirely different story...
        
         | can16358p wrote:
         | I like spending time around my house, sometimes in garden,
         | sometimes around a coffee shop, some work/some socializing/free
         | time.
         | 
         | This can't be possible (at least practically) with a wired
         | setup. I've almost never ran out of battery on my laptop or
         | headphones and never have issues with Wi-Fi (worst case I have
         | wireless hotspot on phone anyway).
         | 
         | I don't see any problem with a wireless setup other than
         | convenience, where the extra capacity/reliability of wires
         | isn't needed 99.9% of the time anyway.
        
           | varajelle wrote:
           | It's not all black and white. Wireless sure has its uses.
           | 
           | > I don't see any problem with a wireless
           | 
           | One of the problem explained in the article is that you may
           | not realize the problems.
           | 
           | ---
           | 
           | So the idea would be to use wires by default (when sitting at
           | your desk), and switch to wireless when you want mobility.
        
             | can16358p wrote:
             | I know the potential "problems" in the article but I've
             | never encountered them.
             | 
             | Literally never.
             | 
             | I'm actually quite surprised that people still have
             | problems with wireless devices in this age.
             | 
             | Even if I had a desk, I'd probably only plug my laptop to
             | prevent battery cycles (and to keep ready for when I wanted
             | to move) but would never bother with Ethernet, or a wired
             | mouse, or headphone jack for example. Any additional
             | latency/performance problem is imperceivable for daily
             | tasks (unless I am a professional esports gamer or trying
             | to download a huge blob over a gigabit connection as fast
             | as possible, which is probably not 99.9% of people do).
        
               | xeyownt wrote:
               | Strange analysis.
               | 
               | You basically say that you don't care about
               | latency/performance loss, but are surprised that people
               | still have problems. Maybe because these persons do care?
        
               | can16358p wrote:
               | While downloading/uploading something there will be no
               | practical difference between Wi-Fi and Ethernet unless
               | you are on a superfast Gigabit fiber.
               | 
               | While on a Zoom meeting the latency introduced by
               | Bluetooth, while slightly perceivable, isn't of an issue
               | over the latency of being connected over the web itself.
               | 
               | Any wireless system would have more or less be less
               | performant than a wired equivalent. What I'm saying is
               | that for 99% of the people in 99% of daily use cases,
               | that difference wouldn't matter.
        
               | mintyten wrote:
               | I have about a 300 Mbps connection with my ISP. The
               | gateway/AP provided by the ISP is located on the second
               | floor of the house. On the first floor, the connection is
               | degraded to the point streaming will occasionally
               | stutter.
               | 
               | On the second floor the difference in speed tests going
               | through cable vs 10 ft. away through one thin wall on my
               | gaming pc is 250 Mbps -> 24 Mbps. There can absolutely be
               | a practical difference in daily use.
               | 
               | Most people do not have multiple APs, most people are not
               | getting APs other than what is provided by the ISP.
        
               | can16358p wrote:
               | Multi stories have that problem (probably because of the
               | shape of antennas designed), it can be easily solved by a
               | gigabit ethernet cable and another AP.
               | 
               | While definitely not ideal, it's a solve-once-and-forget
               | problem.
        
               | Dylan16807 wrote:
               | Well the problem is your access point, not a vague
               | 'wireless'. I can max out my internet connection through
               | a couple walls. And while I had to get my own AP, I would
               | have had to get my own cable if I wasn't doing wireless.
               | They didn't include any that can reach between rooms.
        
               | Dylan16807 wrote:
               | You misread. They specifically don't care about
               | _imperceivable_ problems.
        
         | turtlebits wrote:
         | The ability to not be tethered to your computer desk/office is
         | a big one reason to use a laptop. Your computer isn't just for
         | doing work.
         | 
         | I think a good balance is a laptop with a single wire to
         | USB-C/Thunderbolt dock, with external monitors and wired
         | peripherals, ethernet.
         | 
         | If you move around, wired headphones are a PITA, Airpods have
         | pretty much solved wireless audio for me (especially consistent
         | device switching).
        
         | throwawayboise wrote:
         | I don't have too many issues with WiFi, but my house is sort of
         | isolated. I don't have much if any interference from neighbors.
         | If I lived in an apartment complex with 10 or more different
         | WiFi networks in the same airspace it might be different.
         | 
         | Bluetooth on the other hand is an absolute no-go. I have had
         | uniformly bad experiences with it, and refuse to use any device
         | that depends on a bluetooth connection.
        
           | Gigachad wrote:
           | I live in a high rise and it still isn't an issue. The floors
           | and walls block out almost all wireless signals. I can see a
           | handful of networks but they are all on 1 bar strength. On
           | speed tests I can reasonably get 600mbps on wifi.
        
             | bbarnett wrote:
             | I think your building was in the original ghostbusters
             | movie.
        
               | Gigachad wrote:
               | Maybe.. interestingly I was sitting on the balcony and
               | noticed the video call cutting out. Did a speed test,
               | 6Mbps, I open up the glass sliding door and suddenly it's
               | full speed again. Kinda shocked a pane of glass was
               | enough to completely cripple wifi.
        
               | gonzo wrote:
               | (Metallic) tint.
        
               | Gigachad wrote:
               | Interesting. I think you are right. That would explain
               | why buildings look a lot like walls of mirrors.
        
         | AussieWog93 wrote:
         | >I am always in meetings with "sorry, my headphones died, can
         | you repeat that" or people mysteriously vanishing because their
         | laptop can't charge as fast as Zoom draws power and their
         | computer just dies.
         | 
         | You're missing the point. Wireless technology failing is a
         | fantastic excuse to get out of Zoom meetings!
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | recursive wrote:
         | For me the appeal is that I don't need to figure out how to run
         | wires all over my house, or have them stapled to the walls or
         | something. Wifi works well enough that I would never get to a
         | net positive after considering the ethernet wrangling project
         | inconvenience.
        
           | Gigachad wrote:
           | Wireless makes cleaning and vacuuming so much easier. Also
           | means I can walk around while in calls. And it just works
           | well enough that the times it doesn't are more than made up
           | for the times it does work.
        
           | vonseel wrote:
           | WiFi is fine for most consumers, it's only really a problem
           | if you have a big enough of a house to need multiple APs with
           | wired backhaul, but the cabling isn't there so you go with
           | wireless backhaul / meshing. Wired backhaul always works
           | better in my experience.
        
             | recursive wrote:
             | If my house were that big, I would seriously consider only
             | having connectivity in half the house. But fortunately (?)
             | that's a first world problem I don't have.
        
         | notacoward wrote:
         | Reliable, yes. Easy to implement? Not necessarily. If you don't
         | own the property, you might not be _allowed_ to run your own
         | wires. Even if you do own it, some houses make it more
         | difficult /expensive than others to run wires everywhere they
         | need to be (e.g. consider formerly-external walls full of
         | obstructions in an older house). Let's not make the classic HN
         | mistake of assuming everyone's overpaid, able/willing to pay
         | for the privilege of owning the right kind of property. My
         | family does pretty well with a combination of Ethernet, G.hn
         | powerline, and wireless. Then again, we don't subscribe to the
         | Apple groupthink either so MacOS's misbehavior is not an issue
         | for us.
        
           | olyjohn wrote:
           | Please. It's not a privilege to run Ethernet any more than
           | having Internet and a laptop is a privilege. A spool is like
           | $100, and you don't need to drill gigantic holes and run 60
           | wires back to a central drop to a 10 gig switch. I have run
           | Ethernet cables in all my rentals (even when I was working
           | minimum wage), usually only need 1 or 2 at the most. It's not
           | rocket science either. You can go around the outside of your
           | house, just like how a cable TV or phone installer will do
           | it.
           | 
           | Landlords never notice or care. Just don't make it look
           | shitty, they will just think it's a phone jack anyways.
        
             | RajT88 wrote:
             | > A spool is like $100
             | 
             | For the good stuff! Half or less for the last gen 5e. This
             | is Menard's retail pricing too.
        
             | notacoward wrote:
             | So, your argument is that you casually violated your rental
             | agreements? And you don't see how that reeks of
             | entitlement? It might play well to this particular
             | audience, but people who are less technical and less
             | libertarian than the average HNer might find it less
             | convincing.
        
               | theshrike79 wrote:
               | I you're really paranoid you can use that fancy 3M tape
               | that pulls off cleanly to install some clean cord
               | covers[0] wherever you want. Most come with their own
               | adhesive, that might leave some marks, but it'll come off
               | with a slight scrub.
               | 
               | When you move, just remove them and install them in the
               | next place - or have a chat with your landlord and leave
               | them for the next tenant.
               | 
               | [0] https://www.amazon.com/s?k=cord+cover
        
               | jethro_tell wrote:
               | idk, man, I rented for 15 years and just used thumb tacks
               | to hold the cable in the corner of the ceiling, wall,
               | floor/wall to push them around to where I needed to be.
               | The hole that levees is quit difficult to see, you just
               | pull the pins and coil the cable and walk away. Renters
               | have been doing stuff like that with cable before
               | internet too. Living in an apartment means you probably
               | can't/don't want to run cables in the walls for someone
               | else, but people have been running cables around
               | apartments for years because you just have to do your
               | thing.
               | 
               | I still find wired Ethernet to be a better experience all
               | around though I do have a pretty decent wireless setup
               | and I do roam quite a bit as well.
        
               | Chris2048 wrote:
               | He didn't say he violated rental agreements, in fact he
               | explicitly said the landlord doesn't care. It seems it's
               | _you_ who has a chip on your shoulder about HN that you
               | have to cram entitlement into the situation.
        
               | notacoward wrote:
               | You say chip on the shoulder. I say low tolerance for
               | entirely predictable BS.
               | 
               | When I was poorer, even the "minor" cost of cables would
               | have meant even more missed meals. (Fortunately that
               | wasn't an issue because residential internet wasn't a
               | thing back then, but you get the idea.) Losing a security
               | deposit would have been an absolute disaster. I went to
               | court twice to avoid exactly that, and could well have
               | ended up homeless had I not prevailed. Not every landlord
               | is forgiving, and not everyone has the option to
               | prioritize freedom to make modifications over things like
               | location, price, square footage, etc. Being able to shrug
               | off costs and risks that loom larger for others is
               | practically the definition of privilege.
               | 
               | Even among the more affluent, not everyone would put up
               | with visible wires in every room and on every side of the
               | exterior, _or_ with the effort /expense of "doing it
               | right" by fishing through walls with multiple
               | obstructions. They might well prefer the tradeoffs
               | represented by wireless, even if it's not perfect. Do you
               | use landline phones because you never have to worry about
               | being in a dead zone? Different people, different
               | choices. That's all I'm saying, but somehow people who
               | _can 't conceptualize_ that other people aren't exactly
               | like them think that any choice other than their own
               | deserves an inquisition.
        
         | nso95 wrote:
         | >We waste an hour a day dealing with wireless not working
         | 
         | seems unlikely
        
       | chazeon wrote:
       | I agree very much with what Ben have said. In my experience, I
       | elect to use my once Bluetooth noice-cancelling overhead phone
       | with a 3.5mm cable plugged, and voice from webcam. Life with Zoom
       | are much improved than using it as wireless headset.
        
       | zzo38computer wrote:
       | I prefer all wired connections. Many things are wireless but I
       | use wired as much as possible. I have a wired internet
       | connection, keyboard, mouse, display, telephone, etc. We can
       | clearly know what it is connected to without needing
       | configuration, there is less wireless interference, spying, etc.
       | 
       | The radio is wireless, but that is public broadcast and is not a
       | connection to a specific device. Sometimes it is unreliable, but
       | that is not much of a problem in this case.
        
       | cjohnson318 wrote:
       | There's a tradeoff with wired headphones. Sometimes they act like
       | their own antenna, and if you live in an area with _very_ poor
       | reception, then that becomes a huge problem. In that scenario,
       | bluetooth earbuds are actually preferable, until they run out of
       | battery mid-call.
        
         | salawat wrote:
         | That would be a problem... Why? You're wired.
        
         | BenjiWiebe wrote:
         | Not saying this is impossible, but it doesn't make sense to me.
         | 
         | The phone antenna isn't a straight piece of wire entwined with
         | your cable (probably not even parallel with it), and your cable
         | isn't connected to the antenna port.
         | 
         | How would the cable block the signal?
        
           | betwixthewires wrote:
           | So they do share ground, which is where the interference
           | comes from. You might find sometimes even stereo sound
           | speakers pick up a ticking noise right when you receive a
           | phone call. This is pretty common with speaker systems, wired
           | headphones being a type of speaker system.
           | 
           | Also, a lot of SoCs with FM antennas use the 3.5mm ground as
           | the antenna, so they are wired into the SoC in such a way
           | that they can receive undesired interference.
        
           | cyral wrote:
           | Maybe they mean the noise you can hear from the phone as it
           | communicates. I wonder if it is more pronounced when
           | reception is bad as it searches for other towers? I had wired
           | headphones + mic with an amplifier for a while and if I put
           | my phone anywhere near it you'd hear the classic GSM buzz.
        
       | anonu wrote:
       | Yet were moving quickly to millimeter wave 5G tech... which
       | apparently doesn't have the same congestion issues that WiFi or
       | other older cell technologies do.
        
       | kazinator wrote:
       | > _Most Bluetooth headsets introduce around 150-300ms of latency
       | (the time between my computer receiving the audio from the
       | Internet, and the sound coming out of the headphones)_
       | 
       | I must have an incredible $10 BT speaker (used for quiet TV
       | listening at night). I don't see any delay versus the regular
       | audio (plan old 1/8" audio jack out of Android box, to stereo).
       | You would notice 150-300 ms as serious lip synch issue.
        
         | lxgr wrote:
         | Modern Bluetooth devices can communicate their internal
         | latency, and modern AV stacks use that figure plus known
         | physical layer latencies to delay the video just enough to
         | compensate for that.
         | 
         | For interactive audio like games or video conferencing, this
         | doesn't work of course.
        
           | can16358p wrote:
           | And recording music.
           | 
           | Working on Logic (just hobbyist here) and gaming are the only
           | two activities that I connect my wireless headset via USB C.
           | The latency (because of Bluetooth protocol itself) is too
           | much.
           | 
           | For Zoom calls it doesn't affect me much.
        
         | boolemancer wrote:
         | If you're watching non-interactive content, the device can just
         | play the audio a little ahead of the video to keep things
         | synchronized.
         | 
         | I've noticed this with YouTube where sometimes the audio gets
         | out of sync when listening on bluetooth headphones and I have
         | to pause and re-play to force it to sync again.
        
         | timando wrote:
         | It might be that your device is also delaying the video by
         | 150-300ms so it matches with the delayed BT audio.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-05-13 23:03 UTC)