Ethernet vs WiFi Speed Lost

[Dolby]

The only VOIP hardware in modern companies lives at reception and in the meeting rooms now.

Yealink Tops the SIP phone Market Share for a Third Consecutive Year

Yealink (Stock Code: 300628) is a global brand that specializes in video conferencing, voice communications and collaboration solutions with best-in-class quality, innovative technology and user-friendly experience. As one of the best providers in more than 140 countries and regions, Yealink...

www.yealink.com

Yealink has led the SIP phone circuit for three years, and continuously increased its market share

 

[SauRoNZA]

VoIP hardware sales number is increasing yearly - I wonder who is buying them if they changed strategy almost a decade back ? Why are companies still placing orders for 100 x VoIP phones to sit in reception ? It seems a bit bizarre to me ....

You realise they can be wireless right?

Your argument was that the cabling is required at every desk to facilitate VOIP.

Besides a 100x hardware phones is rather small in a big business, so likely the executive.

Where are the hundreds and thousands for the rest of the staff? Oh yeah right they got headsets for Teams/Meets/Zoom/other which the phones don’t work with.

 

[SauRoNZA]

Yealink Tops the SIP phone Market Share for a Third Consecutive Year

Yealink (Stock Code: 300628) is a global brand that specializes in video conferencing, voice communications and collaboration solutions with best-in-class quality, innovative technology and user-friendly experience. As one of the best providers in more than 140 countries and regions, Yealink...

www.yealink.com

Yealink has led the SIP phone circuit for three years, and continuously increased its market share

And those are mostly wireless…

But even so just because marketshare increased doesn’t mean they aren’t just being installed at reception and in meeting rooms.

It just means they are doing more of it than anyone else.

You are doing correlation again…

 

[Dolby]

You realise they can be wireless right?

But you know they weren’t, right ?

So try so hard to be right each time that I vomit a little in my mouth when. You have an answer for everything.

 

[SauRoNZA]

But you know they weren’t, right ?

So try so hard to be right each time that I vomit a little in my mouth when. You have an answer for everything.

With some luck you choke on it and die then we’ll all be better off for it.

 

[Dolby]

With some luck you choke on it and die then we’ll all be better off for it.

Not all.

There are still people that have to listen to you telling them how right you are

 

[Charlesjjm]

What you need to do is put down the Apple Koolaid and take off the Apple glasses - and read the thread slowly & carefully. Try be objective

Look at the point this thread changed direction. Look at what was said by who. Look at who pasted irrelevant links. Look at who doesn’t answer questions.

Read the original study, it has nothing to do with Apple.

 

[Charlesjjm]

Let me play the Apple game :

Can you not read ?
44.2% is the majority ?
44.2 > 44 ? Right? Then add the almost 10% newer on WiFi 6? Was I wrong?

Sauron was actually wrong easier as he says most of these in the study are 10/100 ports … when clearly most actually Gbit by looking at your stats

And this whole survey process is wrong anyway ? And who says the stats are even accurate? You know there are cases where they have falsely marketed Gbit routers?

Unless every internet connection is 1Gbps then yes, the study is worthless.

 

[ArmatageShanks]

The whole argument is irrelevant, the amount of loss isn't critical or even inconvenient for the great majority of usrrs, and higher throughput options are available either way.

Like arguing the difference between cheap and expensive speaker cabling, such a insignificant difference really.

 

[Dolby]

Unless every internet connection is 1Gbps then yes, the study is worthless.

But - you changed your mind?

You said the majority aren’t faster links - but they are? Why did you say they weren’t , when they were?

So unless 1Gb it’s worthless ? So if you’re WiFi is 80Mbps throughout, surely 100, 200, 500 etc are also slower ?

 

[Dolby]

The whole argument is irrelevant, the amount of loss isn't critical or even inconvenient for the great majority of usrrs, and higher throughput options are available either way.

Like arguing the difference between cheap and expensive speaker cabling, such a insignificant difference really.

Fully agree - but this about MacBooks (though the title is different on Safari, for some reason. Seems to blank out anything to do with Apple)

 

[ArmatageShanks]

Fully agree - but this about MacBooks (though the title is different on Safari, for some reason. Seems to blank out anything to do with Apple)

Ahh

Wasn't there a thing recently where Linux os's had sudden increases eith new drivers because Intel fscked something up?

Think this

 

[Dolby]

Ahh

Wasn't there a thing recently where Linux os's had sudden increases eith new drivers because Intel fscked something up?

Think this

No idea .

 

[Charlesjjm]

But - you changed your mind?

You said the majority aren’t faster links - but they are? Why did you say they weren’t , when they were?

So unless 1Gb it’s worthless ? So if you’re WiFi is 80Mbps throughout, surely 100, 200, 500 etc are also slower ?

Nope. Maybe we are talking past one another. You said this:

Read this as well.

89% are using WiFi 4 and 5 . They don’t break down further - but I can guarantee you that the majority are using WiFi 5 … which incidentally means in most cases Gbit.

*There are outliers - but generally 10/100 & WiFi 4 ; as well as Gbit & WiFi 5 go together

*and I’m sure you’ll use them to drive home a point

My response was that firstly they did break it down further and secondly that it is a fifty/fifty split between wifi 4 and 5.

It is a stupid study. One cannot derive any meaningful conclusions from it since there are just way too many variables that are not quantified. You need at least one constant that is easily identified.

We can start the reasoning from the back. In order for Wifi to be the bottleneck (which the study suggests), the fibre link needs to be much faster than the wifi. If you are dealing with fibre speeds ranging from 1Mpbs to 2000Mpbs, then obviously that conclusion is wrong, and everything else inferred as well.

 

[Dolby]

that it is a fifty/fifty split between wifi 4 and 5.

but I can guarantee you that the majority are using WiFi 5

I thought the figures were 44% to 44.2% ?
So the majority are WiFi 5 ?
Or am I misunderstanding ?

I mean, that's how you guys debate - isn't it ?
Phrases and semantics ?

 

[Charlesjjm]

I thought the figures were 44% to 44.2% ?
So the majority are WiFi 5 ?
Or am I misunderstanding ?

I mean, that's how you guys debate - isn't it ?
Phrases and semantics ?

Respectfully good sir, you are a moron.

 

[Dolby]

Respectfully good sir, you are a moron.

So you disagree?
That’s not majority?