AFAICT the FullMAC chipsets have reached the END OF LIFE period.
Sorry, as I know (no more details - NDA, sorry) some manufacturers are developing (and planning to continue) FullMAC 802.11g (and further) chipsets and also they are offering Linux drivers (however had no chance to test yet).
But from my point of view, SoftMAC cards are better sometimes - you have more control from drivers and can implement some interesting features (for example, madwifi Linux driver with MAC layer ported from xBSD).
Any thoughts why we should prefer FullMAC cards over SoftMAC (except CPU usage, of course)?
regards,
--
Andriy Korud
Hello,
"Andriy Korud" [off-list ref] said :
quoted
AFAICT the FullMAC chipsets have reached the END OF LIFE period.
Sorry, as I know (no more details - NDA, sorry) some manufacturers are developing (and planning to continue) FullMAC 802.11g (and further) chipsets and also they are offering Linux drivers (however had no chance to test yet).
I think he meant "prism54 802.11g fullmac chipsets (all the prism54
project is about) are EOL'd". Not "all fullmac chipsets from all
manufacturers for all norms to come".
In the way of "some manufacturer", are you thinking of ralink ?
They've set up a website with their linux driver, and i think they're
fullmac chipsets.
--
Jean-Baptiste Note
+33 (0)6 83 03 42 38
jean-baptiste.note@wanadoo.fr
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 11:34:02PM +0100, Andriy Korud wrote:
Sorry, as I know (no more details - NDA, sorry) some manufacturers are developing (and planning to continue) FullMAC 802.11g (and further) chipsets and also they are offering Linux drivers (however had no chance to test yet).
But from my point of view, SoftMAC cards are better sometimes - you have more control from drivers and can implement some interesting features (for example, madwifi Linux driver with MAC layer ported from xBSD).
Any thoughts why we should prefer FullMAC cards over SoftMAC (except CPU usage, of course)?
Embedded systems with low end cpus (to make less heat and use less
power) would prefer anything that uses less cpu and can be done in
dedicated (and usually simpler than the cpu) hardware. Of course the
windows laptop and desktop market probably far outsells the embedded
market, for now at least.
Len Sorensen