Oh no. I haven't even upgraded to WiFi 7 yet!

BlackRabbit1 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You are not missing too much.

One of the core features (MLO) is currently mostly scam. APs/Clients negotiate the protocol (and it shows up in the status) but doesn't it to either increase robustness or bandwidth (by combining/switching between two frequency bands).

Also the driver quality is a huge mess.

(We tested it using the latest generation Cisco Enterprise gear but also with Prosumer stuff like Ubiquiti or TP-Link)

But honestly: we need WiFi-8. It finally brings infrastructure-controlled roaming which is super important for any VoIP service.

▲

greenavocado 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> infrastructure-controlled roaming

802.11 r/k/v exists

	▲	BlackRabbit1 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		That's not controlled, seamless hand-over as we know it from GSM/3G/LTE/5G for 30 years now. We basically miss all data (received stations/signal levels from both sides, Bit Rate errors, etc.) for making roaming decisions and then to softly connect them to an AP you want them to be on. Enterprise WiFi is currently mostly "This is a list of APs you maybe can connect to.. have fun.. if you can connect we pre-seeded the AP with some crypto data, so it doesn't take ages to negotiate. Here's your (more or less friendly) disassoc. Fuck off bye." It does somehow work for stationary setups - but as soon as you have mobile traffic (like walking around or machines moving) with multiple APs the quality hits the shitter brutally. Currently this gap is being filled by industrial 5G with dedicated frequencies. It's crazy expensive.
	▲	avhception 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		On paper, yes. In the real world, that random Android client is clinging to an AP that can barely hear it while a better one would be available.

▲

LoganDark 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It sounds like you're talking about throughput aggregation, which indeed no device currently supports. Not even Apple's most recent devices have any sign of it, except that M5 Pro/Max MacBook Pro models are tested for simultaneous transmission on 2.4+5GHz and 2.4+6GHz: https://mrncciew.com/2026/03/17/macbook-pro-m5-wi-fi-7-missi...

▲

SweetSoftPillow 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> which indeed no device currently supports

Aren't devices with Intel Wi-Fi 7 BE200/BE202 are supporting that?

As well as latest Samsung phones?

	▲	BlackRabbit1 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		AFAIR: the BE200/B202 only have one radio. So no parallel streams on two frequencies. But they are the best cards around if you want to play with Wifi-7 on Linux. But always go for the latest wireless-next kernel + firmware blobs. Also they are not compatible with AMD mainboards (go for Qualcomm then).

▲

gpt5 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

UniFi UDB-Switch has throughput aggregation for 5GHz + 6GHz.

▲

gib444 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

5GHz? Surely you mean 5000000kHz ;P

▲

manmal 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The upgrade to 6E was a big jump in my network (Wifi7 Unifi Wall AP). On the same spot, the M3 MacBook (6E) has basically zero lag over VNC, while the M1 MacBook (6) has a noticeable lag. It’s a bit mind blowing how big the difference is.

	▲	InvaderFizz 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That is likely because of AWDL and your WiFi card doing channel hopping to listen between packets. Set your channels to 6/149/37 and the lag will probably vanish. Exactly because of this, I only run those channels, even across multiple APs. In Europe, you may need to use 44 instead of 149. There is currently no good way to keep AWDL off other than a script that just turns it off every 200ms, because of course Apple. Also, not always an option with work issued Macs.

▲

silisili 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not missing much. I feel like it's in many ways misguided. 6ghz ftw because 5ghz penetrates too much and causes noisy neighbor problems. Well, from my experience, 6ghz doesn't penetrate at -all-. So unless you live in a barndo or studio apartment, it's mostly an exercise in frustration.

▲

LoganDark 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I have a Wi-Fi 7 AP and this confused some members of my family that didn't even know it went higher than 6. I thought it was pretty funny

▲

avhception 5 hours ago | parent [-]

My family doesn't know that the WiFi AP is not the DECT base. They understand when I tell them, but that's gone after a week. They use the words WiFi (or, as we say in Germany, WLAN) and "Internet" almost interchangeably. At work, too. "Internet kaputt" can mean anything from "my device is broken" to "our ERP app is not doing the right thing / responding too slow".

▲

warpech 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

That is true everywhere. I think operating systems could do a better job at informing about the health of the internet connection in words the user understands. What seems to be the current bottleneck:

Your router does not respond. Turn it off and on.

This comes close: https://www.getapp.com/all-software/a/breakdown/

▲

MrGilbert 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You can’t blame them, though. I live in the industry for over 25 years now, and when 5 Ghz wifi got introduced, and started to live alongside 2.4 Ghz with all the different protocols, I was like: "Nah. Screw it." I honestly have no idea what the current hot stuff in terms of wifi is.^^

	▲	avhception 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yeah, I guess I draw the line at the workplace. Some of these "Internet kaputt" cases turned out to be a rejected login to our bespoke ERP website.