We don’t even have proper consumer Wi-Fi 7 routers, why the hell do we need Wi-Fi 8? Wi-Fi 7 is supposed to support simultaneous multi-band connections per device and not a single consumer one does this. The most expensive ones out there will do this weird thing where it’ll communicate in a rapid alternating signal, but that’s still not proper. Even if they support 2.4, 5, and 6 GHz, and include multiple radio chips, they are giving us the shittiest Wi-Fi 7 experience.
And that’s not even to talk about how “Wi-Fi 7” is the actual standard and some makes are skirting this by calling what they do “WiFi 7” simply so they can avoid false advertisement.
And that’s not even to talk about how “Wi-Fi 7” is the actual standard and some makes are skirting this by calling what they do “WiFi 7” simply so they can avoid false advertisement.
I would argue that that is still false advertising, because most people can’t tell the difference between “WiFi” and “Wi-Fi”. 😔
We don’t even have proper consumer Wi-Fi 7 routers, why the hell do we need Wi-Fi 8? Wi-Fi 7 is supposed to support simultaneous multi-band connections per device and not a single consumer one does this. The most expensive ones out there will do this weird thing where it’ll communicate in a rapid alternating signal, but that’s still not proper. Even if they support 2.4, 5, and 6 GHz, and include multiple radio chips, they are giving us the shittiest Wi-Fi 7 experience.
And that’s not even to talk about how “Wi-Fi 7” is the actual standard and some makes are skirting this by calling what they do “WiFi 7” simply so they can avoid false advertisement.
I would argue that that is still false advertising, because most people can’t tell the difference between “WiFi” and “Wi-Fi”. 😔
Oh I completely agree, but in legal terms it actually works. Ridiculously stupid loophole.
That would not fly in Canadian courts, I honestly doubt it would in American one either.