When Apple introduced its Airport Extreme wireless networking system at January's Macworld in San Francisco, it once again took a flying leap into the world of wireless networking. Apple deserves credit for introducing IEEE 802.11b -- often called Wi-Fi -- to the personal computer world back in 1999, in the form of the flying saucer-shaped Airport base station and Powerbooks with built-in wireless antennas. The new version, called Airport Extreme, is based on a proposed wireless networking standard called IEEE 802.11g, which is four to five times faster than 802.11b.
Today, thousands of public 802.11b "hot spots" are being set up around the world in hotels, airports, coffee shops, and even in fast-food restaurants. There's a hot spot in the McDonald's restaurant beneath Fortune's Rockefeller Center offices in Manhattan. Would you like Wi-Fries with that cheeseburger?
Why, fie on it! This time around, Apple chose a half-baked standard, and some customers could get burned.
You see, Airport Extreme is based on a "draft" 802.11g standard, meaning it hasn't yet been formally ratified by the IEEE, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. Changes to the 802.11g draft proposal are still being considered, and more changes are possible at the next meeting of the IEEE 802.11g committee, on April 14.
Why would Apple embrace an incomplete standard? Wireless 802.11b networking has been one of the few bright spots in the beleaguered high-tech industry over the past two years. Because it is faster yet backward-compatible with 802.11b, "eleven g" appears to be the logical, no-brainer successor to 11b. Networking and computer companies don't want to miss out on a potential 802.11g bonanza, so they are offering 802.11g systems today, even though the specs are not yet final.
The companies, Apple included, say they don't expect major changes in the 802.11g specs, and that any tweaks that the IEEE may adopt can be addressed later on, as software patches. In other words, Apple says it's safe to buy Airport Extreme base stations and network cards today, even though the products might not conform to the final IEEE 802.11g specs when they are ratified this summer.
I wouldn't risk it. There's no guarantee that today's "draft" 11g products will work with future Wi-Fi certified 11g products. Why spend hundreds of dollars on equipment that may or may not be obsolete in just a couple of months?
Consider this: 802.11b was ratified several years ago, and yet it's not uncommon for 11b wireless networking products from one company to be incompatible with 11b products from another. There's no reason to believe that 802.11g will be any different.
I set up several 11g systems in my office recently, and had technical headaches that still aren't resolved. My Airport Extreme hub, for example, works fine with my Time Warner Cable broadband modem -- for a few minutes. Then it crashes. The allure of wireless networking diminishes greatly when you have to call to reset your cable modem every half hour. Apple says the problem lies with my cable modem. The cable technicians say the problem lies with my Airport Extreme hub.
When I disconnect the 802.11g Airport Extreme hub and replace it with my plain old 802.11b Airport hub, the problem vanishes.
That's a shame, because the Airport Extreme system is really fast, when it works. It has a theoretical top data-transfer speed of 54 megabits per second, compared to 14 mbps for 802.11b. In real life, however, figure on seeing no more than 25 mbps and 5 mbps, respectively. And that's for computer-to-computer transfers. If you're sharing a cable or DSL modem, you're probably not going to see more than 1.5 mbps anyway.
When I mix 802.11b and 802.11g computers on the Airport Extreme network, the system slows down to 802.11b speeds. It's the lowest common denominator. Apple says it shouldn't happen, but it does.
Apple's 11g network cards won't fit in older Macs; in fact, the only 11g-capable machines I've got are borrowed 12-inch and 17-inch Powerbooks. The machines work fine on my older 11b Airport network, and I've no reason to doubt they'll work on my local Starbucks Wi-Fi 11b network. Someday I'll replace all my older Macs with new ones capable of 11g networking, but until then I can't count on seeing the higher speeds that 11g offers.
I'm going to wait until the IEEE ratifies the final 802.11g specs before buying anything, and even then I'm going to wait until the Wi-Fi Alliance begins certifying 802.11g products as Wi-Fi compliant. That could come as soon as summer. In the meantime, my current 802.11b network works just fine, thanks.
Quick aside: Products based on the 802.11b standard are often called Wi-Fi, but Wi-Fi is not a generic name for 802.11b; rather, it refers to 802.11b products that have been tested and certified as interoperable by the Wi-Fi Alliance. The Wi-Fi Alliance also certifies products based on the less common 802.11a standard.
***
Papa Book, Mama Book, or Baby Book?
Speaking of the 17-inch Powerbook:
I took Apple's biggest portable on a business trip to Cincinnati this week and was delighted that it fit inside my computer bag. Airport security screeners gave it a double take, followed by admiring glances. I could hardly wait to open it on the plane and dazzle my fellow passengers with a DVD movie presented on the Powerbook's 17-inch wide screen.
However, using it in my coach seat was an ordeal. The Powerbook more than covered the fold-down tray; in fact, it was almost wedged between my sternum and the seatback in front of me. If the woman in 13F had suddenly reclined her seat, the beautiful display would have gotten ugly in a hurry. So, I did away with the tray and put the Powerbook on my lap, which afforded an extra inch or so of protection from a seat-back screen-crunching.
This is clearly a first-class laptop for big laps that ride most of the time in first class. And at $3,499, it's probably not for coach-class budgets anyway.
I fired up a DVD and enjoyed it immensely, and the Powerbook's battery was still going strong after 90 minutes, when the flight attendant spoiled my reverie by telling me to stow all electronic devices for landing. The battery indicator said I still had 53 minutes left.
Unlike its 12-inch sibling, the 17-inch model did not seem to run particularly hot. Perhaps it diffuses heat over a wider area.
Apple's engineers have done a remarkable job of fitting a 17-inch widescreen and a DVD/CD Superdrive into such a thin and relatively light portable package. Even so, one can't use Apple's flagship portable without thinking that, with fold-down legs, it would make a good card table. I might consider it as replacement for my desktop Mac, I suppose, but I like the extra power of my PowerMac. I might consider the PB17 as a road machine, except that it's just too ungainly to use comfortably on an airplane.
On the whole, I admired the 17-inch PowerBook and could see why Steve Jobs said it was "the best thing we've ever done" at Apple. I also like the little 12-inch Powerbook, but in the end the smaller screen is too cramped.
It's the Goldilocks syndrome: The Papa Bear model is too big, the Baby Bear model is too small. For me, the original 15-inch Titanium Powerbook is still just right.
"At American Express, we consider it a high priority to earn and keep our customers' trust and confidence," American Express wrote in a letter last week explaining its cardholder privacy policy. "This Notice explains how we collect and safeguard information about you and the choices you have about our use and disclosure of that information."
The letter might have been trustworthy had it begun thusly:
"At American Express, we consider it a high priority to earn."
Anyway, here's a summary of the new privacy policy:
The information I supply to American Express when I apply for a credit card includes my name, my address, my Social Security number, how much money I make, what bank and brokerage accounts I have, and so on. From then on, American Express tracks every purchase I make, my spending patterns, and my payment history. American Express then buys or swaps for additional outside information about me, ranging from my credit history to my purchases with other cards. It also collects information about me "in connection with our efforts to protect against fraud."
"We call all of this information 'Cardmember Information,'" American Express explains. "What do we do with this information? We use Cardmember Information in connection with delivering products and services to you."
I fully understand that there has to be the sharing of some of my personal information when I buy something using my card. But it goes beyond that.
"We work with other companies, such as merchants that accept the card, so that you can receive offers for their products and services. We may disclose Cardmember Information to these and other companies to develop and send you these offers."
Oh, so that explains why I get lots of junk mail addressed to the full name printed on my American Express card, and why American Express feels entitled to call me at home with "special offers."
American Express makes it clear that it will sell my personal information to the highest bidder unless I call or fill out a form asking the company not to do so. This is called "opt out" marketing, and it puts the burden on me to stop them from sharing my confidential information with others.
An alternative is "opt in" marketing. If American Express really considered it a high priority to earn and keep my trust and confidence, it would give me the choice of opting in, rather than opting out. But it wouldn't earn nearly as much money, because I suspect that most of its cardholders might not see the appeal if asked, "Hey, would you like to sign up for unsolicited sales pitches by mail, phone, and e-mail?"
State and federal lawmakers have the power to make "opt in" the default setting. Doing so would require a majority of lawmakers who are more concerned with consumers' rights than with campaign contributions from corporate lobbyists and direct marketers.
No doubt the folks at American Express are passionate defenders of my privacy, and they would leap upon any non-American Express transgressors who attempt to steal my data without paying them for it. Even so, I was not encouraged by the "commercially reasonable" clause in the next sentence:
"We take commercially reasonable physical, electronic and procedural steps to help safeguard Cardmember Information." In other words, if it costs too much...
Of course, I could simply cancel my American Express card if I disapproved of the Privacy Notice. But wait:
"If you cancel your card, or your card accounts are closed, we will continue to treat and safeguard Cardmember Information about you as described in this Notice."
***
Here's an example of "commercially reasonable" standards for safeguarding of our information, courtesy of Microsoft.
Yet another security flaw was discovered last week in Microsoft operating system software, one that could conceivably allow a bad person to exploit the hole with a denial of service attack. The issue affects Windows XP, Windows 2000, and Windows NT.
Patches went up right away to fix the problem in Windows XP and Windows 2000. Users of Windows NT, however, will have to fend for themselves.
"The architectural limitations of Windows NT 4.0 do not support the changes that would be required to remove this vulnerability," Microsoft said last week, calling such a patch "infeasible." In other words, it would be commercially unreasonable to fix it.
***
Board Games
Just curious: What business skills, besides fundraising, does President-in-Exile Al Gore bring to Apple's board of directors? The past year has made many investors acutely aware of the need for strong boards of directors, to reduce the likelihood of executive shenanigans. If I recall, Mr. Gore was not particularly effective in preventing executive-office shenanigans in his last full-time job.
On the other hand, he really does deserve credit for being one of the first politicians to understand and support the Internet. Almost a decade ago I attended the first-ever White House news conference conducted over an online network, in which Mr. Gore displayed great ergonomic posture and impressive, if slightly stiff, touch-typing skills at the computer keyboard.
I even wandered into his White House office by mistake, without any staffers or Secret Service people around. (This was well before security was tightened, obviously.) There, on his desk, was a book about the Internet, which back then had at most a few tens of millions of users worldwide. (We're heading toward a billion this year, according to people who count such things.)
So, I suspect that the former Vice President has more computer savvy than, say, Dick Cheney. And he definitely reads more books than, say, George W. Bush.
Maybe Steve Jobs thought that Mr. Gore, often described as "wooden," had a natural affinity for "board." Who knows? I'd hate to think it was political.
Send to a friend
Print
