Core 2 Duo iMacs unofficially rock 802.11n capabilities

We know, it's still draft-spec equipment, but the fact that Apple has knowingly strapped an 802.11n-compliant wireless card inside its newest refresh of iMacs could certainly be telling of a certain product's future (or not). While a few enterprising users happened to spot the 802.11n inclusion while kicking around in the latest build of Windows Vista, there seems to be a bit more supporting evidence now; service source documents apparently credit the Broadcom BCM4321-series chip as the brains behind the iMac's WiFi, which Broadcom proudly boasts as the "first IEEE 802.11n draft-compliant solution." While the "firstness" is certainly debatable, the part number is reportedly visible on the iMac's AirPort Extreme module, giving us hope that Vista is somewhat on track and not completely doomed for infinite delays after all. While the current version of OS X chooses to ignore this speedy potential, future releases may be a bit more likely to fully disclose its secrets -- should the IEEE ever get its act together on a final 802.11n protocol, that is. Nevertheless, we're still a bit stumped as to why the snazzy new Mac Pro's didn't get the undercover next-gen WiFi offering, but hey, that's Apple for ya.

[HughJass @ Sep 29th 2006 11:21PM]

I'll be darned. Very interesting. Since Apple is putting these cards in its machines already, I'd be willing to bet there's a good chance they'll be firmware upgradable when the final 802.11n specs are drafted (since they'll probably be incompatible with the final draft, whenever IEEE decides to finish it.) Time will tell.

[Nigel Hall @ Sep 29th 2006 11:24PM]

I bet the reason they put them in the iMac and not the Mac Pro is because they plan on using the enhanced speed capabilities in the living room and not the office. If iTV is to stream HD movies from a desktop system it will need a lot of bandwidth.

[Daniel @ Sep 29th 2006 11:27PM]

I would say, additionally, that a pro desktop is still far more likely to be wired to the network, since last I remember, the old wire is still faster than wireless...

[Thorn @ Sep 29th 2006 11:59PM]

Depends. Not faster than gigabit (wired), but 2x faster than 100mb (wired).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11#802.11n

[splintax @ Sep 30th 2006 11:49AM]

Theoretically speaking. However, the last time I checked... 802.11 fails to deliver on 11Mbit, the maximum I can get even when right next to the transceiver is around 8Mbit.

[Gabriel @ Sep 30th 2006 12:01AM]

Is it really surprising to see Apple be the for runner in tech. USB, Firewire, The first company to declare floppies and CRTs dead. This all years before the industry followed. Also remember Apple was the first to say bye to the boring beige box of a case. Now your hard pressed to find a company build with anything beige.

[McGibbits @ Sep 30th 2006 12:59AM]

Gabriel: Apple invented everything worthy!? So they spent how many years investing in Crap CPUs before going with mainstream (WINTEL) CPUS? You mac fanboys are everywhere.

[JohnnyC @ Sep 30th 2006 5:25AM]

McGibbets: You put words into Gabriel's mouth, and I really dislike the word 'fanboy'. Luckily for me that won't cause a biased reply towards the rest of your comment (unlike yours).

My purpose really is to point out that "crap CPUs" is a pretty harsh term on your part, considering the fact that the PowerPC and Intel chips were in a tight race for years as far as processing speed is concerned. It was only towards the end of their partnership with Apple (the final 1-2 years) that the PowerPC started to fall behind (and badly at that). I have to admit though, I would like to have seen Apple go with AMD instead of Intel; in the interests of true duality in MAC/WIN competition.

Personal preferences completely aside, I think that we should welcome competition (either in OS environments, processors, or other hardware & peripherals). If we're lucky, the whole of the "what you like sucks, fanboy" & "this system is better than that one" mentalities will always exist - lest we all become victims to a singular developer that has no motivation to make itself better.

So as much as I hate usage of the term fanboy, and the biased commentary & disinformation it brings, I suppose I should be happy that people still have the option of picking sides. So thanks for being a jerk, McGibbets - seriously. It's a sign of good competition, and hopefully good products to come because of it.

[Dave @ Sep 30th 2006 2:28AM]

...and yet more "rock[ing]" features...

[john collucci @ Sep 30th 2006 5:29AM]

Sorry for that last rant, I neglected to mention how phenomenally useful I think that wireless video streaming is going to be. Didn't Apple release 802.11b/g before anyone else as well? Before it was officially final, at least? I think that was so they could roll out the iTunes music streaming capabilities and blow people's minds with the coolness of it all.

Anyway, unless Apple addresses some serious video playback issues with it's current iTunes/Quicktime integration, I'm hoping that they will allow their video streaming features with "wireless-N" to play streams directly from the Quicktime player itself, as oppsed to JUST iTunes...

[andy @ Sep 30th 2006 6:46AM]

" that the PowerPC started to fall behind (and badly at that"
what bullshit, the quad powermac is VERY closely nearly as fast as the new quad (intel) macpro, yet its over a year older, hows that FALLING BEHIND????, id say, thats a year ahead in performance terms, ignoring the heat issues.

[Darrell @ Sep 30th 2006 12:15PM]

yes, Andy, you are right that Power PC is close in the performance with Intel (although lagging behind further each year), but not close in the portable catagory. Remeber, the last iBook and PowerBook is a G4... The "great" people at IBM couldn't figure how to "shoe horn" (Steve Jobs quote) a G5 into one. As much as I wanted a new MacBook, I kinda wish there as an AMD there instead of the Intel. I'll stick to my iBook for now, it does me well.

[Bootes @ Sep 30th 2006 9:42AM]

john collucci, I don't know if Apple released G early, but I do know that B is plenty fast enough to stream music in iTunes.

[Chris @ Sep 30th 2006 11:41AM]

http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-09-27/#5963

The Mac Pro has the same broadcom chip and is therefore equally 802.11n compatible.

[Thorn @ Sep 30th 2006 12:28PM]

According to to the Wikipedia article, 200 Mbit/s is what you should see.

802.11b = 6.5 Mbit/s typical, 11 Mbit/s max
802.11g = 25 Mbit/s typical, 54 Mbit/s max
802.11n = 200 Mbit/s typical, 540 Mbit/s max

[HughJass @ Sep 30th 2006 2:42PM]

Yes, that's what we *should* see, but that depends on distance, interference, and a host of other factors that can't yet be determined because 802.11n hasn't been completed. If you read a few reviews, you'll find that only two or three access points actually live up to their promises, and even those only get the 200Mb numbers when the devices have a clear line of site and are within roughly 10 feet of the access point.

[shinyhat @ Sep 30th 2006 6:14PM]

I'm guessing Apple had planned on 802.11n being ready by this time (it was supposed to happen by now) so the hardware is in place already. It is unlikely (read very expensive) that Broadcom needs to change anything with their chip at all before the finalization of 'n' so why not put them in place now. With all the crap 'n' products out there, maybe Apple is choosing to wait for the standard to be finalized before announcing. If that is the case, and all these machines are suddenly 'n' capable, that is going to be sweet for all who bought those machines! My guess is that the day 'n' is finalized is the day you see Apple releasing the new gear officially and unlocking the chips in these machines. I think we have enough evidence here that they are just waiting it out.

[carl @ Sep 30th 2006 10:55PM]

ehhh. Dell has offered N in their E 17/15/14 notebooks for at least a few weeks now.