Windows 8 to Have Greatly Improved Wi-Fi Connection Times

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is what should happen in a new Windows version. Enhance, refine, fix, allow. Don't fix a wheel that isn't broken. Oh and make there there is an easy to find "Metro OFF" button.
 
Is this even needed? I have win7 on my laptop. (2.xxGHz single core, 1GB ram.) When I bring it back from standby at my work where I connect wirelessly its connected to works wifi by the time its down waking up. I've never timed this but it feels like around 5-7 seconds at most. I never even see the wireless symbol down by the clock looking, its just "connected". This behavior isn't normal?
 
no that is normal behavior. they just improving windows 7 with better and more stable. they fix the copying pasting it works better, they fix the wifi been taking long time and add touch screen system. They just making os better.
 
[citation][nom]4745454b[/nom]Is this even needed? I have win7 on my laptop. (2.xxGHz single core, 1GB ram.) When I bring it back from standby at my work where I connect wirelessly its connected to works wifi by the time its down waking up. I've never timed this but it feels like around 5-7 seconds at most. I never even see the wireless symbol down by the clock looking, its just "connected". This behavior isn't normal?[/citation]

Every improvement is needed. I don't know why your laptop takes 5-7 to wake from sleep, but mine is instant. Then I have to wait a small while before I can use the internet while the connection (wired or wireless) connects, which is annoying. If they can making connecting almost instantaneous that would help a lot.
 
[citation][nom]aftcomet[/nom]Every improvement is needed. I don't know why your laptop takes 5-7 to wake from sleep, but mine is instant. Then I have to wait a small while before I can use the internet while the connection (wired or wireless) connects, which is annoying. If they can making connecting almost instantaneous that would help a lot.[/citation]
Hard drive spin-up maybe?
 
Marketing...

A lot about a network is NOT HOST BASED. If the Win8 computer resumes from sleep/hibernation, inactive anything, and the DHCP address lease has been allocated elsewhere, then the time needed to receive another DHCP lease and populate a routing table will depend on a DHCP server, not the Win8 PC.
 
Windows7 flow
1) Scan all networks for a long time
2) Is the preferred network around?
---Yes
3) Connect to preferred network

Windows8 flow
1) Is the preferred network around?
---Yes
2) Connect to the preferred network.

WOW! Really improved!
 
@spectrewing: to be fair, Windows 7's Wi-fi reconnect time is quite long; when I take my wife's Win7 laptop out of standby, it takes a little while to restore network access: scanning networks, then once connected, browsing, can take a few seconds. On the other hand, my Ubuntu-powered netbook happily tells me "connected" by the time the screen lights up - which is only a quarter of a second after the disk restarted spinning.
To sum up, my wife's laptop requires something like a third of a minute between opening the lid and its restored state, while the netbook is ready to go under a dozen seconds.
I should try and see if Windows XP wasn't snappier, by any chance... As such, it could have been a regression dating back to Vista.
 
Ah its always good to hear from the "no improvement ever" crowd who apparently believe that computers reached their zenith in 1999 or so and that every advance since than has been a waste of time... except for Windows XP of course which they inexplicably pine for.
 
[citation][nom]southernshark[/nom]Ah its always good to hear from the "no improvement ever" crowd who apparently believe that computers reached their zenith in 1999 or so and that every advance since than has been a waste of time... except for Windows XP of course which they inexplicably pine for.[/citation]
I thought the zenith of speed was Windows 98, reliability, Windows 2000... XP was a resource hog!
I think most of the push back comes from those who remember Windows ME, XP (pre SP2), and Vista. While Vista was a HUGE step up in terms of included driver availability, it was just so darned slow... Even Slower than XP was going from Windows 2000 on a Pentium iii. You needed a 2000 dollar computer in 2006 to run Vista comfortably. Therefore, since Vista was horrible, and Windows 7 was so much more refined, we all just assume that Windows 8 will be a resource hog again...

The difference is that Windows 8 is conceptually different: They are looking at less powerful systems to dominate the near future, for mobility's sake. Therefore, speed will be key. Power saving and time saving from wasted power is extremely important.

It isn't that Windows 8 is a waste: People just fear that we will loose all of our old hardware/software again...
 
I wouldn't be surprised if, in their little chart there, they are comparing a below average Windows 7 result/performance to a best case scenario Windows 8 result/performance.
 
[citation][nom]techcurious[/nom]I wouldn't be surprised if, in their little chart there, they are comparing a below average Windows 7 result/performance to a best case scenario Windows 8 result/performance.[/citation]
That may be. But even best case scenario, my netbook with a SSD takes 1 second to 'wake up', but take up to 30 seconds to connect to my network. It is obnoxious, since the whole point of my 'netbook' is to quickly be able to connect to my 'network'. Windows 8 looks like it can be a nice improvement.
 
I have a feeling MS could push this feature in a SP or Update for Win7 but won't. Instead, they will market this new 'improved' feature as a selling point for Windows 8.
 
[citation][nom]sunflier[/nom]I have a feeling MS could push this feature in a SP or Update for Win7 but won't. Instead, they will market this new 'improved' feature as a selling point for Windows 8.[/citation]
I believe this might be an inherent underlying architectural thing. Supposedly, many of Vista's faults were actually addressed in various service packs. I however, never found this to be the case, as even on new builds, I will occasionally try to use my old copy of Vista, only to find it as frustratingly bloated as when I first installed in oh so many years ago. I think the underlying structure of Vista was just too bloated and assumed too much hardware resources present, to be ultimately svelte...
 
yeah this was needed in Windows 7 i noticed it took a good 6 or 7 seconds after resuming from sleep at times on my laptop, funny thing was XP was faster at reconnecting on my laptop then Windows 7 is.
 
I've been using Windows 8 Developer Preview since October/November 2011. It's really better than Windows 7, much more lighter and better user interface.
Of course I also don't like the current Metro UI but you can easily turn it off in the registry and voila, you have the new cooler aero theme, better features, better performance and etc, etc and it looks like Windows 7.
What better?
I didn't have any problems with any games, any! Even 10 years old games made compatible for Windows 7 with patches works fine with Windows 8. The only problem I've found is that Kaspersky are lazy weirdos and their Anti-virus/Internet Security and Pure products don't work but whatever, the other anti-viruses work.

Conclusion: install windows 8, there are no problems at all ^^
 
[citation][nom]newbie_mcnoob[/nom]Now they need to improve the Disk Defragmenter. It's sucked since Vista.[/citation]
A complex proposition with SSDs in the mix.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom