Wireless Networking: Intel Want You to Throw Away Your Gateway

[Russ Smith]

Intel wasn't the first to think of installing WiFi wireless networking inside the box of your desktop PC. Several motherboard manufacturers have been doing that for some time. Intel's move to put WiFi functionality into every processor/chipset combination they produce from now on will likely make built-in wireless networking on desktop systems pretty much universal, though. But Intel wants to go further. Along with the built-in capabilities of Windows XP to share network access by bridging networks, Intel is working to do away with the Gateway/Router which is a common part of most home and business networks.

The Gateway/Router now serves the purpose of sharing one Internet connection with (usually four) wired systems and, if a Wireless Access Point is built-in potentially over 200 WiFi-connected systems as well. A Gateway/Router/Wireless AP costs anywhere from just over $30 for 802.11b (11Mb/s). 802.11g (54Mb/s) versions cost a bit more. By moving the Gateway/Wireless AP functions within one desktop system, you have one less box sitting on your desktop and one less device to set up (and learn how to make work). You lose the wired network capabilities, but wireless is often built-in and is fairly inexpensive to add. 802.11b isn't quite fast enough to support streaming media connections, but 802.11g is.

By putting wireless on-board, Intel is seeking two different "value-added" markets. The first is the home and small business users who intend to set up a small network. The second are the media enthusiasts who may be currently looking at a digital media recorder live a TIVO. When coupled with the media in/out capabilities of high-end audio and video cards, a wirelessly-equipped PC can take the place of a DMR and provide streaming media to any system on the network. 802.11b isn't quite fast enough to support streaming media connections, but 802.11g is.

[Pony99CA]

Desktop PCs have quite often been mentioned as media hubs, which doesn't seem unreasonable. Media Center PCs are one take on the concept, and, while they haven't done that well, I think there's still a chance for them to succeed.

However, replacing a router with a PC seems like a bad idea.

First, most broadband routers include at least a NAT firewall, making them more secure than a Windows-based PC running a firewall. With a PC, you have to remember to have security turned on before you connect to the Internet or risk things like MS Blaster (although Windows XP SP 2 should help in that regard).

Second, using a PC as a gateway would require that PC to be on whenever somebody wanted Internet connectivity. Granted, this may not be a big deal if the PC is also a media server and kept on 24/7, but I'm not sure I'd want the media machine also handling Internet traffic.

Third, I don't think broadband routers are that difficult to set up. Configuring a PC firewall and wireless access point is probably no easier than configuring a router.

This sounds like Intel trying to sell more chips and maybe take some of the business from companies like LinkSys, DLink, and so on.

My home network sits behind a NAT firewall and I run ZoneAlarm because that also blocks outgoing traffic -- just in case I somehow get a backdoor program on my system. I don't see myself eliminating either of those protections.

Steve