# TiVo Wireless n Adapter?



## chuvak (Jul 22, 2006)

Since wireless n products are now becoming available, I'm just wondering if anyone knows if TiVo has any plans to release a Wireless n adapter or if we're still going to have to rely on the Wireless g. A Wireless n adapter would make transfer shows and get updates go much faster since n is supposed to be up to 12 times faster than g and even faster then using the ethernet port.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Don't know about your TiVo but the output from mine doesn't even approach B speeds.


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

Since support for wireless n in Linux is not close to being mature, I wouldn't count on it. Plus, there's not much to be gained by switching at this point since you can't achieve max G speeds with the current adapter. Anyways, all n routers support wireless-g devices, so I don't see that there would be any demand. Wireless n routers are not going to catch on for a while with most customers.

I would just be excited to see WPA support. To me that is more of a problem with new users setting up TiVos with a network connection than any other issue.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

802.11n hasn't even been finalized yet and none of the "pre-n" devices that are shipping today are guaranteed to be compatible with the final n standard. It would be extremely pre-mature to ship a wireless n adapter that had little chance of being compatible with other "pre-n" devices.

Lack of WPA support keeps me from even considering using a wireless adapter on my TiVo. I think that should be worked on before trying to get an N adapter out.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

morac said:


> 802.11n hasn't even been finalized yet and none of the "pre-n" devices that are shipping today are guaranteed to be compatible with the final n standard. It would be extremely pre-mature to ship a wireless n adapter that had little chance of being compatible with other "pre-n" devices.
> 
> Lack of WPA support keeps me from even considering using a wireless adapter on my TiVo. I think that should be worked on before trying to get an N adapter out.


Some of the pre-standard "N" devices can cause interference on existing 2.4 GHz networks. I'm surprised the FCC is even allowing companies to release these products at this stage of the game.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

Yeah, 11n would be very premature at this point. First they'd really need 802.11i/WPA2 support anyway. Even the S2DT can't push shows fast enough to saturate 11g, so 11n wouldn't give any real performance boost.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

I ma running the TiVo wireless G adapters on a brand new 11n router (just bought the latest - not really looking for N) and they work great with the same kind of speed all else report. copying shows from a DT on Wire ot a 240 on Wireless - get about 1.3 real time for high quality shows. All is well.

Note I do my TiVoToGo from the DT now because it is much faster box all around.


----------



## khurtwilliams (Jun 11, 2004)

So you have an insecure wireless network? The Tivo and TiVo Wireless-G adapter does not support WPA or WPA2. So either you are using the crackable WEP or no wireless security at all.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

So what? A lot of geeks run their network without any security deliberately to allow other people to use it. If the machines *on* the network are secure, it isn't a big deal. It is also an odds thing - I use WEP because I have two TiVos using the network. The only other device on the WiFi is my laptop. The other boxes are on switched, wired. Since I use my laptop on other networks when I travel it is firewalled, etc. But the odds of someone coming to my street and using my network in particular, when there are wide open networks all up and down my street, is low. Even if they did, so what?


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

megazone said:


> Even if they did, so what?


If someone commits a crime over your network (or worse the RIAA/MPAA tracks a shared file back to your ip address) you are basically screwed (especially if it's the MPAA./RIAA since you'd have to pay to defend against a civil lawsuit or pony up the payoff money).


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

morac said:


> If someone commits a crime over your network (or worse the RIAA/MPAA tracks a shared file back to your ip address) you are basically screwed (especially if it's the MPAA./RIAA since you'd have to pay to defend against a civil lawsuit or pony up the payoff money).


There is no case law that I know of that makes the owner of the wireless connection responsible. In most cases, whether there was a password or not, the person using the connection is considered to be doing so without authorization. The RIAA is a different story, but personally, I don't feel any threat of outside users using P2P on my connection. If someone is going to hack your connection it is generally to send spam or do some type of DDoS attack.


----------



## gjustice (Mar 8, 2003)

I can't get decent wireless performance inside the house, so I'm not terribly concerned about someone outside "borrowing" bandwidth.


----------



## khurtwilliams (Jun 11, 2004)

So you don't care if someone uses your network to surf kiddie porn or hack into a government agency? When the feds showup and put you in hand cuffs they won't care either.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Man you're paranoid. If you use WEP and MAC filtering you'll make your network secure enough that most "kiddie porn surfers" won't bother messing with it. Especially considering how many open wireless networks there are out there.

Dan


----------



## khurtwilliams (Jun 11, 2004)

I'm paid to be paranoid.

Some of the services I provide to my employer:

"System audit log forensics, security event management, vulnerability assessmen, systems and network security audits"


----------



## alansplace (Apr 30, 2006)

khurtwilliams said:


> So you don't care if someone uses your network to surf kiddie porn or hack into a government agency? When the feds showup and put you in hand cuffs they won't care either.


my signal isn't strong enough to allow a successful connection from the house next door or from the street out front. i don't think i have very much to worry about.
--
Alan


----------



## burnsy (Dec 12, 2001)

Dan203 said:


> Man you're paranoid. If you use WEP and MAC filtering you'll make your network secure enough that most "kiddie porn surfers" won't bother messing with it. Especially considering how many open wireless networks there are out there.
> 
> Dan


6 Dumbest Ways to Secure a Wireless LAN

1) MAC filtering
2) SSID hiding
3) LEAP authentication
4) Disable DHCP
5) Antenna placement
6)Just use 802.11a or Bluetooth

Dishonorable mention: WEP

Read here on how HARD it is to to crack a network with WEP, MAC Filtering On, and SSID hiding.

Dispelling the Myth of Wireless Security

I cannot believe you tech savvy people would dream of running an unsecure network. It is just sad that TiVo does not support better wireless security. What is the real reason for TiVo not fixing this? Is it a patent\IP issue?


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

burnsy: No one said it couldn't be hacked. The point was, using MAC filtering and WEP will atleast keep your neighbors out. And for most people that is all they want. Not everyone is worried about an elite hacker showing up their backyard with a large antenna trying to send spam mails through your router.


----------



## alansplace (Apr 30, 2006)

rainwater said:


> burnsy: No one said it couldn't be hacked. The point was, using MAC filtering and WEP will atleast keep your neighbors out. And for most people that is all they want. Not everyone is worried about an elite hacker showing up their backyard with a large antenna trying to send spam mails through your router.


well said. :up: 
--
Alan


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Hey, you just might as well go wired then if you're really security conscious. 
Assuming you notice the run of Cat 5 running out of your house....


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

If I lived in an apartment or in an area where hacking into routers is a problem, I would certainly want to be all wired or using WPA with a good password. However, that is not the case for everyone (or me). So everyone is in a different situation when it comes to how secure they want their network.


----------



## khurtwilliams (Jun 11, 2004)

burnsy said:


> 6 Dumbest Ways to Secure a Wireless LAN
> 
> 1) MAC filtering
> 2) SSID hiding
> ...


Then followup with a better way to do it.

http://www.lanarchitect.net/Articles/Wireless/SecurityRating/

Security is a trade off between risk and usability. The reason we do not have screeners at the subway stations in Manhattan is because it would reduce the usefullness of the system for purpose of quick and reliable travel.


----------



## arsa13 (Jul 15, 2006)

chuvak said:


> A Wireless n adapter would make transfer shows and get updates go much faster since n is supposed to be up to 12 times faster than g and even faster then using the ethernet port.


This cannot be true... I mean even _if_ 802.11n is 'faster' compared to 100mb wired networks, it wouldn't necessarily transfer shows faster. (Speeds of wireless networks depend on many varibles, including how far you are from the router/ap and other physical barriers that are in the way of the signal.) My network is completely wired, and I get 100mb full duplex, so in theory I could transfer at speeds up to 200mb... Transferring shows from my new 649080DT is still slow as heck.

I could transfer a whole 9gb DVD over my network in about 10-15 minutes. I've done it before. Transferring shows from TiVo take FOREVER. I STILL can't transfer a 2-hr 5gb recording because it 'stops making progress' after 2gb and then restarts the transfer only to restart the process all over again when it reaches 2gb again.

In any case, I'll stick with wired for as long as possible, because they have gigabit wired networks which blow wireless out of the water. All you really need to get a faster wired connection is the correct equipment, and more twists in the cables.

-Matt


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

OT but...

_3) LEAP authentication_

I have to personally disagree with #3. While there are certainly better things out there than LEAP these days, LEAP itself is only insecure if administered by amateurs. (Unlike WEP, which is insecure regardless of how it's configured). A well behaved, perfectly secure LEAP network is quite possible to implement.

Having said that - LEAP's a propriatary pain in the ass overall, and I wish it would just die 

-Ken


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

khurtwilliams said:


> So you don't care if someone uses your network to surf kiddie porn or hack into a government agency? When the feds showup and put you in hand cuffs they won't care either.


Nope. Because the odds are better I get hit with lightning. It just isn't worth worrying about. Too many 'ifs'.

And I'm an ex-CISSP and I used to do secure networks for GTEI/BBN. I know security, and if it is for work I have different risk factors.

For my home network, if I could run WPA2 I would. I pretty much only have WiFi for the TiVos and the convenience of moving around with my laptop. I run WEP, Mac filtering and turn off SSID. I know just how secure that is and it is enough for my concerns. There are neighbors running wide open networks, so anyone coming into my neighborhood looking for a network to leach is going to find a target rich environment. Someone would have to deliberately want to hit *my* network to bother, and I'm not too concerned about that.

I suppose some wackjob could target me and try to frame me for something. But it would hold up about 5 seconds in court. I already allow friends to host servers on my DSL, servers used by the public. It is far more likely one of them doesn't secure something and their Linux box gets cracked and used as a relay or something. It happened once, years ago, to a Linux box on a home network I shared with two housemates. It got rootkitted and used for warez until we caught it. The guy running it had been lax on patches.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

morac said:


> If someone commits a crime over your network (or worse the RIAA/MPAA tracks a shared file back to your ip address) you are basically screwed (especially if it's the MPAA./RIAA since you'd have to pay to defend against a civil lawsuit or pony up the payoff money).


Let them. I'd contest it. I'd like to see this happen a lot actually, because if more people fought them then they'd have to find new tactics. And IP address is NOT the same as a person and with the growing number of worms creating botnets, people hosting servers, etc, even tracing something to a PC doesn't mean the primary use is responsible. I find the RIAA and MPAA's tactics deplorable. It is blackmail.

They need to do more work to legitimately target an individual. They've already had a number of stupid lawsuits where they've gone after someone who is highly unlikely to be a real downloader. There is one millionaire they went after who is fighting back and has the money to make their lives hard, and I hope he rips them a new one.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

burnsy said:


> I cannot believe you tech savvy people would dream of running an unsecure network. It is just sad that TiVo does not support better wireless security. What is the real reason for TiVo not fixing this? Is it a patent\IP issue?


Why not? A lot of EXTREMELY tech savvy people run their networks wide open *deliberately* - to encourage others to use it for free. There are businesses that do the same - the Panera across the parking lot from me offers free, open WiFi. Increasing numbers of cafes, etc, offer open WiFi access - no login, no security. Cities are installing municipal WiFi, and some of them are looking at free access for all. I've been through a number of airports that offer free WiFi to everyone - no security. I've stayed in hotels with free WiFi. Attended conferences with free WiFi. There were open access points all over CES for example - that's how I posted my TiVo reports 'live' from the show.

The more open networks there are, the better. Because once there is a critical mass, then it becomes pointless to use tracing to a network as 'proof' of anything. It'd sink the kind of tactics the RIAA uses where they John Doe charges based on an IP.

No one really knows why TiVo does't support WPA. Perhaps the hardware isn't capable of supporting it - some older WiFi systems and PCs are incapable of being upgraded to WPA.

I've considered opening up my WiFi completely - when my DSL goes out I leach from neighbors who don't secure their networks at all.


----------



## bitTraveler (Mar 3, 2002)

rainwater said:


> burnsy: No one said it couldn't be hacked. The point was, using MAC filtering and WEP will atleast keep your neighbors out. And for most people that is all they want. Not everyone is worried about an elite hacker showing up their backyard with a large antenna trying to send spam mails through your router.


I would normally agree, but for some reason the idea of serving up blurry web pages to the neighbors amuses me.

http://www.ex-parrot.com/~pete/upside-down-ternet.html

bit


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

bitTraveler said:


> I would normally agree, but for some reason the idea of serving up blurry web pages to the neighbors amuses me.


I've seen that, that is very amusing. 

I've known people to be less... polite. Like using goatse.cx to replace images.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

megazone said:


> Let them. I'd contest it. I'd like to see this happen a lot actually, because if more people fought them then they'd have to find new tactics. And IP address is NOT the same as a person and with the growing number of worms creating botnets, people hosting servers, etc, even tracing something to a PC doesn't mean the primary use is responsible. I find the RIAA and MPAA's tactics deplorable. It is blackmail.


It turns out it *is* easier to fight the RIAA and MPAA is you leave you router open. Go figure.

As for me, I'll still use WPA2 at home. Better safe than sorry in case a new worm of the month pops up and someone and someone connects to my router (behind my firewall) and my software firewall fails somehow. I know it's very unlikely to happen, but not impossible (the company I work for got infected a few years back that way).


----------



## BobKerns (Jan 28, 2007)

Maybe things were different back when this thread was current, but I'm running WAP2 on my network, and my TiVos are happpy (S2, S2DT, both with TiVo-brand USB 802.11g adaptors). They even specifically report that I'm running WAP2 on the advanced wifi settings screen.

Yes, the TiVos don't push out the data as fast as you'd like. However, there IS good reason to want a Wireless-N adaptor for TiVo. (This is what lead me to this thread).

Slower adaptors consume more of your available bandwidth -- they have to transmit longer to send the same data. Also, you can't configure your router to be wireless-n-only, which helps speed things up for the rest of your devices.

And Wireless-N as much better range -- an even more important factor than the speed issue, if you need it!


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

A TiVo branded Wireless N standard adapter would be fine for those wnating an all N network but I think the Standard needs to be confirmed first for it to make business sense to TiVo to put an N-_standard_ wireless adapter out for sale. TiVo does not have the resources to play the pre-N games.


----------



## parsec (Mar 6, 2007)

I don't post here very often, but I thought it was important to respond to the previous post. The 802.11n draft has pretty much been approved. It's not a full fledged standard at this point, but any 802.11n device you purchase today is guaranteed to be compatible with the final standard with a firmware update. That includes the adapters. 802.11n isn't something that's just on the horizon any more, it's here. TiVo ought to be working on an update that will at least enable third party adapters.


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

parsec said:


> It's not a full fledged standard at this point, but any 802.11n device you purchase today is guaranteed to be compatible with the final standard with a firmware update.


Many of the draft N devices don't even work with routers from different companies. And there is no guarantee that the companies will be able to provide firmware updates to the N standard once its official.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

rainwater said:


> Many of the draft N devices don't even work with routers from different companies. And there is no guarantee that the companies will be able to provide firmware updates to the N standard once its official.


and as I said - TiVo does not have the resources to deal with such a two step process. They are not a wireless device company.


----------



## gwsat (Sep 14, 2006)

I have a g wireless adapter (not a TiVo brand) to connect my S3 to a Belkin pre-n wireless router. For current purposes, I cant imagine why I would need higher speeds than are provided now. My wireless connection mostly serves to download data from TiVo. All of that happens in the background and has been error free. The only other thing I routinely use my S3s wireless capability for is the Yahoo weather page, which downloads a little slowly but not maddeningly so.

Where did all this wireless security talk come from? I thought this thread was about whether TiVo is offering an n wireless adapter and whether anyone really needs one yet. Silly me.


----------



## Daurkin (Oct 20, 2003)

I too am curious about a USB Wireless-N device working

I have a huge mix of Wireless B/G/N devices in the house. That mean the fastest connection to my router is the Wireless B. That's due to the original wireless adapter for the tivios. If I can swap them out with the N-draft. then they wouldn't slow down the network, just the transfer speed of the device would be slow.

At least that's what I'm thinking...


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

Daurkin said:


> I too am curious about a USB Wireless-N device working
> 
> I have a huge mix of Wireless B/G/N devices in the house. That mean the fastest connection to my router is the Wireless B. That's due to the original wireless adapter for the tivios. If I can swap them out with the N-draft. then they wouldn't slow down the network, just the transfer speed of the device would be slow.


What kind of N router do you have? Any new N-router isn't going to be running at B speeds even if you set it to b/g/n mode. While its true, the overall effective range may be smaller if you have to set it to that mode, it should not be slowing down your network significantly. Btw, the TiVo branded adapters are G not B. So if you use those, you can turn off B on your network.


----------



## hoyty (Jan 22, 2003)

rainwater said:


> What kind of N router do you have? Any new N-router isn't going to be running at B speeds even if you set it to b/g/n mode. While its true, the overall effective range may be smaller if you have to set it to that mode, it should not be slowing down your network significantly. Btw, the TiVo branded adapters are G not B. So if you use those, you can turn off B on your network.


Actually a B device on a mixed network will slow the entire network down. The router can only communicate with one device at a time. For a rough example it takes 8 MS for B to send a packet, 4 MS for g to send a packet and 2 MS for N to send a packet. That means all the g and n devices have to wait while the slow b device is chatting with router. In reality it doesn't slow everything to b speeds, however they are definitely slower than a pure network of a given signal type. You rarely notice this until you have 10+ devices per router all sending data though.


----------



## dwit (May 5, 2004)

hoyty said:


> Actually a B device on a mixed network will slow the entire network down. The router can only communicate with one device at a time. For a rough example it takes 8 MS for B to send a packet, 4 MS for g to send a packet and 2 MS for N to send a packet. That means all the g and n devices have to wait while the slow b device is chatting with router. In reality it doesn't slow everything to b speeds, however they are definitely slower than a pure network of a given signal type. *You rarely notice this until you have 10+ devices per router all sending data though*.


So in most peoples' real world settings, a wireless b device does not noticeably slow the "g" network down?

That's good to know.


----------



## hoyty (Jan 22, 2003)

dwit said:


> So in most peoples' real world settings, a wireless b device does not noticeably slow the "g" network down?
> 
> That's good to know.


Except that the main point of this thread was to get more throughput than a g network allows by using a n network, thus assuming the g network is saturated. In that case if you have a b device it will noticeably slow the n network since all the n devices will twiddle there thumbs waiting for b device to shut up.


----------



## davidb4775 (Aug 26, 2004)

gwsat said:


> I have a g wireless adapter (not a TiVo brand) to connect my S3 to a Belkin pre-n wireless router.


What make and model "g" adapter are you using? I am looking to get a HD and it seems that EVERYONE is saying one has to use the TiVo adapter. BTW, I also have the Belking pre-n router and LOVE it


----------



## fyodor (Sep 19, 2006)

Another alternative would be to get a wireless N bridge and plug the ethernet into it. That way you're not stuck with compatibility issues. There are also various powerline and coaxial bridging options.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

davidb4775 said:


> What make and model "g" adapter are you using? I am looking to get a HD and it seems that EVERYONE is saying one has to use the TiVo adapter. BTW, I also have the Belking pre-n router and LOVE it


For a series 3 unit you can use a wireless game adapter (even g) if you plug it into the cat 5 jack.

They generally cost more then the tivo unit, only make sense if you have an extra one around. Some routers can be configured to be used as an access point.


----------



## davidb4775 (Aug 26, 2004)

Unfortunately (or fortunately), I sorta skipped the "a" and "g" part and went from "b" to "pre-n"--leaving me with an idle Orinoco AP in the closet. Though it's a "b", I suppose I could use it for d/l'ing the guide. As the life of the series 2 goes around the block another time, I come across sites that have charts of what adapters will and will not work with the S2 models. I haven't seen anything like that for the S3 or HD models. While I may end up spending money on the TiVo adapter, I was hoping to find an adapter that would be universal, cheaper and that could be used for other devices down the road.

References that I find regarding the S3 and HD seem to indicate that, as a result of limited and specific drivers loaded in the S3 and HD, its going to be a hot and miss (mostly miss) to find a USB g adapter that happens to use the drivers loaded in the units. I was hoping that some users with a generous supply of toys might had already tried different g adapters.


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

There is no such thing as a universal adapter.

For the Series 3 support for other than the TiVo brand adapter was dropped. IMO, it would be easier to get the TiVo adapter first, then hunting down other adapters.


----------



## fyodor (Sep 19, 2006)

If you're only interested in wireless G performance, you can find a wireless bridge for $30-$50 on ebay and just connect it by ethernet. If you want wireless N performance, I think that there are some bridge products for about $100.


----------



## Andy D (Feb 1, 2008)

I find that I need to go to wireless N for my network. My neighborhood is just too full of 802.11 b/g at 2.4 Ghz. I really need to go to something else as My network performance is just bad because of all the networks and collisions.

I guess there is no TiVo 802.11n adapter yet, so I was wondering if something else may work.

I use Apple Airport Extreme (now G, I want to go to N) and maybe I can just get another Airport Base Station, and connect it to the TiVo through the ethernet and make TiVo behave as if it were connected to hardwired network.

Has anybody tried this?

Any reason why this would not work?

Thanks,

Andy


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

Andy D said:


> I find that I need to go to wireless N for my network. My neighborhood is just too full of 802.11 b/g at 2.4 Ghz. I really need to go to something else as My network performance is just bad because of all the networks and collisions.
> 
> I guess there is no TiVo 802.11n adapter yet, so I was wondering if something else may work.
> 
> ...


I have a similar setup with the Extreme N router and 2 airport express adapters. It will work just fine.


----------



## slpatters (Nov 5, 2008)

rainwater said:


> I have a similar setup with the Extreme N router and 2 airport express adapters. It will work just fine.


I can't get my Apple Airport Extreme and Airport Express to work. How'd you set yours up?


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

slpatters said:


> I can't get my Apple Airport Extreme and Airport Express to work. How'd you set yours up?


Set the option "Allow this network to be extended" on the base station. Then for the express adapter, set the mode to "Extend a wireless network". Then you select the name of the network the base station creates (the ssid). Once you do this, then you are all set. You may need to connect directly through ethernet on the express so it shows up in the airport utility for the first time. Once you set it to connect to your base station, then both will show up in the airport utility when you connect to your base station normally.


----------



## slpatters (Nov 5, 2008)

rainwater said:


> Set the option "Allow this network to be extended" on the base station. Then for the express adapter, set the mode to "Extend a wireless network". Then you select the name of the network the base station creates (the ssid). Once you do this, then you are all set. You may need to connect directly through ethernet on the express so it shows up in the airport utility for the first time. Once you set it to connect to your base station, then both will show up in the airport utility when you connect to your base station normally.


I have the Airport Express on the network and the Airport Utility finds it. But Tivo Series 2 DT can't see it when it's connected via ethernet.


----------



## bsporl (Feb 7, 2006)

I've got two of the slower 500 series S2 tivo's connected to a Linksys USB, then connected to Belkin G wireless bridges.

At the other end of the bridges is a computer with Pytivo. The video stream is fast enough, but it sucks up the entire available bandwidth, meaning no other traffic can travel over the network while a show is being transfered. I always assumed it was maxing out the available G bandwidth but based on the comments in this forum, Tivo transfer speed is less than B speed, or 11Mbps. 

If the transfer speed is only 11Mbps, the Belkin G bridges must be stressed, or pushing more data than they can handle.

Overall it's a cheap, simple solution for multiple connections at a remote location, however transfer speed should be faster.


----------



## cloudance (Oct 28, 2004)

I've got an S2 (singe tuner) with a Linksys USB->10/100/1000 adapter, and that feeds a Linksys N (only) bridge set to run only on the 5Ghz side. In my office I run a Linksys Synchronous Dual-band N router, and I've set the QOS to slightly bump the priority of the bridge. 

The only systems on 5ghz band are my Tivo and my Macbook Pro. My wife's Dell Laptop, my Cell Phone and my Sisters' laptop (she visits quite frequently) are on the G network (and the 2.5ghz band). 

Works great. 

Since I'm about to upgrade to a Tivo HD, and I'm about to move my office to another room in my house (and hence will have to run new phone and coax to that room) so I think I'll just run an extra Cat-6 cable from the office to the entertainment center ( since the coax has to go to the same place... I have neither attic nor crawl-space so I have conduit running on the outside of the house over the roof to the other side. Sheesh.) that way I'll have GB wired ethernet into a switch, one port to the TiVo, and I'll get a new A/B/G/N dual band AP and set it up as a repeater in my living room. 

Off topic, but I plan on re-roofing this summer and I'll run EMT conduit from the garage to all rooms in the house, 2 in the living room (and one direct from one side of the living room to the other), the foam over top of it all so I can do hope-runs for all the drops as well as have a direct run for my Surround-Sound speakers. That'll let me do a home run, and then put Phone, Coax, and Cat 6 into any room in the house.


----------

