Ersatz Certifications? WFA and more ....

[saturation]

I came across this device at a reputable computer store last month. It was less than $10, and if it worked, would upgrade an old 11g client.

The packaging and device appear as high quality construction. Note the following at the bottom beginning from the left of the larger photo:

Designed For Windows XP
Certified For Windows Vista
Compatible with Windows 7

To obtain these logos a maker must pass these requirements:
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/DevTools/WDK/WDKpkg.mspx

They are fairly lenient, but there is no database consumers can check to verify these claims. So how do we know if these logos are true to their meaning? The only way for consumers to be sure is to test it on these OS.

In addition, the WFA logo on the right on the box, blown up in attachment #2.

I cannot find such a logo anywhere nor a specification related to 'compatible' rather than certified. Also, the model # on the scan is removed by me, is not in the WFA database although other models in the maker's line are.

Some comments on the statements made on the bottom of the box:

If certified, 11n, it should be backward compatible with b,g at least so its moot

However, the device is rated only to 150 Mbps, and is a single radio, which is not certifiable as 11n, so what does this logo mean and where did it come from? Note, the true WFA logo is '3D' versus the more 2D of this compatible logo

The software based WPS button does not work, which would be surprising if the device was truly certified


Testing:

It has one desirable feature, its a plug in AP. You can insert it into any PC, load its client and engage AP mode, and now you can directly access that PC's shared resources in ad-hoc mode up to 50Mbps.

Its connection to an AP router ESR-7750 with 11n is unreliable in long downloads, with eventual connection drops 5-10 minutes transferring large files. Its OK for burst connections, but over the long haul, it does no better than 11g. It has no problems as a 11g or 11b client.

 

[thiggins]

If a device isn't in the Wi-Fi Alliance certification database, it's not Certified. Period.

Single stream N devices (maximum link rate of 150 Mbps) can apply for a certification mark as shown in the attached image.

The mark you found is a misuse of the Wi-Fi Certification logo.

 

[saturation]

If a device isn't in the Wi-Fi Alliance certification database, it's not Certified. Period.

Single stream N devices (maximum link rate of 150 Mbps) can apply for a certification mark as shown in the attached image.

The mark you found is a misuse of the Wi-Fi Certification logo.

Increasingly a number aren't, at least by some products in the lines of Engenius, Belkin, Tenda, and Trendnet.

I've never seen that other logo used, as many makers who support pre-11n make N a key selling point, label it all over the box, and if consumer's looked for the WFA logo, see it doesn't say 11n certified but only to 11g.

Many makers use whole assemblies, like Ralink, that are certified by the WFA as reference designs to 11n.

I wonder if others forego certification since the designs are certified, so often they only require a few parts [ cases, brick power supplies and antennas] that could spell the difference in final costs and performance, but the maker needn't worry about core compatibility. Many uncertified devices seem targeted to SOHO and consumers, were price is a big factor in purchase decisions, and as we see in many reports, WFA certification is no guarantee of a trouble free usability experience.

For more on this topic, see here:

http://forums.smallnetbuilder.com/showthread.php?t=3157