OK, but you seem to be agreeing that if you have two 802.11n devices connected at 5GHz then they will communicate with each other at proper 802.11n speeds, regardless of whether there are 802.11g devices connected to the other antenna...

Of course the throughput _between two devices_ is going to be limited to the speed of the slowest device, but the concern seems to be that just having a slower device on the network is going to reduce throughput between _other_ devices -- which can be the case when you're using the same antenna, especially as between 802.11b and g, but shouldn't be the case on a dual-antenna setup.

Anyway, the new AEBS does have an option to allow 802.11n ONLY on the 5GHz band and to limit the 2.4GHz band to 802.11b/g connections -- you might have to press the Option key but it's there. As you say, you'll then limit 2.4GHz-only 802.11n devices to b/g connections, but you'll make sure that 5GHz devices really do connect to the 5GHz antenna. (Or you can give the 5GHz network its own SSID.)

But yes, 802.11n at 2.4GHz is faster than 802.11g but slower than 802.11n at 5GHz -- even if there are no 802.11g devices on the network.

Reggie, I think you're living in the past. The old 802.11n AEBSs definitely had a single radio so if you wanted to run 802.11b/g devices you'd have to put everything in the 2.4GHz band, which would slow down the connection for 802.11n devices -- not down to b/g speeds, just by a bit since range is reduced, no wide channels are possible etc. The NEW AEBSs have two separate radios and DO run 802.11n on 5GHz-only and b/g on 2.4GHz-only.

As I understand it, it's more or less the same as running an old AEBS at 5GHz only and connecting it via Ethernet to an AX at 2.4GHz -- Apple's recommended method before the new AEBSs -- which didn't result in any real speed hit. Of course if you send data to or from a b/g device it'll be at b/g speeds, but their presence on the extended network shouldn't result in any significant slowdown.

I just mean the statutory implied warranty of merchantability, which in many states can be excluded but has to be done conspicuously, like with a sticker saying "This product is sold as-is with no implied warranty of merchantability". I don't think Apple expressly excludes the statutory merchantability warranty so there's still something to fall back on even in the US. I'm not saying it's a substitute for AppleCare but it's not nothing.

Sorry mate, I have to agree with everyone here that this isn't a very rigorous argument. AppleCare would have saved your arse if your Mac had crapped out for some other reason than it actually did? So everyone should buy AppleCare?

Insurance is a pure numbers game, there will always be stories of people coming a cropper and needing it bigtime, but that doesn't mean it's a value proposition for everyone. On the contrary: the average person will always spend more on premiums than they'll get on payouts -- that's how the insurance is priced. Insurance makes sense for catastrophic events that you'd never be able to pay for, but this is consumer electronics, not life and death.

Plus of course there are statutory warranties, not just in the Netherlands but practically everywhere, that require all consumer products to be fit for purpose and of merchantable quality. These don't expire after a year. Limited and extended warranties are a good way to spook customers into thinking they don't have any rights they haven't paid for. But if a computer you paid $2000 for goes on the fritz after 13 months there's a pretty good chance it wasn't of merchantable quality in the first place and they should fix or replace it for free. It's not always practicable to pursue your legal rights against a big company but you don't have to just roll over either.

One thing AppleCare may be good for is selling your oldish Mac to someone who wants to know they're covered. But I haven't worked out whether the extra $ you'll get on eBay for a covered Mac is worth the extra $ you've paid to Apple. I suspect it's not.

120hz shouldn't mean frame interpolation, it should just mean 120hz. A 120hz panel taking a 24fps source and just displaying each frame 5 times is a thing of beauty and is actually one of the more useful developments in HDTV over the last year. Of course, if you don't just repeat the frames but try to guess where they're going next, you ruin everything.

If you buy the upgrade you get a new serial number. As long as you have a registered installed copy of EyeTV 2 you can install the upgrade over that and everything's peachy.