A story was published last week http://www.techworld.com/mobility/features/index.cfm?featureID=3830&pagtype=samecatsamechan that delves into what I think is a rather sloppy argument from one of our competitors on 802.11n and how to deploy a dual-radio .11n AP with adequate power. We’ve taken a close look at the issue, and developed a system-level solution with Cisco Catalyst switches to autonegotiate the appropriate power to run a dual-radio 802.11n AP at full performance. Our erstwhile competitor Aruba boasts the “only 802.11n AP that operates with standard PoE.” Yet when you really take a closer look, what they mean here is that their AP can operate, but at reduced performance and capacity. Their story gets stranger when you read recent, completely inconsistent press comments from Aruba, essentially warning against 802.11n deployments altogether. http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communications/0,1000000085,39290082,00.htm The best part — there’s no sign that the company is shipping product any time soon. My other favorite competitive claim by the same folks is their new “80 Gbps controller”. Sounds great, until you realize that if you actually want to encrypt your traffic over an Aruba WLAN — and what customer wouldn’t — that same Aruba controller, which handles all encryption centrally, slows down to 16 Gbps. Kind of like looking at a speedometer — sure, 210 mph looks cool, but it doesn’t mean a thing.