Wouldn't say no to getting 25-30mb/s transfer rate for bulk copying, vs the 5-10mb/s of present... only problem is that it presumably goes in a USB socket, so your realistic absolute max rate with that connected to any host is about 25mb/s thanks to USB2's humongous overheads (so really it's a 250mbit adaptor, unless they've worked some particular black magic)... never mind the comparitively sluggish-seeming Humax USB ports (which I don't think I've seen the equivalent of more than 5mb/s out of even with already-decrypted material and using a quick pocket HDD instead of a thumbdrive).
Course, I'd then have to get a new ADSL router with 300mb/s wireless and gigabit LAN ports to actually connect anything else at that rate... Or at least a separate 300/gigabit WAP and a gigabit-enabled router.
I think the idea behind it, btw, is to mitigate the speed-zapping effects of waveband congestion, in situations where you can't use a physical cable (let's not start a silly argument over the practicalities or likelihood - these situations DO occur, and I've been subject to them myself even, including having to fit a wireless card to a desktop computer in order to connect to a router that was less than five metres away... it was less than ideal, but that's the way it was).
If you've got four devices all sharing 54mbit wifi - the speed of my ISP's complementary router - on the same channel (which tends to be the case if they're connecting through a lone router), then if all of them are firing at once you're not going to get more than about 13mbit each. Which is fine for web browsing or basic to medium grade media streaming, but doesn't cut the mustard for higher end HD or bulk file transfers (including whole-file buffering). Even if you're just sending from one to the other over 65mbit (which is what I tend to get from N...), that's only 32mbit effective, or 3mb/s. Nowhere near the speed of even a relatively primative (!) 100mbit cabled connection.
Ramp that up to 150mbit, assuming you get a perfect N signal, and that's 37 to 75mbit. Better... but not quite there.
250~300mbit? Now we're talking. 125-150mbit with two transactors. 62-75 with four. Or still a slow but tolerable 15 with a whole ten players on the field (vs 2.5mbit for slow old G, or 7 for regular N...).
It's really not about the single-user peak speed, it's about what happens when you have several people sharing the connection and either co-existing to simultaneously download things from a high speed web connection, or more particularly transfer data between nodes on the same network. And one slow node has the potential to drag everyone else down with it, because even if the router is able to support multiple speeds on the same frequency, it still takes more time transceiving the same data to/from that node than it would a faster one, and that's time it then doesn't have available to communicate with the others. You want each node to operate at as high a speed as it possibly can.
