For you home network, they're are likely few or no use card to warrant a new tech like this.
But for offices, schools, conference halls, and other place with many people together it could be useful as a very fast zero-wire solution. Even then it'll be niche: most office workers or conference attendees don't need 100Mbit let alone more than 1Gbit. But some will: maybe said office is full of video editors and such.
Remember that the bandwidth is a shared resource like WiFi: that isn't "up to 224Gbit/s for every device in the room" it is "up to 224Gbit/s for every device in total". And that "up to" value is for ideal circumstances: there will be some environmental interference (though LOS limitations will work in this techs favour there) and, more significantly, the more devices you have in a given collision domain the more they will interfere slightly with each other too because they can't share the group resource with complete efficiency (and this difficulty grows exponentially after a certain threshold). Get a couple of machines transferring arbitrary data as far as they can via WiFi, take the total of transfer speeds they are getting and now add more machines doing the same. The total might scale well for an irritation or two of this test, but there will be a pint when it significantly won't and the total bandwidth will actually fall (and latency will shoot up).
The main push for 5G mobile networks wasn't better max bandwidth per device, but better performance (latency and throughout) for every device when you have a lot of them sharing the same collision domain. The headline figure of 224G bit is (while not at all dishonest) just that: a figure to gain interest via headlines. Those who actually have a need or want for such tech will be looking much deeper into it than that.
home networks in high density condo towers where WiFi network channels are often already occupied by neighbors on the same and adjacent floors. The 5GHz band might have a "limited distance" but it's still enough to interfere between neighbors.
Good point. I was thinking about the bandwidth within the local network partition and neglected to consider that the line-of-sight nature is helpful in compact housing because it significantly limits what can interfere with that local partition.
But for offices, schools, conference halls, and other place with many people together it could be useful as a very fast zero-wire solution. Even then it'll be niche: most office workers or conference attendees don't need 100Mbit let alone more than 1Gbit. But some will: maybe said office is full of video editors and such.
Remember that the bandwidth is a shared resource like WiFi: that isn't "up to 224Gbit/s for every device in the room" it is "up to 224Gbit/s for every device in total". And that "up to" value is for ideal circumstances: there will be some environmental interference (though LOS limitations will work in this techs favour there) and, more significantly, the more devices you have in a given collision domain the more they will interfere slightly with each other too because they can't share the group resource with complete efficiency (and this difficulty grows exponentially after a certain threshold). Get a couple of machines transferring arbitrary data as far as they can via WiFi, take the total of transfer speeds they are getting and now add more machines doing the same. The total might scale well for an irritation or two of this test, but there will be a pint when it significantly won't and the total bandwidth will actually fall (and latency will shoot up).
The main push for 5G mobile networks wasn't better max bandwidth per device, but better performance (latency and throughout) for every device when you have a lot of them sharing the same collision domain. The headline figure of 224G bit is (while not at all dishonest) just that: a figure to gain interest via headlines. Those who actually have a need or want for such tech will be looking much deeper into it than that.