JohH$800 isn't even bad for an enterprise-y access point.
But as I understand WiFi 7 is not yet standardized.

Chrispy_"22 Gbps"

Wake me up when WiFi can beat the nearly 25-year-old Gigabit Ethernet 115MB/s to a single device more than one room away. With a high-end 802.11ax (WiFi6) 2x2 router and device, I could see file transfers happening at almost 150MB/s in a country house in the middle of nowhere with a guaranteed zero other wireless networks in range to interefer, as long as the laptop could see the router and there's was nothing more than 50cm of air between the laptop and the router. The minute you put the laptop on a desk and the router under the desk, it's back to sub-gigabit speeds, and you're lucky if you get half that the minute you move to the next room, even if you still have line of sight to the router :\

I wish they'd just label these things more clearly. "Up to 22 Gbps aggregate bandwidth across all devices, and up to* 1.2Gbps per device witin 5 meters"

Chrispy_I mean it's an improvement in that you can potentially achieve real-world scenarios to match the 25-year-old wired ethernet standard over WiFi, but 40ft is still basically the same room in the sort of house that could give you a completely uncontested 6GHz ultra-wide 160MHz channel to yourself, and 1.1Gbps still isn't 22Gbps, it's barely one-twentieth of the quoted number. You also need a device with 2x2 AX or 3x3 AC, and you still have caveats.

Gigabit ethernet is damn near gigabit. You're going to see 925Mbit of data transfer rates with the rest of the gigabit used for QoS and protocol overhead, on literally any old piece of junk laptop, or even tablets and phones via a cheap USB ethernet adapter.

TheLostSwedeDon't get me wrong, I prefer Ethernet any day over WiFi, least not because it synchronous, which WiFi is not.
But you can't go making statements like what you did, as it was factually incorrect.

Chrispy_Just playing devil's advocate, is it any more factually incorrect than advertising "22Gbps" in the first place? There's literally no way to ever see transfer rates at anwhere close to 22Gbps. Even 2Gbps is dishonest and misleading in all but an ideal scenario as I've mentioned.

TheLostSwedeWell, WiFi products have been advertising the maximum combined speed of all frequencies for at least a decade now, so dishonest, yes, but also a norm in the industry.
It's hard to work out a suitable "standard" for these things when it comes to actual speed, as there are too many variables, as you've pointed out.
That said, I agree that these companies should also have to present the typical performance at a set distance to a 2x2 client, to give potential customers a more real world expected performance.

MLO should allow for faster speeds, assuming it works as advertised, as you'll be able to combine all three frequency bands into a single data stream, client allowing.
It's also said to improve the latency of MLO clients, but I haven't seen any tests proving this as yet.