Wired + wireless works fine in Windows to the same network. It bothers me to needless grab two IPs for one machine though so I usually shut off the Wifi.
while windows may recognize both devices, i don't believe they're simultaneously useful. that is, you can't use both an ethernet & wireless connection. for instance, if you were a router, you're expected to route packets to 2 mac addresses, but at the machine level, how would you then re-assemble the packets for, say, the browser?
ok, i can see where outlook may use wired for polling, & firefox would use wireless for requests, but i can't see how i would request a page & get the packets split through both devices.
Third party is usually better, often support more configurations than window server does out of the box but most people are just using simple teaming setups so it doesn't matter.
On the hardware side for consumers with dual band radio you can probably really get almost 300 Mbps around rather than 300 Mbps claimed but 100 Mbps in ideal conditions. The single radio DI655 can handle about 250 Mbps of routed traffic, so once they have a decent dual band setup they only need a little more processing power to handle it. Too bad "Internet broadband" sucks in the US.
No that router isn't very good. Even the better 802.11n draft routers don't pull anywhere near that for total routing performance - they top off around 250 Mbps:
3com and Intel NICs can do this via their third party software - you can team two LAN adapters to increase your bandwidth and/or redundancy on one IP. I am sure it has been done homebrew with wifi on Linux, check google. You have more link aggregation flexibility in Linux than you do in Windows.
that's actually a lot cooler than people realize. for all time, global companies w/ VSANs & other remote data centers have been complaining about latency due to chattyness. this should pretty much put an end to that.
