Do you like your wires?  Too bad.  A report from the Burton analyst group speculates that wireless connections will start to replace wired Ethernet network connections within the next two or three years, and companies should probably start thinking now about switching from wired to WiFi.  

The big reason is that the new WiFi standard, 802.11n, is starting to appear in new equipment, and the increasing use of notebooks, mobile applications and voice over IP is probably going to accelerate its adoption.  As well, a standard wired network transmits data at a theoretical maximum of 100 megabits per second, while .11n wireless can do about 284 megabits per second, and that’s good news for multimedia users.  

There is a fly in the ointment at this point, though:  the final standard for .11n has to be approved by the Institute Of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and that may not happen for another couple of years.  In the meantime, the WiFi Alliance, which handles certifications to make sure that WiFi products from various manufacturers can operate with each other, is certifying equipment with the temporary, or draft standard, so that consumers won’t have to worry about buying gear that may not work later on.  

Read more at ZDNet.

'Too bad' doesn't mean anything - Wired networks will still be widely used in mission critical applications as Wired is still many times more reliable than wifi.

As on all protocols, throughput is often lower than link speed. Most of my computer network and all of my server network runs on Gigabit Ethernet (link speed of 1000Mbps) and the real throughput is still only about 320Mbps, because of latency. This affects wireless networks much more, and while .11n is rated at 300Mbps link speed, throughput remains much less, especially varying with signal strength and quality.

Baseband, wired Ethernet will always be at least a step ahead of wireless. Unless I'm moving around all the time in the house (which I don't,) I don't like WiFi. I don't think corporations will SWITCH to wifi as they will be adding it to complement existing infrastructure. Especially for desktop/workstations, there is absolutely no advantage to using WiFi, and completely switching to wireless will just result in more problems. Furthermore, there are security issues to deal with on a wireless network, and in many cases, dealing with those issues means restricting the capabilities of the wireless connection.

Quoted from TRENT

As on all protocols, throughput is often lower than link speed.

Yup.  You'll note I said "theoretical maximum".

FWIW, my Super-G equipped notebook consistently achieves equivalent download performance to my desktop, which is on a traditional wired connection.  This may be a case of "your mileage may vary", but I think for the average non-technical, non-business user, the convenience of WiFi is eventually going to make it a more attractive solution than stringing more wires around the house -- particularly when the manufacturers get off their duffs and make the implementation of robust security transparent (or at least far less opaque than it is now) to the average user.  

I do agree that for a lot of businesses, it doesn't make a lot of sense right now.  Let's continue this discussion in about ten years, though.