I rather think that wireless is state of the art.
But only as far as "brainless" is modern Wireless cannot be "state of the art" (=English: "state of the art") because "wireless" is not a protocol. It only means "cordless" – nothing more and nothing less. Every – but really every – technology has advantages and disadvantages, so there is no "one system fits all." Every cable has its properties, and the same basically applies to "cordless cables" – because the latter are not virtual in the sense of existing only in the imagination but in the form of radio links. Every frequency has its associated radiation pattern – and that is not limited to the useful signal, which brings us immediately to the topics of "spillover loss" and "signal to noise ratio." WLAN & Wi-Fi are in this sense "unshielded" – with cables, that would be a clear indication to doubt HD compatibility. Therefore, I only use "cordless cables" for nomadic users. I watch a music clip on YouTube on the tablet, gladly on the terrace – sure, I don't want to trip over eighteen meters of cable there. But if I watch Rosamunde Pilcher with my beloved, then I want to have both hands free for cuddling; and against pressure marks on my thighs, I don’t put the flat screen with one meter diagonal on my lap but hang it on the wall opposite. It doesn’t hang down to the next flood there, you’re right about that, but of the eight possible hanging spots in the living room (or, at , only seven until the piano is removed), each is reasonably close to a network socket. Besides that, I expect around 2025 (at CeBit or "Jugend forscht," time will tell) a kind of "night vision goggles" with which you can make electrosmog visible. Whoever transmits everything that isn't "3" in the tree basically turns their cozy home into a furnished microwave. How seriously does one want that? Wireless is almost synonymous with Terabit requiring Gigahertz, which the average partygoer buying consumer electronics likes to ignore. By the way, the fact that there are such things as repeaters at all is not only related to "extending" radio links but also serves to repair dents experienced by the radiation "cone" or "sphere" through components etc. Incidentally, almost as many "experts" cannot explain the difference between repeaters and access points as there are cardinals who mispronounce the word "diocese." And one more thing to think about regarding "Wireless = State of the Art": a radio link can only replace a copper cable; state of the art would rather be fiber optic cables.