I sincerely hope that the future doesn't involve wires. Incremental improvement will be required to reach that future. This is one of them, so I welcome it.
Lower power, lower latency, lower penetration at reasonable bandwidths and lower costs should absolutely be the goal.
That's not to say high penetration wireless doesn't have it's uses, it absolutely does, but those are few and far between in a consumer usecase, especially if you can run an affordable lower power, lower penetration meshnet that doesn't cause interference with your own devices, or with your neighbors.
Then the only real caveat is that you’re using 2/7 (or 2/3 in the EU) of the allocated 6ghz spectrum, but that’s workable given the range of 6ghz.
Wifi by compare recently went from 480 MHz of space (5GHz) to 1600 MHz (+6E spectrum) of space available in total. Colossal gain, nearly tripled in bandwidth. But there's still less bandwidth in all wifi than there is in a single wigig channel.
That wifi is making such excellent use of such a relatively limited amount of spectrum is amazing. I'm expecting impressive connectivity even at significantly reduced link budgets.
But as for the point here, about interesting new inter-device connectivity, I agree with both of you. Wigig did have these capabilities, has had interesting video & device shipping for a while now. Alas adoption has been just critically low. VR was basically the only thing that pulled this impressive wigig standard out of the hole it had crawled in to die. No one was building this stuff. Huge loss, huge pity. I really wish we had a lot more experience using wigig like technologies, because to the grandparent posters point, having this massive connectivity capability on tap for everyday consumer & business wifi: it's definitely going to enable intense new streaming & inter-system capabilities. I just wish we'd gotten more of a chance to explore this space more freely in the past 10 years, which is about how long 802.11ad/wigig's been around for.