Alright, I don't usually comment on stuff unless I'm sure I know what I'm talking about, and this is one thing I do know. It's my job to know, I'm a CCNA Wireless. N is better for many reasons... This comes directly from Cisco:
Summary of 802.11n Technology
To summarize the benefits of 802.11n technology, it is simplest to say that there are two major areas of improvement over previous 802.11 devices. The first area of improvement is in the use of MIMO technology to achieve greater SNR on the radio link. The second area of improvement is in the greater efficiencies in both radio transmissions and the MAC protocol. These improvements translate into benefits in three areas: reliability, predictable coverage, and throughput.
Reliability
Greater SNR on the radio link translates directly to more reliable communication, often at higher data rates. Higher SNR means that more interference is needed to corrupt a transmission. This means greater client densities can be supported.
Predictable Coverage
The use of multiple spatial streams provided by MIMO technology means that there will be fewer dead spots in a coverage area. Areas that previously suffered from destructive multipath interference now make use of that same multipath effect to provide robust communication.
Throughput
The efficiency improvement in 802.11n provides a greater transfer of the high bit rates of the 802.11n radio to effective throughput seen by actual applications, at least in greenfield deployments. Even in mixed-mode deployments with legacy 802.11 devices, 802.11n will provide greater effective throughput, although significantly less than the greenfield mode.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/coll...ite_Paper.html
So there you, go. Basically, it's uses less power (Did someone say longer lasting battery?) and has increased range and higher data rates at a further point from the access point.
Any flamers want to take a hit at that?