Article about home wireless "congestion"

Loading thread data ...

~

formatting link
Ultimately the question is, or will be: how do you achieve the requisite bits per second per cubic meter, for your applications running in your coverage area?

If 2.4GHz meets your needs ... then, given that it carries further and is cheaper, why not go for it.

BUT if you have serious bps/m^2 needs, then 72MHz (or whatever) of bandwidth in the 2.4 band can't compete with 330MHz (or whatever) in the 5GHz band.

The greater attenuation at higher frequencies is a nonissue for your high bps/m^2 users, who will want to space their radios at

20' or 20m intervals. In fact it's a plus for 5GHz as it reduces the impact of interference from the peanut gallery.

~ Very old woody beets will never cook tender. ~ -- Fannie Farmer

I dig this quote, so I googled on it, and got 30,000 hits, all of which appear to be your sig. Man you post a lot! (Loved you in Alfredo Garcia btw.)

Reply to
Aaron Leonard

Hmm. This came from the 1965 edition of the cookbook.

The closest I found on the 'net was the 1918:

formatting link
I don't really post that much -- a lot of newsgroups get archived in a lot of places though. I'm nowhere near the a big poster in any of the newsgroups I follow, which are only about 6.

Reply to
Warren Oates

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.