Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

802.11n Increases speed to 108Mbit ....BUT

  • 17-01-2004 12:29pm
    #1
    spongebob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,143 ✭✭✭


    Get ready for a long list of standards

    802.11 (unlicenced spectrum)
    802.16 (licenced spectrum)
    802.15 (unlicenced ultra short distance wide band)

    Now
    Read

    M


Comments

  • #2
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,619 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    The main reason for the success of 802.11b is it's interoperability. Don't they realise that.

    In short unless you are getting top speed reliably from your existing RF gear the benefits of faster protocols are negligable - especially since the ESTI power limits on 2.4GHz are so much less than in the states.

    The prospect of cheaper gear (discontinued stuff not meeting the "new" standards) at new frequencies is desireable :)


    ==================================

    The 22Mb extension sorta died 'cos of compatibility problems - at least 802.11g has better support.

    With all RF you have the problem that the amount of data you can transfer is a function of bandwidth used and S/N ratio.

    The more bandwidth you use the more data you can transfer - but the less channels there are because each uses a greater proportion of the available spectrum.

    S/N ratio - if the background noise level doubles then you loose half the data transfer rate (simplistic but a firest approximation) You can't increase signal level too much or you will intefer with other users & visa versa.

    Also if a link is having problems getting 11Mb using 802.11b then fancy standards won't help you. (of course newer cards will have greater sensitivity in the RF circuitry)


  • #3
    spongebob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,143 ✭✭✭spongebob


    Standards wars are great fun who came up with that + extension stuff anyway. I remember when US Ribotics were the market leaders in modems and tried to bounc e the market into their version of 33.6k and 56k (X2 it was called) . Of course it didn't work with the eventually agreed standard , v90 , and connected at 28.8k instead ....except to other US Robotics kit.

    These rows at the IEEE are more of same. I'll wait for the standard.

    M


  • #4
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,619 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    I still have a compucom speed modem 9,600bps
    except it only does 2,400 to other brands :D

    It's still fun to hear how you can retro flash these things to the new standards. And in fairness a lot of the time you can.. (except for the times you can't :( )


Advertisement