Wireless wireless wireless in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r19945312 en Wed, 02 Dec 2009 13:24:25 EDT Wed, 02 Dec 2009 13:24:25 EDT Re: Wireless wireless wireless http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19945559 KrK : At only .75 cents a kilobyte!

:hmm:]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19945559 Wed, 06 Feb 2008 14:29:38 EDT Re: Wireless wireless wireless http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19945483 en102 : Wireless is good, however, there are limits (there aint no such thing as a free lunch)

300 Mbps = SHARED, and assuming no interference
That 300Mbps requires a lot of spectrum, and capacity will be limited to distance (i.e. how many users / distance).

Wireless is technically much cheaper technology to deploy, with the exception of the cost of licensing the spectrum itself.

It would be nice to have something like AT&T replace its 'Uverse' FTTN/VDSL with its 700MHz spectrum with a pico cell where VRADs exist today.
--
Canada = Hollywood North]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19945483 Wed, 06 Feb 2008 14:16:22 EDT Re: Wireless wireless wireless http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19945475 alchav :
said by ninjatutle See Profile :

Wireless is the future. Not fibre to the casa.

300Mbps is pretty sweet.
Wireless does have it's applications, but it will never replace FTTH. 300Mbps might be sweet, but this is under ideal conditions and probably a few feet away. If you want HDTV, Phone, and Broadband Fiber is the only way to go.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19945475 Wed, 06 Feb 2008 14:15:01 EDT Wireless wireless wireless http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19945312 ninjatutle : Wireless is the future. Not fibre to the casa.

300Mbps is pretty sweet. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19945312 Wed, 06 Feb 2008 13:49:34 EDT