 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | reply to Linklist
Re: Limited distance limits value of this bandwidth said by Linklist:Terahertz wi-fi would probably only work within ranges of about 10m Effective distance limited to approx 33 ft. This might be ok for a home theater system, but isn't effective for covering a home without repeaters and multiple access points. Really? let's see 33 ft radius is 3400 square feet. My home is nowhere near that size. |
|
|
|
 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | said by BF69:said by Linklist:Terahertz wi-fi would probably only work within ranges of about 10m Effective distance limited to approx 33 ft. This might be ok for a home theater system, but isn't effective for covering a home without repeaters and multiple access points. Really? let's see 33 ft radius is 3400 square feet. My home is nowhere near that size. And is your home layout in a circle? Mine isn't. My house extends more than 33 ft in some directions from a central point. Not to mention issues of 3 floors. |
|
| reply to BF69
Mine is larger than that and it takes 5 APs to cover the entire house, garage, and shop. |
|
BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | reply to Linklist
said by Linklist:And is your home layout in a circle? Mine isn't. My house extends more than 33 ft in some directions from a central point. Not to mention issues of 3 floors.
A) must be nice to be rich
B) this is just a beta I'm sure any distance issue can be worked out
C) This is 3 Gbps at 542 GHz. Ok no one even offers 3 Gbps. The highest I know is 100 Mbps about 1/30th of 3 Gbps. And who says you have to use 542 GHz? I'm sure at say oh 50 GHz the distance issue is much less. |
|
Markie
join:2003-07-26
Kalispell, MT | reply to battleop
That's... iffy... really iffy. I've covered LARGE concrete buildings with 5 APs... you need better APs. Or better positioning/channel planning of the APs. |
|
| Since you have been to my house and you already know the specifics can you tell me where to move the APs to?
--
I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company. |
|
Markie
join:2003-07-26
Kalispell, MT | I never claimed that, I just claimed I've never seen a house that would need 5 good APs positioned well. My recommendation, and what I install are EnGenius/Senao EAP300's. Two of them should cover most houses, hit the garage and detatched buildings with an EnGenius/Senao ENH202. That's probably what *I* would do, not knowing the specifics of your install. I was just saying, as a general rule, 5 APs to cover a house (except possibly some of the largest houses) just isn't needed and will only cause more co-channel interference (if you can get good coverage with 3 APs that's ideal, then you only have one AP on each channel)
Obviously, I recommended the brand I've had the best luck with, but many APs are good. And many are junk.
Now, as for the original post... 10m isn't the problem. The problem is that in the terahertz range, the signals don't penetrate anything. So you'd need one AP in each room, and VISIBLE line of sight. It's not that much different from Infrared... |
|
TheMGPremium
join:2007-09-04
Canada
kudos:1 | reply to BF69
said by BF69:Ok no one even offers 3 Gbps. The highest I know is 100 Mbps about 1/30th of 3 Gbps.
A) 3Gbps is most likely the raw bitrate, not the actual network throughput.
B) Internet access is not the only data that people transfer over networks. Local (computer-to-computer for example) data transfers are another common use for a network, and can definitely benefit from such speeds. |
|
