| Bad math 2.4GHz - 2.35GHz = 65MHz, not 55MHz. Somebody's been smoking too much worthless Enron stock.
Anyway, the real problem is out of band transmission and reception, not power. It's hard to believe that modern engineering designs do not exist to constrain transmission by the 2.4GHz spectrum devices, as well reception by the 2.3GHz spectrum to a narrow channels without giving up signal strength. Of course it may require slightly better hardware, and that may add a few cents to the cost of each device... |
|
 a
@attbi.com | 1000mhz=1ghz
2400mhz=2.4ghz
2350mhz=2.35ghz
that is a difference of 50mhz
I think the previos guss was closer |
|
 NunyaBidnessGod Bless All Of UsPremium
join:2001-05-25
Memphis, TN | said by a:
1000mhz=1ghz
2400mhz=2.4ghz
2350mhz=2.35ghz
that is a difference of 50mhz
I think the previos guss was closer
um
isnt 1ghz really 1024mhz?
and wouldnt that make the difference a lil more than 50 mhz?
--
Nunya Bidness |
|
|
|
pierce2
join:1999-09-22
Santa Cruz, CA | no, 1Ghz is 1,000,000,000 Hertz.
however, '2.4Ghz' is actually range of frequencies, from 2.4000 to 2.4835 GHz. Ditto, the "2.35" stuff is probably a band in that general area. |
|
