dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
436
share rss forum feed


FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

Super WiFi anything but super

Super WiFi is not WiFi at all, it uses TV frequencies 54 MHz to 698 MHz. It needs its own special hotspot device to translate Whitespace connectivity to WiFi connectivity to connect to smartphones for example. And the top speed is about 10mbps. In other words it is a way to connect a central wired Internet connection to remote WiFi APs wirelessly instead of with cables.

»venturebeat.com/2013/07/09/this-···tudents/

While standard Wi-Fi uses the 2.4 GHz radio frequency, Super Wi-Fi uses lower frequency TV radio signals — 54MHz to 698 MHz – which travel farther and propagate more effectively over hills and around obstacles such as trees. Maximum range for the signals appears to be about six miles, with a maximum speed around 10Mbps.

“You don’t need special equipment to access Super WiFi,” AIR.U cofounder Bob Nichols told me. The long-haul wireless transfer to transit stations and shelters is done via Super WiFi, but the local connection to students’ laptops is standard WiFi.

So you have a remote WiFi AP with a total SHARED speed of 10 Mbps trying to handle possibly dozens of users. Don't expect great speeds. But I readily admit it is better than no access at all.
--
"If you want to anger a conservative lie to him.
If you want to anger a liberal tell him the truth."

BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH

1 recommendation

So they're using it for wireless backhaul? That's what I thought when reading the article, I couldn't imagine the nightmare that rolling out USB dongles to every student would create, even though the ability to have cellular-like coverage over a whole campus or town would be pretty cool...

elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY
reply to FFH5
True they dont like it called wi-fi because some business/association was formed on the name, but it is using the EM spectrum just the same with different protocols, so they aren't compatible today. In 5 years who cares, it's seamless.

It sort like HSPA (and even LTE) magically become 4G. Reality and marketing don't live on the same planet.

I remember when I got my first wifi gw It sucked too and so did compatibility, but it still runs by print server today w/ openwrt...Linksys wrt54g v1.0 But look at today. Once they figure out multiple channels and directionality watch out.

I mean think of FTTN. You could pretty much do away with aging copper if you had base stations instead of VRAD.

The potential for M2M is amazing here, along w/ payments.

The use cases for such valuable spectrum will be even more revolutionary than wifi and bluetooth. Just think in a metro app, P2P communication is now feasible and this presents new levels of potential privacy....

Just think add in some encryption and maybe the NSA cant spy on your walkie talkie cell phones

silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA
reply to BiggA
Seems they are using it for backhaul. I can't imagine it will work well though. They will quickly find they don't have much bandwidth to play with. A few youtube videos will slow the network to a crawl.

BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH
reply to elefante72
Even if they used the same air interface, a Wifi card can only see 2.4ghz and 5ghz...

Bandwidth depends on what they're using for the air interface, and how many channels they can bond together. If they can get several channels all running an LTE-like OFDMA, that would get them maybe ~50mbps a channel...