  woody7
Premium Member
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA |
woody7
Premium Member
2007-Mar-28 3:03 pm
hmmm.....why not here?  | |
|
 | | |
Re: hmmm.....Why sell a software solution when you can sell a hardware solution too? | |
|
| | | |
Re: hmmm.....Except that unless you have an extremely high transmit and/or receive location you are not going to get anywhere near 60 miles LOS. The curvature of the earth makes sure of that. The 'world record' referenced by Karl Bode used two mountaintops. How many regular users have a couple of 7500 foot mountain peaks laying around? | |
|
| | |  Kompressor
Premium Member
join:2002-02-12
Huntington Beach, CA |
Re: hmmm.....Depending on what frequency you are transmitting on, it is possible for a simplex signal to go around the world. | |
|
| | | | | |
Re: hmmm.....Well, them frequencies are not used for plain vanilla 802.11 WiFi... | |
|
| | | | | |
to Kompressor
well, considering in general terms, the radio distance is defined as O(ptical) = sqrt(2h(r))+sqrt(2h(t)), where O = distance to optical horizon, and h=(r)receiver height, and h(t) is transmitter height. So assume the antenna is 20' at both sides. The optical distance would be approximately sqrt(2*20) + sqrt(2*20) = Appx 12.5 miles.
Now we calculate the loss.
PL = 117 + 20log10fMhz-20log10hthr+40Log10D
Where 117 = Constant
2.4Ghz
20' and 20'
Distance of 12 miles
So it's about 175db loss over that distance. Thus, the antenna is the key, because with a 175db loss, the antenna is going to have to be pretty tight. | |
|
| shoan
join:2006-02-27
Benton, AR |
to woody7
sometimes I just have to shake my head at things. Just knowing that they can do things like this yet this is slated for places outside of the US just makes for a sad penguin | |
|
| |
Why not for the US?I can see a great need for this, this would allow people in rural area's to get affordable broadband. The price difference (15,000.00) vs. (700.00) is a no brainer, why anyone would choose wimax is beyond me. Of course, that's assuming this works as advertised.. | |
|
| | |
Re: Why not for the US?quote:
Why not for the US?
The same reason we can't make toothbrushes that last for more than two months. | |
|
| | | |
Re: Why not for the US?Yuck - do yo really want to use a toothbrush that is several months old? | |
|
| | |  vdiv
Premium Member
join:2002-03-23
Reston, VA
1 edit |
vdiv
Premium Member
2007-Mar-28 3:22 pm
Re: Why not for the US?Yes, if I brush my teeth once a month I'll believe this when I see it. There is no way a 100 mW transmission can traverse 60 miles (line of sight I presume -- useless), especially with all the interference in the 2.4 GHz band. Software is good but not that good. | |
|
| | | | | |
MZR2
Member
2007-Mar-28 3:53 pm
Re: Why not for the US?It is possible, LOS is the keyword. Ever thought how the 1W transmitters in the directway satellite systems can reach a satellite that is 22,000 miles away? LOS... | |
|
| | | | |  fireflierCoffee. . .Need Coffee
Premium Member
join:2001-05-25
Limbo |
Re: Why not for the US?Well, that and HIGHLY directional antennas. . . | |
|
| | | | | |  NOCManMadMacHatter
Premium Member
join:2004-09-30
Colorado Springs, CO |
NOCMan
Premium Member
2007-Mar-28 5:06 pm
Re: Why not for the US?Only 1W? How high up are those satellites? I've ran setups to 23,000miles and we'd have to push a few dozen watts just to get through heavy clouds and a lot more if it was raining really bad. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
MZR2
Member
2007-Mar-28 8:51 pm
Re: Why not for the US?I agree with you, but remember,in a sat terminal you are amplifying a wide spectrum(multiple channels). A direcway, any other residential sat setup only needs to amp a small carrier.
It is just like many Wireless ISPs that use 5 and 10MHz channel widths to increase range instead of the standard 20MHz Wi-Fi channels.
I was a direcway customer about 5 years ago and used to lose sync every time a dark cloud got in the way.
BTW, I still have the equipment, If anyone wants it. | |
|
| | | | | | |  maartenaElmo
Premium Member
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA |
to NOCMan
QUESTION: What's the power for Cassini's transmitter? ANSWER from FAQ on June 3, 1999: It's 20 watts. Received at the DSN antennas, the signal power is 10 to the -16th (0.0000000000000001) watts. From Saturn, the signal takes about 1 hour and 20 minutes to reach Earth. Conclusion: You don't need a whole lot of power to send a signal.... and to receive a signal, you need even less. | |
|
| | | | | | vdiv
Premium Member
join:2002-03-23
Reston, VA |
to fireflier
Yes, but antennas are hardware. Wi-Fi gear uses a half-dipole with a tiny 2.16 dBi gain and this article claims using existing Wi-Fi gear. Also consider the carrier frequency, noise figure and lack of line-of-sight (multiple reflections).
Allow me to remain a skeptic... | |
|
| | |  exocet_cmWriting
Premium Member
join:2003-03-23
Brooklyn, NY |
to MrBentor
said by MrBentor:Yuck - do yo really want to use a toothbrush that is several months old? Wait, there is a lifespan on toothbrushes? I don't replace mine till I go to the dentist and I have teeth in great shape and clean too (according to the dentist... and my girlfriend). | |
|
| |  GlennLouEarl3 brothers, 1 gone
Premium Member
join:2002-11-17
Richmond, VA |
to Karl Bode
Two months?! Dude, you're brushin' way too hard. | |
|
| |
anomus
Anon
2007-Mar-28 3:05 pm
Cool, then I can throw away my cantennas...I was thinking about converting a dish network dish to connect to more distant neighbors but maybe I wont need to after all. Nothing like endless possible free internet connections.  | |
|
ctggzg
Premium Member
join:2005-02-11
USA |
ctggzg
Premium Member
2007-Mar-28 3:09 pm
What?"The receiver in the office consists of a directional antenna linked to a modified--but otherwise standard--wireless access point."
I wouldn't call that "regular Wi-Fi hardware". | |
|
|  FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
1 edit |
FFH5
Premium Member
2007-Mar-28 3:15 pm
Re: What?This WiFi and its special directional antennas and software is designed to connect distant access points and not access points and end users. It is like the old Microwave towers that telcos used to transmit signals. After the data gets to the remote access point, then it must be distributed locally(presumably with std WiFi equipment).
Basically it is the use of relay towers that use WiFi to distribute signals. | |
|
| | ctggzg
Premium Member
join:2005-02-11
USA |
ctggzg
Premium Member
2007-Mar-28 3:31 pm
Re: What?Okay, the article is a little misleading then, especially the "it is regular Wi-Fi hardware but with modified software" part. Just relaying wifi signals doesn't seem very ground-breaking. Home routers in WDS mode already do it on a much smaller scale. | |
|
| | cdpersonThe Stranger
join:2006-11-06
Canada |
to FFH5
Sounds like cellular technology. | |
|
 fcisler
Premium Member
join:2004-06-14
Riverhead, NY |
fcisler
Premium Member
2007-Mar-28 3:51 pm
Regular HWOf course it's regular hardware....did you not read the software part?!?!? Someone at intel has the brilliant idea to "Beef up" a wrt54g, load DD-WRT on it, and using a couple of amplifiers - bump up the power to 10watts! Now THATS why it's not going to be in the US. I pity the guy who lives next to the tower-of-power in Kazakhstan now! | |
|
93388818 (banned)It's cool, I'm takin it back
join:2000-03-14
Dallas, TX |
93388818 (banned)
Member
2007-Mar-28 4:32 pm
Line OF SightThe problem is, not everyone can get LOS with a terrestrially based transmitter. | |
|
 nekote
join:2000-12-16
Hopkinton, MA |
nekote
Member
2007-Mar-28 4:45 pm
Hardware modified: LOS / point-to-point, onlyHardware "modified": antenna LOS / point-to-point, only
From the end of the article: "Additionally, a lot of the protocols and procedures in ordinary Wi-Fi communication are eliminated. Handshaking, which allows a PC and a wireless router to link up in an ordinary Wi-Fi network, and collision detection are eliminated."
"hard to align"
software permits some degree of mis-alignment.
First thing kids do is climb on the towers - jiggering the alignment. | |
|
| KearnstdSpace Elf
Premium Member
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ |
Kearnstd
Premium Member
2007-Mar-28 5:17 pm
Re: Hardware modified: LOS / point-to-point, onlysaid by nekote:Hardware "modified": antenna LOS / point-to-point, only From the end of the article: "Additionally, a lot of the protocols and procedures in ordinary Wi-Fi communication are eliminated. Handshaking, which allows a PC and a wireless router to link up in an ordinary Wi-Fi network, and collision detection are eliminated." "hard to align" software permits some degree of mis-alignment. First thing kids do is climb on the towers - jiggering the alignment. then the kid's parents sue the ISP/tower owner after the kid falls off. | |
|
| |  PolarBear03The bear formerly known as aaron8301
Premium Member
join:2005-01-03 |
Re: Hardware modified: LOS / point-to-point, onlyLike the kid who's parents sued the LIRR because he got hit by a train while graffiti-ing the train station. | |
|
|  lrtc6
join:2004-06-05
Toronto |
to nekote
I wonder how they are going to deal with multiple user since there is going to be co-channel interference, and if it's based on 802.11 which is contention based there is going to be mega problems with that range. The hardware only supports so many wireless channels. | |
|
 vpoko
Premium Member
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA
1 edit |
vpoko
Premium Member
2007-Mar-28 6:37 pm
Could it be done by end users in the US?Doesn't WiFi use part 15? If you were doing it with a directional antenna and didn't interfere with anything else, why wouldn't that be acceptable here? | |
|
 nklb
Premium Member
join:2000-11-17
Ann Arbor, MI |
nklb
Premium Member
2007-Mar-28 11:12 pm
CSMA/CDsaid by article :
Additionally, a lot of the protocols and procedures in ordinary Wi-Fi communication are eliminated. Handshaking, which allows a PC and a wireless router to link up in an ordinary Wi-Fi network, and collision detection are eliminated.
Last time I checked wireless used CSMA/CA and not CSMA/CD. AKA they already use Collision Avoidance rather than Collision Detection. | |
|
fartness (banned)Donald Trump 2016
join:2003-03-25
Look Outside |
fartness (banned)
Member
2007-Mar-29 1:10 am
Fresnel zone?With 60 miles in between, there could be a lot that could block the Fresnel zone. Could cause problems. | |
|
 plk
Premium Member
join:2002-04-20
united state |
plk
Premium Member
2007-Mar-29 10:10 am
sure it doesOh yes..... this works just fine... with my d-link router.
Blimp sold separately
Hell, these folks can't even live up to claimed bandwidth or distance in the home...... blowing smoke up your..... | |
|
|
|
