Hey Jeff,et al, whaddya thunk a this?

Hey Jeff, et al,


Whaddya think of this? Looks like a solution to my desktop dilemma, but
afraid I'm gonna have the FCC knocking at my door?


http://www.resellerratings.com/store...ireless_Beyond

Just noticed it requires usb 2.0; I only have 1.0 so this would be better?


http://www.radiolabs.com/products/wireless/waverv2.php


uknowwho <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:gpetbo$tj7$(E-Mail Removed):

> Hey Jeff, et al,
>
>
> Whaddya think of this? Looks like a solution to my desktop dilemma, but
> afraid I'm gonna have the FCC knocking at my door?
>
>
> http://www.resellerratings.com/store...ireless_Beyond

On Sat, 14 Mar 2009 00:22:18 +0000 (UTC), uknowwho
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Hey Jeff, et al,

Yo. Dat's me.

>Whaddya think of this?

Dunno. What problem are ya trying to solve? Whatcha got to work
with?

>Looks like a solution to my desktop dilemma,

What desktop top dilemma? I'm not going to search through all the
past articles in order to find your dilemma. I'm lazy. Make it easy
for me and others by posting the article number or supplying a
description.

>but
>afraid I'm gonna have the FCC knocking at my door?
>http://www.resellerratings.com/store...ireless_Beyond

Dunno. RadioLabs has been around for quite a while. I don't think
they'll turn you in for buying their products. If it puts out too
much power, I might turn you in to the EPA as a gross RF polluter. In
general, the FCC runs on complaints. Ordinary intereference
complaints don't count. It has to be something with ties to terrorism
or national security, or the FCC won't spend the money or allocate the
resources. Welcome to the post 911 era.




--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 (E-Mail Removed)
# http://802.11junk.com (E-Mail Removed)
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

On Sat, 14 Mar 2009 00:39:58 +0000 (UTC), uknowwho
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Just noticed it requires usb 2.0; I only have 1.0 so this would be better?
>http://www.radiolabs.com/products/wireless/waverv2.php

200mw for 802.11b and 100mw for 802.11g is high power? I don't think
so. Most client radios belch about 35mw. That's a 7.6dB boost in
transmit power, which is good for about a 2.3 times increase in
transmit range. However, you won't get any improvement in receive
range as the receiver is the usual (unspecified) chipset. No way are
you going to get the claimed 10x the range of a typical notebook
computah. The only real benefit over a notebook wireless derrangement
is that the USB radio allows you to be creative about the type and
location of the antenna, which has a big effect on range.

You might be ok with USB 1.0 as you'll be limited to 11Mbits/sec
thruput. If you're trying for the DX (distance) record, you'll be
running at the slower wireless speeds anyway, so the faster USB port
isn't going to buy you much. I don't know what OS you're running so I
can't tell if there will be driver issues.

Also, the $130 price tag seems too expensive when there are similar
admittedly lower tx power products available (e.g. Hawking HWUN3) for
half the price.

Caveat Emptor.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 (E-Mail Removed)
# http://802.11junk.com (E-Mail Removed)
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

Jeff Liebermann <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> On Sat, 14 Mar 2009 00:39:58 +0000 (UTC), uknowwho
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Just noticed it requires usb 2.0; I only have 1.0 so this would be
>>better? http://www.radiolabs.com/products/wireless/waverv2.php
>
> 200mw for 802.11b and 100mw for 802.11g is high power? I don't think
> so. Most client radios belch about 35mw. That's a 7.6dB boost in
> transmit power, which is good for about a 2.3 times increase in
> transmit range. However, you won't get any improvement in receive
> range as the receiver is the usual (unspecified) chipset. No way are
> you going to get the claimed 10x the range of a typical notebook
> computah. The only real benefit over a notebook wireless derrangement
> is that the USB radio allows you to be creative about the type and
> location of the antenna, which has a big effect on range.

So if I know the chipset where do I find performance info on that?
Seems I remember there was a gov. link for that but probably can't find
it now, for the tests? But look at their advertised receive sensitivity
ratings, that sounds good on the surface -91dbM at 11mbs

>
> You might be ok with USB 1.0 as you'll be limited to 11Mbits/sec
> thruput. If you're trying for the DX (distance) record, you'll be
> running at the slower wireless speeds anyway, so the faster USB port
> isn't going to buy you much. I don't know what OS you're running so I
> can't tell if there will be driver issues.

Have to check their return policy but the specs says usb 2.0 "only".
The first unit is 2.0 only the second one (200mw) is 1.0 or 2.0
The first radio is 500 mw output via an amplifier, but I'm more
concerned about the receive end of matters. Also any amplifier will
also increase the noise level on the receive side right?

>
> Also, the $130 price tag seems too expensive when there are similar
> admittedly lower tx power products available (e.g. Hawking HWUN3) for
> half the price.

Yeah the price is a ripoff, but might be worth it for convenience of usb
unit. Have to find out the chipset as I also want to know what software
it is compatible with. The OS is not an issue, they state they have
drivers for 98SE, but I've heard that story before. Thanks for your
usual good answer, this group would be toast without you.

>
> Caveat Emptor.
>

yeah, no guarantee, no buyee

"Peter Pan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed) m:

>
> "uknowwho" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:gpeucs$tj7$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Just noticed it requires usb 2.0; I only have 1.0 so this would be
>> better?
>
>
> Twice as good, thats why it wants 2 instead of 1..... 1 +1 = 2 !
>

say, did your Mother have any children that lived?