Questions about Wi-Fi adapters, amplifiers, and antennae

Hi:

I have this network adapter -- http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16833122382
-- WG311NAR

I'm looking for a way to strengthen my Wi-Fi reception regardless of
the access point I'm using.

I need an antenna system with it's own power supply to strengthen the
Wi-Fi signal. Current the signal strength registers at only 20%. I
want to strengthen the reception to 100% -- or as strong as possible
-- without increasing the transmission strength.

Ideally, I would like the transmission strength to be the minimum
required to access the internet but with the reception strength being
the maximum possible. I don't mind if the my internet speed is slow
due to weak transmission.

Where I live, there is a coffee shop that allows free use of their
open wireless access point. So if the signal being received by my
network adapter is intense enough, I'd by able to access the net via
the coffee shop from my residence.

A. Is there a way to amplify the received wireless radio signal after
it has been picked by an antenna and then feed the strengthened signal
into the WG311NAR adapter? If so, then it wouldn't matter whether or
not the antenna is directional. Are there any devices that will do
this? I've heard of wireless repeaters that will boost and then re-
transmit radio signals but I don't want this because they will also
amplify the radio signal my adapter transmits.

B. If such a device does not exist, then I would like to purchase a
wireless adapter with the following characteristics:

1. The strength of the transmitted wireless carrier signal is the
minimum required in order to access the net

2. The amplitude of the modulation signal about to be imposed on the
wireless carrier signal about to be transmitted should be the minimum
required in order to access the net

3. It doesn't matter to me whether the adapter uses one antenna or two
antennae. In either case, however, reception should involve the use of
an omni-directional antenna that picks up signals in all directions.

4. It doesn't matter to me whether the antenna[e] is [are] external or
internal

5. It doesn't matter to me whether the wireless adapter is internal
[e.g. PCI] or external [e.g. USB]

6. The antenna-gain or sensitivity does not matter to me

7. The strength of the received carrier signal does not matter to me

8. Amplification of the received wireless radio signal should be done
after de-modulation. After de-modulation -- the resulting electric
signal should amplified as much as physically-possible without
damaging the wireless adapter. This will provide a relatively
efficient wireless internet access while consuming relatively little
power and transmitting a relatively weak radio signal. This process
will also generated relatively little radio-frequency interference.

If the hypothetical device in A does exist, from where can I purchase
it?

If the hypothetical device in A does not exist, which wireless adapter
should I buy?


Thanks a bunch,

Green Xenon

On 2/21/2011 4:53 PM, GreenXenon wrote:
> Hi:
>
> I have this network adapter -- http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16833122382
> -- WG311NAR
>
> I'm looking for a way to strengthen my Wi-Fi reception regardless of
> the access point I'm using.
>
> I need an antenna system with it's own power supply to strengthen the
> Wi-Fi signal. Current the signal strength registers at only 20%. I
> want to strengthen the reception to 100% -- or as strong as possible
> -- without increasing the transmission strength.
>
> Ideally, I would like the transmission strength to be the minimum
> required to access the internet but with the reception strength being
> the maximum possible. I don't mind if the my internet speed is slow
> due to weak transmission.
>
> Where I live, there is a coffee shop that allows free use of their
> open wireless access point. So if the signal being received by my
> network adapter is intense enough, I'd by able to access the net via
> the coffee shop from my residence.
>
> A. Is there a way to amplify the received wireless radio signal after
> it has been picked by an antenna and then feed the strengthened signal
> into the WG311NAR adapter? If so, then it wouldn't matter whether or
> not the antenna is directional. Are there any devices that will do
> this? I've heard of wireless repeaters that will boost and then re-
> transmit radio signals but I don't want this because they will also
> amplify the radio signal my adapter transmits.
>
> B. If such a device does not exist, then I would like to purchase a
> wireless adapter with the following characteristics:
>
> 1. The strength of the transmitted wireless carrier signal is the
> minimum required in order to access the net
>
> 2. The amplitude of the modulation signal about to be imposed on the
> wireless carrier signal about to be transmitted should be the minimum
> required in order to access the net
>
> 3. It doesn't matter to me whether the adapter uses one antenna or two
> antennae. In either case, however, reception should involve the use of
> an omni-directional antenna that picks up signals in all directions.
>
> 4. It doesn't matter to me whether the antenna[e] is [are] external or
> internal
>
> 5. It doesn't matter to me whether the wireless adapter is internal
> [e.g. PCI] or external [e.g. USB]
>
> 6. The antenna-gain or sensitivity does not matter to me
>
> 7. The strength of the received carrier signal does not matter to me
>
> 8. Amplification of the received wireless radio signal should be done
> after de-modulation. After de-modulation -- the resulting electric
> signal should amplified as much as physically-possible without
> damaging the wireless adapter. This will provide a relatively
> efficient wireless internet access while consuming relatively little
> power and transmitting a relatively weak radio signal. This process
> will also generated relatively little radio-frequency interference.
>
> If the hypothetical device in A does exist, from where can I purchase
> it?
>
> If the hypothetical device in A does not exist, which wireless adapter
> should I buy?
>
>
> Thanks a bunch,
>
> Green Xenon

Do a Google search for the word cantenna and you should find what you
are looking for. Yes, I said cantenna, not antenna.

You should be able to purchase or build something along the lines of
what you need based on what the above search finds for you.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 14:53:56 -0800 (PST), GreenXenon
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Ideally, I would like the transmission strength to be the minimum
>required to access the internet but with the reception strength being
>the maximum possible. I don't mind if the my internet speed is slow
>due to weak transmission.

My crystal ball is a bit foggy on what you're trying to accomplish. If
you just want improved receive gain, then my guess(tm) is that you're
sniffing the traffic at the coffee shop. Please find someone else to
help you with this endevour.

>Where I live, there is a coffee shop that allows free use of their
>open wireless access point. So if the signal being received by my
>network adapter is intense enough, I'd by able to access the net via
>the coffee shop from my residence.

Make up your mind. If you can barely hear the coffee shop access
point, they probably can't hear you any better.

Do you have the permission of the coffee shop to use their system?

Google for some kind of DIRECTIONAL external antenna with an RP-SMA
connector or pigtail. Keep the coax cable as fat and as short as
practical:
<http://www.fab-corp.com/home.php?cat=251>
<http://www.fab-corp.com/home.php?cat=255>
If you want cheap junk, I've bought a few of these with fair results
(I had to resolder the coax connector on all of them and the 1/4-20
threaded nut for the tripod mount fell apart).
<http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=180476863637>
<http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=180478833768>

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

On Feb 21, 4:58*pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:


> On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 14:53:56 -0800 (PST), GreenXenon
>
> <glucege...@gmail.com> wrote:


> >Ideally, I would like the transmission strength to be the minimum
> >required to access the internet but with the reception strength being
> >the maximum possible. I don't mind if the my internet speed is slow
> >due to weak transmission.


>
> My crystal ball is a bit foggy on what you're trying to accomplish. If
> you just want improved receive gain, then my guess(tm) is that you're
> sniffing the traffic at the coffee shop. *Please find someone else to
> help you with this endevour.


No sniffing. I just want to access the internet wirelessly without
buying a router of my own. I want to be as anonmymous while using the
internet.

Now just why do I want so much privacy? See
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...6a79315?hl=en#

The answer should be waiting for you.

>
> >Where I live, there is a coffee shop that allows free use of their
> >open wireless access point. So if the signal being received by my
> >network adapter is intense enough, I'd by able to access the net via
> >the coffee shop from my residence.
>


> Make up your mind. *If you can barely hear the coffee shop access
> point, they probably can't hear you any better.


I need and want them and me to hear each other clear enough that I can
access the internet through their system.


>
> Do you have the permission of the coffee shop to use their system?
>


Everyone does. Otherwise the shop would be more restrictive of who
uses their internet service. Think encryption.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 17:48:03 -0800 (PST), GreenXenon
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Now just why do I want so much privacy? See
>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...6a79315?hl=en#
>
>The answer should be waiting for you.

What an eye opener. Yikes.

>> Do you have the permission of the coffee shop to use their system?
>
>Everyone does. Otherwise the shop would be more restrictive of who
>uses their internet service. Think encryption.

Sounds to me like everyone has access, but not everyone has
permission. You usually need to be an active customer.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 17:48:03 -0800 (PST), GreenXenon
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>No sniffing. I just want to access the internet wirelessly without
>buying a router of my own. I want to be as anonmymous while using the
>internet.

Even if you purchased a wireless router, you still will not have
access to the internet. You'll need an ISP (internet service
provider). What you really want is an internet connection without
paying for it, or without buying anything at the coffee shop. I
maintain a few coffee shop type wireless systems. You're the type of
customer that gives me the most headaches.

>Now just why do I want so much privacy? See
>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...6a79315?hl=en#

This has what to do with privacy? What do you have to hide?

Privacy... well, your IP address resolves to:
cpe-98-154-37-244.socal.res.rr.com
which puts you on Road Runner somewhere in Southern California.
Running traceroute points to the Brea area of Orange County.
ge17-0-breaca1-ars2.socal.rr.com
Nice area. Considering that you're looking for a free internet
connection, my guess(tm) is that his cable modem connection doesn't
belong to you, that you may not have permission, or that Road Runner
is about to jack up the price on you after the trial period ends.

>The answer should be waiting for you.

It's not. I read your drivel and found nothing useful, relevant, or
interesting. I'll be happy to continue debating your personal
problems, but methinks you'll find it more useful to concentrate on
the wireless problem.

>I need and want them and me to hear each other clear enough that I can
>access the internet through their system.

Have you ever considered the possibility that they don't want to hear
you? Some of the local hot spots have the transmit power turned down
on the access point to prevent freeloaders from accessing the system
from the parking lot or nearby apartments.

>> Do you have the permission of the coffee shop to use their system?

>Everyone does. Otherwise the shop would be more restrictive of who
>uses their internet service. Think encryption.

Ok, you don't have permission. Please research "theft of service".
<http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=wi-fi+"theft+of+service">
I'm sure the patrons of the coffee shop will complain while you
monopolize most of the available bandwidth.

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

On Feb 21, 7:17*pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:


> On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 17:48:03 -0800 (PST), GreenXenon
>
> <glucege...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >No sniffing. I just want to access the internet wirelessly without
> >buying a router of my own. I want to be as anonmymous while using the
> >internet.
>


> Even if you purchased a wireless router, you still will not have
> access to the internet. *You'll need an ISP (internet service
> provider). *What you really want is an internet connection without
> paying for it, or without buying anything at the coffee shop. *I
> maintain a few coffee shop type wireless systems. *You're the type of
> customer that gives me the most headaches.


I already have internet service of my own. I have an account with Time
Warner Cable. RoadRunner.


>
> >Now just why do I want so much privacy? See
> >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...rowse_frm/thre...


>
> This has what to do with privacy? *


A hell of a lot.


> What do you have to hide?


My name and face, while being brutally honest about my hatred of
society's irrational norms. No comment on which norms I'm against.


>
> Privacy... well, your IP address resolves to:
> * cpe-98-154-37-244.socal.res.rr.com
> which puts you on Road Runner somewhere in Southern California.
> Running traceroute points to the Brea area of Orange County.
> * ge17-0-breaca1-ars2.socal.rr.com
> Nice area. *Considering that you're looking for a free internet
> connection, my guess(tm) is that his cable modem connection doesn't
> belong to you, that you may not have permission, or that Road Runner
> is about to jack up the price on you after the trial period ends.


No. I'm paying for my own internet service. I could care less about
money. It's my privacy that I'm concerned about. I also don't want
Time Warner cutting off my service after receiving complaints from the
moderators/administrators of chat rooms due to my perverse text.
Worse, I don't want some ordinary person, organizing a lynch mob and
burning me alive -- and people will do that if they know my
personality. They will do this to make a name for themselves.


>
> >The answer should be waiting for you.
>


> It's not. *I read your drivel and found nothing useful, relevant, or
> interesting. *I'll be happy to continue debating your personal
> problems, but methinks you'll find it more useful to concentrate on
> the wireless problem.


Both are useful.


>
> >I need and want them and me to hear each other clear enough that I can
> >access the internet through their system.


>
> Have you ever considered the possibility that they don't want to hear
> you? *Some of the local hot spots have the transmit power turned down
> on the access point to prevent freeloaders from accessing the system
> from the parking lot or nearby apartments.


That's why I need a very sensitive reception system.


>
> >> Do you have the permission of the coffee shop to use their system?
> >Everyone does. Otherwise the shop would be more restrictive of who
> >uses their internet service. Think encryption.
>


> Ok, you don't have permission. *Please research "theft of service". *
> <http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=wi-fi+"theft+of+service">
> I'm sure the patrons of the coffee shop will complain while you
> monopolize most of the available bandwidth.


Most? No way. Text does not take up much bandwidth. All I plan to do
is write text in chat rooms. I doubt the cafe staff will care enough
to complain. I would like to use a maximum bandwidth of only 50 Kbps
-- to show that I respect the owners of the coffee shop. Is there a
way to tweak my wireless adapter so I'm not using more than 50 kbps of
service from the shop?

On the other hand, people in the chat rooms reading my text -- who I
gravely disrespect -- will want to fry me due to the deviance of the
stuff I'd like to write. These evil people in the chat rooms will
launch large amounts of emotional complaints -- to the chat service
provider [such as Yahoo], chat admins [who actively monitor text
written in the chat room], and the cafe's ISP -- against me.

What will happen if the ISP of the coffee shop refuses to take any
action against my activity? This is where things get very interesting.
People in the chat rooms will go crazy. They'll start marching on the
streets and violently protesting. They will demand that the government
make new laws. New laws rendering the socially-unacceptable stuff I
write illegal. These people will form lynch mobs forcing the enactment
of new legislations and draconian penalties against the stuff I'd like
to write in chat rooms [which currently don't violate any law].

Am I right?

Currently that stuff I'd like to write in chat rooms is totally-legal.
However, laws can change and that is not good for me.

Bottom line -- I don't plan to do anything that will make the patrons
of the coffee shop uncomfortable. However, I do plan to write stuff in
chat rooms that will rock readers to their very cores. Stuff that if I
ever said on the street, I'd be tossed into the local incinerator by
an angry puritanical lynch mob.

On Feb 21, 6:38*pm, Char Jackson <n...@none.invalid> wrote:


> On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 17:48:03 -0800 (PST), GreenXenon
>
> <glucege...@gmail.com> wrote:


> >Now just why do I want so much privacy? See
> >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...rowse_frm/thre...
>
> >The answer should be waiting for you.


>
> What an eye opener. Yikes.


Exactly. That's why I need so much anonymity. So I can write dirty
filthy sick things in chat rooms that would otherwise get me into a a
LOT of trouble with society and its evil puritans.


>
> >> Do you have the permission of the coffee shop to use their system?


>
> >Everyone does. Otherwise the shop would be more restrictive of who
> >uses their internet service. Think encryption.


>
> Sounds to me like everyone has access, but not everyone has
> permission. You usually need to be an active customer.


I am a customer I buy stuff from the coffee shop all the time.

Paying for internet service is not the issue here. I'm already doing
that. It's my location and identity that I want concealed.

If I wrote the stuff here that I'd like to write in chat rooms, my ISP
would be forced to ban me permanently. The text I want to post is just
so sick that any human being would want me dead.

If I post in chat rooms using the cafe's internet access, it will be
very difficult for the puritans to figure me out. So difficult it
won't be worth their time, energy, or money.

What is the minimum amount of bandwidth required to post text in chat
rooms? In another post I said I'd like to limit my usage of cafe to
only 50 kbps. Now I want to go even low than that. I want to use the
least necessary for real-time transmission/reception of text in chat
rooms. Is 1-bit-per-second too low? If so, what is the lowest I can
get while still pissing off my chat-enemies in real-time?

On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 20:17:23 -0800 (PST), GreenXenon
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Feb 21, 6:38*pm, Char Jackson <n...@none.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Sounds to me like everyone has access, but not everyone has
>> permission. You usually need to be an active customer.
>
>I am a customer I buy stuff from the coffee shop all the time.

But only for very small values of "all the time", I'm guessing. So
here's an idea. Go visit the coffee shop and buy something. You can
use the Wi-Fi while you're there. If you want to use more Wi-Fi, you
can buy more 'somethings'. Once you leave the cafe, your permission to
use their Wi-Fi likely ends.

>If I wrote the stuff here that I'd like to write in chat rooms, my ISP
>would be forced to ban me permanently. The text I want to post is just
>so sick that any human being would want me dead.

The help you seek isn't necessarily the help you apparently need.

On 22/02/2011 2:55 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 20:17:23 -0800 (PST), GreenXenon
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> On Feb 21, 6:38 pm, Char Jackson<n...@none.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds to me like everyone has access, but not everyone has
>>> permission. You usually need to be an active customer.
>>
>> I am a customer I buy stuff from the coffee shop all the time.
>
> But only for very small values of "all the time", I'm guessing. So
> here's an idea. Go visit the coffee shop and buy something. You can
> use the Wi-Fi while you're there. If you want to use more Wi-Fi, you
> can buy more 'somethings'. Once you leave the cafe, your permission to
> use their Wi-Fi likely ends.
>
>> If I wrote the stuff here that I'd like to write in chat rooms, my ISP
>> would be forced to ban me permanently. The text I want to post is just
>> so sick that any human being would want me dead.
>
> The help you seek isn't necessarily the help you apparently need.
>
Having read his post my first thought was " not a chance pal"

--
X-No-Archive: Yes