Signal Seeker

I have purchased every antenna I can get my hands on. I can not find and
antenna that performs as good as the Signal Seeker. I have just purchased a
large 19db panel antenna from a well know manufacture with a built in
network card and it shows alot of networks, but they won't connect. The
Signal Seeker can connect showing 1 bar. It is the best antenna on the
market for home, business, and war driving. I have great response from
customers. But I still have people in this news group that give me static. I
know that the size doesn't make since, "5x6" that it able to do what it
does. What suggestion would you like me to do to show a comparison of how
great this small antenna is. I'm not trying to promote sells, we already are
having problems keeping up with dealers that have used them. I just want to
show the people that are giving me static that the Signal Seeker is the best
solution for it size on the market. It out performs antennas that are
impossible to take with you or place on your desk. My feed back from people
has been awesome. Here is just one from today and they go on and on.

MY NAME IS BOB. I BOUGHT ONE OF YOUR SIGNAL-SEEKER ANTENNAS AND WAS BLOWEN
AWAY BY IT. I HAVE TRIIED MANY DIFFERANT ANTENNAS, AND I WAS PEEVED THAT
NONE OF THEM DID WHAT THEY SAID THEY WOULD. WHETHER THEY WERE
OMNI-DIRECTIONAL, OR DIRECTIONAL.

YOUR SIGNAL-SEEKER ANTENNA, HOWEVER, DID EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS SUPOSE TO. IT
BRINGS IN SIGNALS THAT ARE WEAK WITH ANY OTHER ANTENNA, AND BRINGS THEM IN
CONNSISTANTLY.

THANK YOU FOR THIS GREAT ANTENNA. IT'S THE ONLY ONE I'LL EVER NEED.
BOB
ST. LOUIS, MO

The only people that ever say anything but positive things are ones that
don't understand wireless networks or have a lack of computer knowledge to
use them. I hope some people give me some suggestion on how to prove the
performance of the Signal-Seeker. Others express they have high gain and the
calculation show that they do but they don't perform as good as the
Signal-Seeker. Please give me some advice on how to shut up the critics that
don't understand that black is just the absence of color.
Thanks Ed

"Ed Williams" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>customers. But I still have people in this news group that give me static. I

Because what you post is *clearly* marketing hype, some of which is
patently false on its face, and *none* of which you will support with
technical specifications, measured or otherwise.


>The only people that ever say anything but positive things are ones that
>don't understand wireless networks or have a lack of computer knowledge to
>use them.

That is the kind of *flat assed lie* that causes your
credibility to be zero.

In this newsgroup, it has been the most technically astute
people who have been the most critical. Jeff Liebermann has
taken you to task, *in* *detail*, once or twice already. To
suggest that Jeff lacks an understanding of wireless networks or
computers is just hilarious beyond belief. Dishonest claims
like the above demonstrate *exactly* why nobody should believe a
word you say about your product until you provide independent
verified specifications.

>I hope some people give me some suggestion on how to prove the
>performance of the Signal-Seeker.

There are have been several technically capable people make
suggestions, and you have ignored all of them.

>Others express they have high gain and the
>calculation show that they do but they don't perform as good as the
>Signal-Seeker. Please give me some advice on how to shut up the critics that
>don't understand that black is just the absence of color.

You could start with the addition of a little integrity to what
you post here. Skip the marketing hype too (or run for a political
office and scratch posting to technical newsgroups).

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) (E-Mail Removed)

(E-Mail Removed) (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:
>credibility to be zero.

Yeah, what Floyd said. How come you keep posting here, and clearly
read the postings, but won't respond to Jeff's comments? We don't
want to be "BLOWEN" away, we want to understand the device and have
independent proof that it's better than the alternatives. Oh, yeah,
and we don't trust you marketting types, sorry...

why buy an antenna? you can create one with about of 2-5 $ of
investment.wheather its omni or directional
"Ed Williams" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>I have purchased every antenna I can get my hands on. I can not find and
>antenna that performs as good as the Signal Seeker. I have just purchased a
>large 19db panel antenna from a well know manufacture with a built in
>network card and it shows alot of networks, but they won't connect. The
>Signal Seeker can connect showing 1 bar. It is the best antenna on the
>market for home, business, and war driving. I have great response from
>customers. But I still have people in this news group that give me static.
>I know that the size doesn't make since, "5x6" that it able to do what it
>does. What suggestion would you like me to do to show a comparison of how
>great this small antenna is. I'm not trying to promote sells, we already
>are having problems keeping up with dealers that have used them. I just
>want to show the people that are giving me static that the Signal Seeker is
>the best solution for it size on the market. It out performs antennas that
>are impossible to take with you or place on your desk. My feed back from
>people has been awesome. Here is just one from today and they go on and on.
>
> MY NAME IS BOB. I BOUGHT ONE OF YOUR SIGNAL-SEEKER ANTENNAS AND WAS BLOWEN
> AWAY BY IT. I HAVE TRIIED MANY DIFFERANT ANTENNAS, AND I WAS PEEVED THAT
> NONE OF THEM DID WHAT THEY SAID THEY WOULD. WHETHER THEY WERE
> OMNI-DIRECTIONAL, OR DIRECTIONAL.
>
> YOUR SIGNAL-SEEKER ANTENNA, HOWEVER, DID EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS SUPOSE TO. IT
> BRINGS IN SIGNALS THAT ARE WEAK WITH ANY OTHER ANTENNA, AND BRINGS THEM IN
> CONNSISTANTLY.
>
> THANK YOU FOR THIS GREAT ANTENNA. IT'S THE ONLY ONE I'LL EVER NEED.
> BOB
> ST. LOUIS, MO
>
> The only people that ever say anything but positive things are ones that
> don't understand wireless networks or have a lack of computer knowledge to
> use them. I hope some people give me some suggestion on how to prove the
> performance of the Signal-Seeker. Others express they have high gain and
> the calculation show that they do but they don't perform as good as the
> Signal-Seeker. Please give me some advice on how to shut up the critics
> that don't understand that black is just the absence of color.
> Thanks Ed
>
>

Ed Williams <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> customers. But I still have people in this news group that give me
> static. I know that the size doesn't make since, "5x6" that it able to do
> what it does. What suggestion would you like me to do to show a
> comparison of how great this small antenna is. I'm not trying to promote
> sells, we already are

Just this snippet says everything. It is filled with grammatical errors.
Your customer testimonials are even worse, with spelling mistakes, and
errors in thought process. You must be in too much of a rush to proofread,
or even consider what you are putting in "print".

"5x6" does matter. Antennas, even your overpriced antenna, are not magic.
ERP is not produced from something that you figured out in your sheet metal
shop. With that sized antenna, the only way to get superior signal is with
higher power. You may be able to achieve higher ERP than some other
combinations on the market and still be within legal power limits, or not.
It's just impossible to say, because you constantly act like you don't
understand how it is done, and can't explain it. It may be that it's a
fine product, but the web site, and your posts, are a real turn off to me.

I've been following your posts since the first one.
You sounded like an astonished end user, having stumbled onto someone
else's great product that you wanted to let us all know about.

> From: "Ed Williams"
> Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 11:41:14 -0500
> We just started market this antenna. It was designed by a local man.

Most of your other posts indicate that you are just a happy user. Then you
claim to have designed it after many years in the business.

What is it? Is it some radio design of your own that is not FCC certified,
and therefore illegal for sale, or is it just a cheap USB dongle with a
brass panel antenna that you think is better than someone else's panel
antenna? Is it $50 worth of parts and you are afraid to list the FCC ID of
the dongle, because then people might build it by themselves and cut you
out of your profit?

Instead of repeated posts of how certain people in the group are against
your device and don't understand wireless, why don't you reveal a little of
the detail you've been asked for? What is the FCC-ID of the radio? What
is the model number of the radio? Who is the radio manufacturer? What is
the MAC address of the radio? What is the antenna design (patch, biquad)?
Can we see a picture of the inside of the 4x10 or 5x6 box that seem to have
the same Netstumbler photo on your web page?

---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8,-122.5

You guys wouldn't help an old lady across the street. My feed back is from
customers. How much more honest can you be. I don't change a word of what
they email. The antenna works that good. All I wanted was some opinion on
what would be a good way to put the remarks that have been said to rest. I
guess some of you guys would never be satisfied. All you want is to argue
your point. And the point is I'm not going to waste my time anymore with
you. I will just let the satisfied customer prove my point.


<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:d4b679$vkv$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Ed Williams <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> customers. But I still have people in this news group that give me
>> static. I know that the size doesn't make since, "5x6" that it able to do
>> what it does. What suggestion would you like me to do to show a
>> comparison of how great this small antenna is. I'm not trying to promote
>> sells, we already are
>
> Just this snippet says everything. It is filled with grammatical errors.
> Your customer testimonials are even worse, with spelling mistakes, and
> errors in thought process. You must be in too much of a rush to
> proofread,
> or even consider what you are putting in "print".
>
> "5x6" does matter. Antennas, even your overpriced antenna, are not magic.
> ERP is not produced from something that you figured out in your sheet
> metal
> shop. With that sized antenna, the only way to get superior signal is
> with
> higher power. You may be able to achieve higher ERP than some other
> combinations on the market and still be within legal power limits, or not.
> It's just impossible to say, because you constantly act like you don't
> understand how it is done, and can't explain it. It may be that it's a
> fine product, but the web site, and your posts, are a real turn off to me.
>
> I've been following your posts since the first one.
> You sounded like an astonished end user, having stumbled onto someone
> else's great product that you wanted to let us all know about.
>
>> From: "Ed Williams"
>> Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 11:41:14 -0500
>> We just started market this antenna. It was designed by a local man.
>
> Most of your other posts indicate that you are just a happy user. Then
> you
> claim to have designed it after many years in the business.
>
> What is it? Is it some radio design of your own that is not FCC
> certified,
> and therefore illegal for sale, or is it just a cheap USB dongle with a
> brass panel antenna that you think is better than someone else's panel
> antenna? Is it $50 worth of parts and you are afraid to list the FCC ID
> of
> the dongle, because then people might build it by themselves and cut you
> out of your profit?
>
> Instead of repeated posts of how certain people in the group are against
> your device and don't understand wireless, why don't you reveal a little
> of
> the detail you've been asked for? What is the FCC-ID of the radio? What
> is the model number of the radio? Who is the radio manufacturer? What is
> the MAC address of the radio? What is the antenna design (patch, biquad)?
> Can we see a picture of the inside of the 4x10 or 5x6 box that seem to
> have
> the same Netstumbler photo on your web page?
>
> ---
> Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8,-122.5
>

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 01:44:48 -0400, "Ed Williams"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I have purchased every antenna I can get my hands on.

I assume you mean panel antennas. If so, I just added up the total
cost of one of every antenna on the:
http://www.fab-corp.com
web site (excluding the quantity bundles, and connector variations).
That's 10 antennas for a total of about $600. I'm sure FAB
appreciates your business.

>I can not find and
>antenna that performs as good as the Signal Seeker.

True. Signal Seeker is not an antenna. It's a radio with an antenna
attached. Comparing that to just an antenna is a waste of time.

>I have just purchased a
>large 19db panel antenna from a well know manufacture with a built in
>network card and it shows alot of networks, but they won't connect.

Make and model? USB or ethernet? No reason to keep the competition
name secret. Let's see what Google can find. One of these perhaps?
http://www.superpass.com/usbadp.html
http://www.moonblinkwifi.com/pd_usbant1.cfm
If you can see lots of networks, perhaps the reason it can't connect
is that they're encrypted and don't allow connections?

Does your purchase of such a competitive device imply that you're
going to do a side by side comparison test? If so, I can recommend a
few simple tests that will establish the relative differences in
performance. Actually, one is very simple. Locate an access point
with a very simple antenna at some location in the open. Connect a
computah to the access point that is capable of serving large files.
Connect your test radio to a laptop and download large files while
measuring the thruput speed. Start very close to the access point and
move backwards. Record the speed at convenient distances out to as
far as you can easily measure. With a big antenna, this can easily be
miles so be prepared to deal with long distances. Make a graph of
distance versus thruput. The graph will be jagged because of
reflections, multipath, interference, and such, but will give a good
idea of the distance versus speed tradeoff. If you need setup clues
or benchmark software, please ask.

>The
>Signal Seeker can connect showing 1 bar.

I can't resist a joke. I was in a shop that sells cell phones and was
listening to the salesmans pitch line. He was comparing cell phones
for a customer that was obviously clueless. So, he declared that one
particular phone was more "powerful" because it showed 5 bars instead
of 4 bars for the cell site. Never mind that they were radically
different phones, with totally different signal strength to RSSI to
number of bars conversion algorithms. How many microvolts or dBm
receive signal equals one bar?

>It is the best antenna on the
>market for home, business, and war driving.

War driving? Does it work with Netstumbler under Windoze 98/ME in
native mode? Does your USB radio include an NDIS 5.1 driver for
Netstumbler on W2K and XP? Does it work with Kismet (Linux)?

>I have great response from
>customers. But I still have people in this news group that give me static.

That would be me, but I wouldn't exactly call my comments static.
Most of my comments are requests for detail and numbers, some of which
you previous promised.

>I know that the size doesn't make since, "5x6" that it able to do what it
>does.

I, on the other hand, know that aperture size limits antenna gain for
panel antennas and that as long as the patch antenna is not built from
more than 2 layers, the gain will be directly related to the aperture
size, which is the active antenna area. Download MStrip40 for a
suitable simulation:
http://www.e-technik.fh-kiel.de/~splitt/html/mstrip.htm

>What suggestion would you like me to do to show a comparison of how
>great this small antenna is.

Thruput vs range as previous described would be a good start.
Compare with competitive radios and antennas. Throw in a simple
laptop with built in MiniPCI radio or PCMCIA for comparison. Measured
receive sensitivity and transmit power output (EIRP) would be nice,
but will require quite a bit of test equipment. I'll settle for
thruput vs distance.

>I'm not trying to promote sells, we already are
>having problems keeping up with dealers that have used them. I just want to
>show the people that are giving me static that the Signal Seeker is the best
>solution for it size on the market. It out performs antennas that are
>impossible to take with you or place on your desk.

It's not considered polite for me to question your motives. However,
please note that if you really, truly, genuinely want to do battle
with me, answering some of my requests for details and numbers would
be a good start.

>My feed back from people
>has been awesome. Here is just one from today and they go on and on.

I've been involved with many manufacturers and product over the last
35 years. Very few people write unsolicited comments of praise. One
mail odor and online company I just checked shipped to about 10,000
active customers last year, and received about 40 email and written
messages of praise. I know because the company posts these on the
company bulletin board. Everyone reads them. Most of the customer
feedback is in the form of complaints, shipping issues, tech support,
and requests for additional info. The number of unsolicited comments
of praise you supply seems a bit excessive for your size company.

Also, your postings all show problems in grammar and spelling, which
also appears in the alleged customer feedback. The similarity to your
style and to other alleged comments on the eBay site, make me suspect
the origin of your customer testimonials.

>The only people that ever say anything but positive things are ones that
>don't understand wireless networks or have a lack of computer knowledge to
>use them.

Now wait a minute. I said that your antenna has a definite receive
advantage over system with a connecting coax cable. Everything else
is problematic, but the receive advantage is certainly there.

Incidentally, on the topic of understanding wireless, I do which you
would use dB, dBM, and dBi in their proper places. They're not
interchangeable.

>I hope some people give me some suggestion on how to prove the
>performance of the Signal-Seeker. Others express they have high gain and the
>calculation show that they do but they don't perform as good as the
>Signal-Seeker. Please give me some advice on how to shut up the critics that
>don't understand that black is just the absence of color.
>Thanks Ed



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

"Ed Williams" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> You guys wouldn't help an old lady across the street. My feed back is
> from customers. How much more honest can you be. I don't change a word
> of what they email. The antenna works that good. All I wanted was some
> opinion on what would be a good way to put the remarks that have been
> said to rest. I guess some of you guys would never be satisfied. All
> you want is to argue your point. And the point is I'm not going to
> waste my time anymore with you. I will just let the satisfied customer
> prove my point.
>
>

You sir, are a real piece of work. I looked at something that was linked to
your website (or E-Bay) that you claimed that the gain is estimated to be
between 26 & 30 db. AND comparing it to a 14 dbi patch with a 500mW amp. An
8 dbi patch from Huber-Suhner is roughly 4 x 5. And a 16 dbi HS patch is
roughly 12 x 12. A 24 dbi grid is like 36 x 18 or so, so there's absolutely
NO WAY you can get 24 db of gain out of a 5 x 6 inch antenna, pure antenna
gain, not with a pre-amp.

The people here are looking to argue, they were asking for proof, REAL
proof, not just you spouting out bullsh*t. I'm sure that the regs here are
WAAAAYYYY more knowledgable about the subject than you.

If there was ANY validity to your product at all, you would have no problem
answering the question's posed.

And by the way, I've got a 16 GB/sec laser based product with a 150 mile
range for sale for $250. I've had 13 people try it out that thought it was
great..unbelievable. If your interested, give me a call at 1-800-EAT-SH*T.

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
<snip>
> What is it? Is it some radio design of your own that is not FCC certified,
> and therefore illegal for sale, or is it just a cheap USB dongle with a
> brass panel antenna that you think is better than someone else's panel
> antenna? Is it $50 worth of parts and you are afraid to list the FCC ID of
> the dongle, because then people might build it by themselves and cut you
> out of your profit?

May be absolutely no relationship at all, but there's a possibility that
this could shed a little light on his Signal Seeker:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?Q5B4121FA

Thanks for the help Jeff. As soon as I can get time to put some numbers or
graphs together I will. Maybe it was a fluke but my antenna does have 4
layers in its design. Its just not a simple reflector with foil on it. It
works and my feed backs are real. I'm working on some CNC setups right now
to speed up production. When I get that together I will have the time to
work on the numbers.
Thanks Ed

"Jeff Liebermann" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 01:44:48 -0400, "Ed Williams"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>I have purchased every antenna I can get my hands on.
>
> I assume you mean panel antennas. If so, I just added up the total
> cost of one of every antenna on the:
> http://www.fab-corp.com
> web site (excluding the quantity bundles, and connector variations).
> That's 10 antennas for a total of about $600. I'm sure FAB
> appreciates your business.
>
>>I can not find and
>>antenna that performs as good as the Signal Seeker.
>
> True. Signal Seeker is not an antenna. It's a radio with an antenna
> attached. Comparing that to just an antenna is a waste of time.
>
>>I have just purchased a
>>large 19db panel antenna from a well know manufacture with a built in
>>network card and it shows alot of networks, but they won't connect.
>
> Make and model? USB or ethernet? No reason to keep the competition
> name secret. Let's see what Google can find. One of these perhaps?
> http://www.superpass.com/usbadp.html
> http://www.moonblinkwifi.com/pd_usbant1.cfm
> If you can see lots of networks, perhaps the reason it can't connect
> is that they're encrypted and don't allow connections?
>
> Does your purchase of such a competitive device imply that you're
> going to do a side by side comparison test? If so, I can recommend a
> few simple tests that will establish the relative differences in
> performance. Actually, one is very simple. Locate an access point
> with a very simple antenna at some location in the open. Connect a
> computah to the access point that is capable of serving large files.
> Connect your test radio to a laptop and download large files while
> measuring the thruput speed. Start very close to the access point and
> move backwards. Record the speed at convenient distances out to as
> far as you can easily measure. With a big antenna, this can easily be
> miles so be prepared to deal with long distances. Make a graph of
> distance versus thruput. The graph will be jagged because of
> reflections, multipath, interference, and such, but will give a good
> idea of the distance versus speed tradeoff. If you need setup clues
> or benchmark software, please ask.
>
>>The
>>Signal Seeker can connect showing 1 bar.
>
> I can't resist a joke. I was in a shop that sells cell phones and was
> listening to the salesmans pitch line. He was comparing cell phones
> for a customer that was obviously clueless. So, he declared that one
> particular phone was more "powerful" because it showed 5 bars instead
> of 4 bars for the cell site. Never mind that they were radically
> different phones, with totally different signal strength to RSSI to
> number of bars conversion algorithms. How many microvolts or dBm
> receive signal equals one bar?
>
>>It is the best antenna on the
>>market for home, business, and war driving.
>
> War driving? Does it work with Netstumbler under Windoze 98/ME in
> native mode? Does your USB radio include an NDIS 5.1 driver for
> Netstumbler on W2K and XP? Does it work with Kismet (Linux)?
>
>>I have great response from
>>customers. But I still have people in this news group that give me static.
>
> That would be me, but I wouldn't exactly call my comments static.
> Most of my comments are requests for detail and numbers, some of which
> you previous promised.
>
>>I know that the size doesn't make since, "5x6" that it able to do what it
>>does.
>
> I, on the other hand, know that aperture size limits antenna gain for
> panel antennas and that as long as the patch antenna is not built from
> more than 2 layers, the gain will be directly related to the aperture
> size, which is the active antenna area. Download MStrip40 for a
> suitable simulation:
> http://www.e-technik.fh-kiel.de/~splitt/html/mstrip.htm
>
>>What suggestion would you like me to do to show a comparison of how
>>great this small antenna is.
>
> Thruput vs range as previous described would be a good start.
> Compare with competitive radios and antennas. Throw in a simple
> laptop with built in MiniPCI radio or PCMCIA for comparison. Measured
> receive sensitivity and transmit power output (EIRP) would be nice,
> but will require quite a bit of test equipment. I'll settle for
> thruput vs distance.
>
>>I'm not trying to promote sells, we already are
>>having problems keeping up with dealers that have used them. I just want
>>to
>>show the people that are giving me static that the Signal Seeker is the
>>best
>>solution for it size on the market. It out performs antennas that are
>>impossible to take with you or place on your desk.
>
> It's not considered polite for me to question your motives. However,
> please note that if you really, truly, genuinely want to do battle
> with me, answering some of my requests for details and numbers would
> be a good start.
>
>>My feed back from people
>>has been awesome. Here is just one from today and they go on and on.
>
> I've been involved with many manufacturers and product over the last
> 35 years. Very few people write unsolicited comments of praise. One
> mail odor and online company I just checked shipped to about 10,000
> active customers last year, and received about 40 email and written
> messages of praise. I know because the company posts these on the
> company bulletin board. Everyone reads them. Most of the customer
> feedback is in the form of complaints, shipping issues, tech support,
> and requests for additional info. The number of unsolicited comments
> of praise you supply seems a bit excessive for your size company.
>
> Also, your postings all show problems in grammar and spelling, which
> also appears in the alleged customer feedback. The similarity to your
> style and to other alleged comments on the eBay site, make me suspect
> the origin of your customer testimonials.
>
>>The only people that ever say anything but positive things are ones that
>>don't understand wireless networks or have a lack of computer knowledge to
>>use them.
>
> Now wait a minute. I said that your antenna has a definite receive
> advantage over system with a connecting coax cable. Everything else
> is problematic, but the receive advantage is certainly there.
>
> Incidentally, on the topic of understanding wireless, I do which you
> would use dB, dBM, and dBi in their proper places. They're not
> interchangeable.
>
>>I hope some people give me some suggestion on how to prove the
>>performance of the Signal-Seeker. Others express they have high gain and
>>the
>>calculation show that they do but they don't perform as good as the
>>Signal-Seeker. Please give me some advice on how to shut up the critics
>>that
>>don't understand that black is just the absence of color.
>>Thanks Ed
>
>
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
> 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS 831-336-2558