 | |  |  | | | | | | | | | | | | |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
| |
| Author |
Message |
_Billy_
B.V. VIP - Pioneer
Joined: Oct 25, 2001
Posts: 18400
Location: South Carolina---Laissez les bons temps rouler
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:47 am Post subject: WiFi |
 |
|
| |
_________________
Adopt A Greyhound! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Author |
Message |
ninor
B.V. VIP - Friend
Joined: Sep 28, 2001
Posts: 3535
Location: Northern Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 6:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
hmmmmmmm ...... I'm a bit skeptical.
It's says it's using a "built-in" Wifi card, but it's connected from the Antenna to your PC via a USB cable, which isn't nearly as good as an on-board PCMCIA/PCI/PCIe card. You're going to be limited by the capabilities of the USB external interface.
Then there's the question of who's Access Point you're going to connecting to that's 10 miles away?
I smell fish and Snake Oil Billy.  |
|
_________________
For some, the mystery of evil is too deep to be illuminated by the light of reason.
~Dean Koontz~ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Rhythm
B.V. Lurker
Joined: Jul 19, 2007
Posts: 306
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
the usb isnt likely to be limiting as any wi-fi hotspots you find are not going to be transferring at a rate the usb can't handle. My question would be how usable the detected signals would be.
You have to be able to transmit a signal that distance as well as recieve or you can't request sites to view. Receiving a long distance signal is not the same as them receiving you. I wouldnt at all be surprised that you would see a increase in signal strength overall but for instance to see that 10 mile distance I would expect BOTH parties would have to be using a similar antenna in order to talk to each other. (i.e. the wifi transmitting point would need a similar antenna in ordr to recieve a signal from you) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
ninor
B.V. VIP - Friend
Joined: Sep 28, 2001
Posts: 3535
Location: Northern Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| Rhythm wrote: |
| the usb isnt likely to be limiting as any wi-fi hotspots you find are not going to be transferring at a rate the usb can't handle. |
You're mistaken about it not being limited by being connected to a USB port. A USB connection is a generic way to connect a wide range of external devices, although it has it's place, it is nowhere near as good a connection as say a PCI Express slot.
Any device connected to a PC/Laptop via a USB port instead of through a direct connection on a PCI/PCIe/PCMCIA slot is going to suffer in performance because it's another link in the chain. The actual data rate that USB (be it 1.0 or 2.0) is capable of isn't the issue, it's the fact that it's external to the motherboard as apposed to be connected direct to an on-board slot that is specific purpose designed with it's own transmission Protocols.
Let's take PCI Express for example:
The 1x PCIe slots will support a bandwidth of 5Gbps, and the 16x PCIe slot will support 80Gbps (16x connector which is used as a video card expansion slot), as apposed to USB 2.0 connection of up to 480 Mbps.
PCI Express Throughput
The Throughput Rates for the PCIe interface is for one direction only. PCI Express is a serial bus which embeds its clock unlike the other bus standards listed here. The throughput of a PCI Express interface is reduced by 20 percent due to the 8B/10B data encoding. The table accounts for the 8-bit/10-bit encoding loss: at a 2.5Gbps clock speed, the 1x transfer rate of should be 312.5MBps with 8 bits per clock [without 8B/10B], but at 10 bits per clock the transfer rate becomes 250MBps [with 8B/10B].
Bus Spec: PCI; 33MHz, 32-bit, Transfer Rate: 133MBps
Bus Spec: PCI-Express x1, Transfer Rate: 250MBps
Bus Spec: AGP 2x, Transfer Rate: 533MBps
Bus Spec: PCI-Express x4, Transfer Rate: 1,000MBps
Bus Spec: AGP 4x, Transfer Rate: 1,066MBps
Bus Spec: AGP 8x, Transfer Rate: 2,133MBps
Bus Spec: PCI-Express x16, Transfer Rate: 4,000MBps
It's not just a matter of throughput capabilities though, the big difference is the difference in the way the data is transferred (Protocol):
PCI Express Protocol
The PCI Express frame is made up of a 1-byte Start-of-Frame, 2-byte Sequence Number, 16 or 20-byte Header, 0 to 4096-byte Data field, 0 to 4-byte ECRC field, 4-byte LCRC, and 1-byte End-of Frame. The smaller the number of bits transferred in the data field the greater the over-head becomes. A zero byte data field results in a 100 percent over-head, because no data was transferred. The best case through-put is achieved when the data field is max-ed out with 4096 bytes of data. Using those conditions a total of 4124 bytes will be transferred representing 4096 bytes of data.
PCI Express Design Data
PCI Express is optimized for a 4 layer FR4 [Dielectric], supporting up to 20 inch distances between devices. The actual distance between IC's depend on the number of via's. The differential trace impedance is defined as 100 ohms + 15%. Each trace pair should have a matched trace length of + 5 mils. How ever pair-to-pair trace length matching is not required. Each signal pair is capacitive coupled at the receiver. Do not stager the capacitors for each signal pair, they should reside next to each other. Jitter in the PCI Express Interface: PCI Express specifies a maximum output jitter of 120ps for the Serializer and a minimum input jitter tolerance of 240ps for the De-serializer. The UI [Unit Interval] is the bit time = 400ps, Phase Jitter most important. The UI of 400ps is 1/[2.5Gbps]. The Bit Error Rate [BER] is defined as 1x10-12.
Technical Specification Information Source
You are correct however, on your assertion that you would also need to have some sort of sending signal booster device in conjunction to a receiver booster (such as this antenna) in order to upload data (such as page requests, and affirmation of data packets received, etc.). |
|
_________________
For some, the mystery of evil is too deep to be illuminated by the light of reason.
~Dean Koontz~ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Rhythm
B.V. Lurker
Joined: Jul 19, 2007
Posts: 306
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| |
well since your average wifi spot isnt going to exceed the bandwidth of the USb it really is not of much consequence especially for someone like billy who is basically looking for any connectivity he can get and isnt necessarily looking for the very best ping times or bandwidth capabilities.
The USB is more than capable and with very little cost, of providing all the throughput he is likely to need. if You have a on board solution that is comparable I am sure billy would love to hear about it. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
ninor
B.V. VIP - Friend
Joined: Sep 28, 2001
Posts: 3535
Location: Northern Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| Rhythm wrote: |
well since your average wifi spot isnt going to exceed the bandwidth of the USb it really is not of much consequence especially for someone like billy who is basically looking for any connectivity he can get and isnt necessarily looking for the very best ping times or bandwidth capabilities.
The USB is more than capable and with very little cost, of providing all the throughput he is likely to need. if You have a on board solution that is comparable I am sure billy would love to hear about it. |
Evidently you missed the whole point I was trying to make about USB being inferior to a PCI/PCIe/PCMCIA. It's all about the Protocol.
Nevermind.  |
|
_________________
For some, the mystery of evil is too deep to be illuminated by the light of reason.
~Dean Koontz~ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
_Billy_
B.V. VIP - Pioneer
Joined: Oct 25, 2001
Posts: 18400
Location: South Carolina---Laissez les bons temps rouler
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| I pick up signals on my lap top now. There are probably 100 hotels within a 10 mile range of me and neighbors using routers whom I could use their signals. There are also signals sent out for the public use around 5 miles from me. I would imagine that the signals that I pick up now are from a neighbors router within 200 feet. It would be just as easy to insert a wifi card so I don't know why this antenna uses a built in one, unless it's meant for easier use. |
|
_________________
Adopt A Greyhound! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
KingYaba
B.V. Lurker
Joined: Dec 01, 2004
Posts: 485
Location: My own mental hell
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:57 pm Post subject: Re: WiFi |
|
|
| |
_________________
Texas: illegally acquired; universally admired. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
CrunchyUncle
B.V. Lurker
Joined: Jan 14, 2008
Posts: 28
Location: wilmington nc
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
_________________
Fahrenheit 451-The temperature at which book paper catches fire, and burns. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
| | | | | | | |
| |
blocks-left.jpg
blocks-left.jpg
blocks-left.jpg
|  |
Online Stats: 
