"Sam" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:04:55 GMT, "PipeDown"
wrote:

The higher the frequency the phone uses, the greater the range and less
interference (and more channels for same bandwidth).

Not really. Why would you think there's any connection between
frequency and range?

[snip]

Actually that was an oversimplification. While in general (for signals with
the same energy) range will typically fall off with frequency ( though there
are exceptions depending on where you look in the EM spectrum) the newer
phones have higher frequency and longer range.

They can do this by using a better signal (digital) and by taking advantage
of better electronics and newer ideas about signal transmission and data
retention.

While the statement snipped and taken out of context is untrue WRT all
signals, it does hold true for the cordless phones which was the topic of
the thread and my reply. One can safely assume that if you go to the store
and select a higher frequency phone over a lower one, the performance will
be better. (I did find dissenting comments while googling but that website
was bias as it was selling older technology and the article was
anti-marketing)

Higher frequency allows you to have a narrower channel which can hold more
information. More channels means they can have more seperation between
which equals less interference. Digital signals have inherent advantages
over analog WRT noise immunity. Code hopping and spread spectrum add even
more noise immunity by allowing the radios to instantly change channels
without you interacting. and more.

On the other hand, Higher frequencies would definately have more difficulty
penetrating watery obstructions like trees, leaves and people but would have
good line of sight performance. The other digital based noise control
strategies take up the rest of the slack for the time being.