"Wireless is a pain. It's slow, expensive, will not work in some areas,
and has security issues."
Slow? It runs at or faster than the cable modem speed. This user (the
guy that started the thread) does not have a file server to worry about.
Even then, most users will not detect the difference between wired and
wireless.
expensive? You can get a 4-port Linsys WAP for next to nothing.
Wireless NIC is cheap as well.
will not work in some areas??? He's talking ACROSS THE HALL.
security issues? Enable WEP and MAC filtering and only those who REALLY
want in will get in. If they want in that bad, they will get in no
matter what.

I've been running Wireless for years at home and in various hotels.
Works GREAT.

LittleJohn wrote:

Jeff Cochran wrote:

(Dorot29701) wrote:

My question: Both computers are in bedrooms, across the hall from each other.
Would it be possible (instead of buying wireless setup) to have those two rooms
wired for cable and get a spliter so the signal would go to both rooms? Is that
even possible?

Sure. Then you need a second cable modem of course.


Poor solution, Jeff. Most Cable providers (ISPs) won't allow it, and
those that do will charge you twice their standard monthly fee.

A better solution is to purchase a 4-port firewall router (Under $100) and
put it behind the cable modem. Then you can feed up to 256 computers off
that same line. Have an installer run cat-5 or cat-6 (for higher speed)
cable between the two rooms terminated in standard (RJ-48) Ethernet boxes
on the wall. Or do it yourself. It's no harder than running phone wire.


First, wireless will work fine. Second, have a network installer come
to the house and do the work if you want. Third, wireless *will* work
fine.


Wireless is a pain. It's slow, expensive, will not work in some areas, and
has security issues. It's the only solution if you want to sit on your
deck and use your laptop, but a poor substitute when hard-wiring is
possible.

LittleJohn
Madison, AL