On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 12:41:11 +0000, Christian McArdle wrote:

FWIW WiFi reception is generally poor in this house, which has some
400mm-thick internal walls. I now have two base stations (one Belkin,
one unbranded) and I still get *very* patchy coverage.

Yes. I never seem to get anything like the advertised reception in my house.
I would be happy with 1/10th the published range. This is with only a thin
tongue and grooved wall in the way. Not even masonry.

Christian.

Sadly, marketing speak has become an acceptable technical description.

My 802.11b+g base station + card claim 54Mbit/sec but the most I can get
is 34, with station and client in the same room. At least this 34Mbit/sec
validates with the data throughput I actually get, allowing for protocol
overhead.

Same with the 802.11a types we've been testing at work - except they give
out totally after traversing 2-3 drywalls. Fine for open-plan coverage,
but generally a bit useless otherwise, which is why I go for 802.11g most
of the time.

Why nobody's ever been busted under trades descriptions I don't know :/

Tim