On 8/4/2011 5:37 PM, Dave Liquorice wrote:

Don't have a laptop, 'orrible things to use with those scroll pad
things.

I use a wireless mouse with my laptop, and ignore the spawn-of-satan
scroll pad.

Do you have the same feeling about mobile phones?

They are pretty crap as well. Delayed and distorted even with a good
signal. If the signal gets a iffy and holding a conversation next to
impossible. Land lines are so much clearer and without delay.

I've found that Skype on my Dell Streak provides a much better sound
than my BT landline or hubphone, when calling family in the US.
Which is odd, since all three are using the same bit of phone line...

S Viemeister wrote:
On 8/4/2011 5:37 PM, Dave Liquorice wrote:

Don't have a laptop, 'orrible things to use with those scroll pad
things.

I use a wireless mouse with my laptop, and ignore the spawn-of-satan
scroll pad.

Do you have the same feeling about mobile phones?

They are pretty crap as well. Delayed and distorted even with a good
signal. If the signal gets a iffy and holding a conversation next to
impossible. Land lines are so much clearer and without delay.

I've found that Skype on my Dell Streak provides a much better sound
than my BT landline or hubphone, when calling family in the US.
Which is odd, since all three are using the same bit of phone line...

But not the same bit of bandwidth encoded in the same way...

tony sayer wrote:

It doesn't put RF trash on the mains where its liable to upset many
things including ADSL routers.

That sound like complete nonsense to me.
To start with, 90% of ADSL modem/routers have WiFi output nowadays.
How come they don't upset themselves?

O dear!, you really need to learn a bit more about RF and radio;!....

If you are so knowledgeable why don't you answer my question?
To repeat the question: if WiFi interferes with ADSL routers,
how come the vast majority of ADSL routers have WiFi output?

--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland

On 04/08/2011 22:14, dennis@home wrote:


"Malcolm" wrote in message
...

You're a handyman - DIY. Hardwire the connection using solid core
premises cable (Cat 5E) two RJ45 faceplates &two drop leads of a
suitable length plus a decent punch down tool. As others have said
faster than wireless and secure. Use Videk for info but all of what
you want is available from Screwfix or TLC. IIRC they do the sold core
Cat 5E cable in quantities less than a 305m box. Think of using Cat 6
and keeping the radius of any bends gentle to allow for GB connections

Malcolm

Be careful he will call you **** for brains for making suggestions like
that.


No Dennipoos - only you. Malcolm is no doubt a nice person who
genuinely wanted to offer good advice, for which I thank him.

You on the other hand are a sneaky two faced little ****.



--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

On 04/08/2011 14:46, Hugh - Was Invisible wrote:
On 04/08/2011 14:24, John Rumm wrote:
On 04/08/2011 11:56, Timothy Murphy wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

My Linksys (Cisco) WRT54GL router works everywhere in a very large
house.
I don't understand this passion for Ethernet.
...
It doesn't put RF trash on the mains where its liable to upset many
things including ADSL routers.

That sound like complete nonsense to me.

It may well do, however it is actually a valid point.

To start with, 90% of ADSL modem/routers have WiFi output nowadays.
How come they don't upset themselves?

WiFi starts at 2.4GHz and higher. Powerline can cause undesirable noise
in the (much lower frequency) HF radio band (1.6 - 30 MHz) - and so
potentially upsets radio hams. 2.4GHz is already stuffed full of
microwave ovens, video senders etc, so for those and a number of other
technical reasons is not well suited as a general long distance
communications frequency.

Its a reliable 100Mbps link.

Do you have 100Mb/s ADSL input?

No, but I have lots of PCs and other equipment on a gigabit network.
Shifting large files about like DVD images or recorded TV programs can
be done with relative ease on a cable (the limiting factor is not
usually the network but the disk speed), where on wireless (which I also
have) it would be unworkable slow.

You get your own wire..shared with no one.

Don't you ever want to use your laptop in the bedroom,
in the loo, in the garden ...?

Yes, that's why you have the wireless in addition to the wired LAN.



We have a Netgear DGND3700 (N600 gigabyte modem router dual band
wireless) that moves files very quickly between our wired and wireless
PCs. Higher band is lost on our smartphones, printer and wife's work
laptop.

I splashed out on one of those very recently after my old Lynksys router
died after many years - very expensive, but it was a complete disaster.
The range within the house was diabolical compared to the old (cheapo)
one, also it seemed to drop the wifi connection regularly.

Eventually gave up and sent it back, and replaced it with another cheapo
job (a £31 Buffalo), which is working just as well as the Lynksys did.
Maybe my Netgear one was a duff one, I don't know.

David

On 04/08/2011 23:50, Timothy Murphy wrote:
tony sayer wrote:

It doesn't put RF trash on the mains where its liable to upset many
things including ADSL routers.

That sound like complete nonsense to me.
To start with, 90% of ADSL modem/routers have WiFi output nowadays.
How come they don't upset themselves?

O dear!, you really need to learn a bit more about RF and radio;!....

If you are so knowledgeable why don't you answer my question?
To repeat the question: if WiFi interferes with ADSL routers,
how come the vast majority of ADSL routers have WiFi output?

Who said WiFi interferes with ADSL routers?

I may be wrong, but I suspect the reference to putting RF trash on the
mains was in relation to Homeplug data over mains connections and
nothing to do with WiFi.



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 04/08/2011 19:48, The Medway Handyman wrote:
On 04/08/2011 12:28, dennis@home wrote:

Any decent handyman would buy a couple of rj45 sockets, some proper
cable, boxes and two short patch leads and do a neat job without needing
to drill half inch holes to get the patch lead connectors through.
Toolstation sell all the required kit quite cheaply.

Which bit of 'temporary cable' confused you **** for brains?

Which bit of 'decent handyman' confused you?

On 05/08/2011 00:18, Bob Neumann wrote:
On 04/08/2011 19:48, The Medway Handyman wrote:
On 04/08/2011 12:28, dennis@home wrote:

Any decent handyman would buy a couple of rj45 sockets, some proper
cable, boxes and two short patch leads and do a neat job without needing
to drill half inch holes to get the patch lead connectors through.
Toolstation sell all the required kit quite cheaply.

Which bit of 'temporary cable' confused you **** for brains?

Which bit of 'decent handyman' confused you?

None of it ****wit.

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

On 05/08/2011 00:06, Lobster wrote:
On 04/08/2011 14:46, Hugh - Was Invisible wrote:
On 04/08/2011 14:24, John Rumm wrote:
On 04/08/2011 11:56, Timothy Murphy wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

My Linksys (Cisco) WRT54GL router works everywhere in a very large
house.
I don't understand this passion for Ethernet.
...
It doesn't put RF trash on the mains where its liable to upset many
things including ADSL routers.

That sound like complete nonsense to me.

It may well do, however it is actually a valid point.

To start with, 90% of ADSL modem/routers have WiFi output nowadays.
How come they don't upset themselves?

WiFi starts at 2.4GHz and higher. Powerline can cause undesirable noise
in the (much lower frequency) HF radio band (1.6 - 30 MHz) - and so
potentially upsets radio hams. 2.4GHz is already stuffed full of
microwave ovens, video senders etc, so for those and a number of other
technical reasons is not well suited as a general long distance
communications frequency.

Its a reliable 100Mbps link.

Do you have 100Mb/s ADSL input?

No, but I have lots of PCs and other equipment on a gigabit network.
Shifting large files about like DVD images or recorded TV programs can
be done with relative ease on a cable (the limiting factor is not
usually the network but the disk speed), where on wireless (which I also
have) it would be unworkable slow.

You get your own wire..shared with no one.

Don't you ever want to use your laptop in the bedroom,
in the loo, in the garden ...?

Yes, that's why you have the wireless in addition to the wired LAN.



We have a Netgear DGND3700 (N600 gigabyte modem router dual band
wireless) that moves files very quickly between our wired and wireless
PCs. Higher band is lost on our smartphones, printer and wife's work
laptop.

I splashed out on one of those very recently after my old Lynksys router
died after many years - very expensive, but it was a complete disaster.
The range within the house was diabolical compared to the old (cheapo)
one, also it seemed to drop the wifi connection regularly.

Eventually gave up and sent it back, and replaced it with another cheapo
job (a £31 Buffalo), which is working just as well as the Lynksys did.
Maybe my Netgear one was a duff one, I don't know.

David

Perhaps I am just lucky. Ours manages a good signal and I have never
noticed a loss of connection. Perhaps that was because I splashed out
for a Netgear adaptor when I got it. I did have to set up connections
manually. The push button system to auto connect would not work for me.

In the past I had used a couple of Belkins with horrendous problems.
Subsequently went wired with a non-wireless Netgear modem router DG834?
but then needed wireless again so bought a cheap adaptor. Eventually
went for the new Netgear because I needed better speeds to upstairs.

John Rumm wrote:
On 04/08/2011 23:50, Timothy Murphy wrote:
tony sayer wrote:

It doesn't put RF trash on the mains where its liable to upset many
things including ADSL routers.

That sound like complete nonsense to me.
To start with, 90% of ADSL modem/routers have WiFi output nowadays.
How come they don't upset themselves?

O dear!, you really need to learn a bit more about RF and radio;!....

If you are so knowledgeable why don't you answer my question?
To repeat the question: if WiFi interferes with ADSL routers,
how come the vast majority of ADSL routers have WiFi output?

Who said WiFi interferes with ADSL routers?

I may be wrong, but I suspect the reference to putting RF trash on the
mains was in relation to Homeplug data over mains connections and
nothing to do with WiFi.



It was. Far closer in frequency to DSL.

Plenty of possibilities to down convert through diodic joints into the
DSL spectrum.

"The Medway Handyman" wrote in message
...
On 04/08/2011 22:14, dennis@home wrote:


"Malcolm" wrote in message
...

You're a handyman - DIY. Hardwire the connection using solid core
premises cable (Cat 5E) two RJ45 faceplates &two drop leads of a
suitable length plus a decent punch down tool. As others have said
faster than wireless and secure. Use Videk for info but all of what
you want is available from Screwfix or TLC. IIRC they do the sold core
Cat 5E cable in quantities less than a 305m box. Think of using Cat 6
and keeping the radius of any bends gentle to allow for GB connections

Malcolm

Be careful he will call you **** for brains for making suggestions like
that.


No Dennipoos - only you. Malcolm is no doubt a nice person who genuinely
wanted to offer good advice, for which I thank him.

You on the other hand are a sneaky two faced little ****.

Oh look the MHM shows his colours again.
Shouldn't you be trolling a cycling group.

On 04/08/2011 17:51, John Rumm wrote:
On 04/08/2011 15:32, Robin wrote:

Re-reading my post I see was not clear: we don't *ever* run an open
wireless network because there are about 50 houses within range (and
several of those buy-to-lets occupied by transients). Most visitors
only get access if they trust us to input the SSID and password and
extract their MAC address, and to tidy up later.

Yup in similar circumstances I would probably have the second as a
encrypted one with a rotating password, so you can give access for a day
or so, but then the credentials get revoked.

The one nice thing I found about the expensive (but crap) Netgear model
I mentioned previously was its 'Guest network' facility, which provided
for a limited-access network whose password could be given out to guests
and changed at will, without affecting the main wifi network

David

John Rumm wrote:

If you are so knowledgeable why don't you answer my question?
To repeat the question: if WiFi interferes with ADSL routers,
how come the vast majority of ADSL routers have WiFi output?

Who said WiFi interferes with ADSL routers?

I may be wrong, but I suspect the reference to putting RF trash on the
mains was in relation to Homeplug data over mains connections and
nothing to do with WiFi.

I think you are right.

However, the exact quotation was
----------------------------------
My Linksys (Cisco) WRT54GL router works everywhere in a very large house.
I don't understand this passion for Ethernet.
It gets through walls lined with foil backed plasterboard.
It doesn't put RF trash on the mains where its liable to upset many
things including ADSL routers.
Its a reliable 100Mbps link.
----------------------------------

It seemed reasonable to assume that the statement
referred to the immediately preceding remark (of mine).


--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland

In article , Timothy Murphy
scribeth thus
tony sayer wrote:

It doesn't put RF trash on the mains where its liable to upset many
things including ADSL routers.

That sound like complete nonsense to me.
To start with, 90% of ADSL modem/routers have WiFi output nowadays.
How come they don't upset themselves?

O dear!, you really need to learn a bit more about RF and radio;!....

If you are so knowledgeable why don't you answer my question?
To repeat the question: if WiFi interferes with ADSL routers,
how come the vast majority of ADSL routers have WiFi output?




Wi-fi or 2.4 Ghz radio signals don't interfere with ADSL routers as
such, thats to assume that the radiated RF field is causing direct
interference of the circuitry in the router itself, that normally being
accidental demodulation rather like the -buzz-buzz-buzz- of a mobile
phone on anything thats a bit susceptible to RF fields..

Competent design will make sure that any semiconductor/s in that
equipment is adequately isolated and or bypassed at RF in order to make
that not so. A simple example being an emitter base junction in a
bipolar transistor where a few hundred PF of capacitance across that
junction will clear up most RF or much higher frequency signals that
that device is responding to..


What is normally actually happening is simple Radio interference where
each wi-fi capable router which transmits signals also receives them too
and if there're on the same frequency then simple radio frequency
interference occurs.. Like say in the summer when you are receiving TV
signals from another transmitter using the same channel thats coming in
because of Anomalous proprogation conditions..

As there are only so many channels to go round this is a real problem in
a lot of the country as many people use wireless because they don't like
wires, but as there are only so many channels interference at RF rather
than accidental demodulation is the cause of this problem.

Have a drive around with netstumbler on your laptop and see what that
responds to or rather the rate of same in anything like a built up area.
In some streets in Cambridge its pinging continually even at 10 MPH down
some streets...

Some routers also use the less congested 5 Ghz band which has more room
but equipment's that can use that are still very few..
--
Tony Sayer

We have a Netgear DGND3700 (N600 gigabyte modem router dual band
wireless) that moves files very quickly between our wired and wireless
PCs. Higher band is lost on our smartphones, printer and wife's work
laptop.

I splashed out on one of those very recently after my old Lynksys router
died after many years - very expensive, but it was a complete disaster.
The range within the house was diabolical compared to the old (cheapo)
one, also it seemed to drop the wifi connection regularly.

Eventually gave up and sent it back, and replaced it with another cheapo
job (a £31 Buffalo), which is working just as well as the Lynksys did.
Maybe my Netgear one was a duff one, I don't know.

David


Quite possible on a differing default channel to the default one next
door was using;!.. Seen it happen here with our neighbours..


There was nothing wrong as such with the original it was just on the
SAME channel as another unit/s and the user didn't know that. Course
they changed product "x" for product "y" that was simply on a different
channel now product "y" is a better device that what product "x" was but
there wasn't a fault condition or poor performance with product "x"
anyway;!...

--
Tony Sayer

In article , S Viemeister
scribeth thus
On 8/4/2011 5:37 PM, Dave Liquorice wrote:

Don't have a laptop, 'orrible things to use with those scroll pad
things.

I use a wireless mouse with my laptop, and ignore the spawn-of-satan
scroll pad.

Do you have the same feeling about mobile phones?

They are pretty crap as well. Delayed and distorted even with a good
signal. If the signal gets a iffy and holding a conversation next to
impossible. Land lines are so much clearer and without delay.


I've found that Skype on my Dell Streak provides a much better sound
than my BT landline or hubphone, when calling family in the US.
Which is odd, since all three are using the same bit of phone line...


More to do with Skype uses a wider audio bandwidth than what
conventional telephony does;!...


Some radio stations use Skype as a low/no cost "phone in" or OB
contribution circuit because of this..
--
Tony Sayer

On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 14:35:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

AnthonyL wrote:
On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 11:38:57 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Its a reliable 100Mbps link.
You get your own wire..shared with no one.


I suppose drilling holes in the ceiling and that sort of thing
appeals to DIY people.

No, but rock solid 100Mbps performance does.


You got 100Mbps internet then?


Intercomputer communication is far more important here than internet.

That's not quite "shared with no one" though is it?

--
AnthonyL

On 04/08/2011 13:16 Reentrant wrote:

On 04/08/2011 10:08, Dave Liquorice wrote:

Powerline networking is going to be around £75 for a set.

£35 if you don't need passthru:

http://www.ebuyer.com/160665-extra-v...699e2-2-3-twin


I have four and they are fine.

I've got half a dozen of the pass-through version
(http://www.ebuyer.com/179960-extra-v...pi699e2-4u84-3)
and they work fine. Well worth the extra £10 a pair to not to lose the
socket they're plugged into.

Use http://www.topcashback.co.uk/ref/digital (referral link) to get
yourself some cashback on the purchase.

--
F

AnthonyL wrote:
On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 14:35:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

AnthonyL wrote:
On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 11:38:57 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Its a reliable 100Mbps link.
You get your own wire..shared with no one.


I suppose drilling holes in the ceiling and that sort of thing
appeals to DIY people.

No, but rock solid 100Mbps performance does.

You got 100Mbps internet then?


Intercomputer communication is far more important here than internet.

That's not quite "shared with no one" though is it?

as far as the wires go, yes it is.

CAT5 is switched star wired full duplex. To the switch. Then its 100Mps
duplex to the server. So in 'RF' terms that's a shared 200Mbps channel.

AND its buffered at the switch, so no back off and throughput reduction
due to collisions.

save yourself the heartache, and forget WiFi. I undertook a similar
exercise, and struggled to get 1 bar of 5 at the PC 10 yards away. I wnet
through a phase of using my upstairs PC as a proxy for that PC, which
caused no end of problems.

Got some powerline adapters 6 months ago - never looked back.

On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 10:20:05 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

My wireless router is in the cellar and works all over the house. Next
door too.

My (admittedly cheap) wireless router can be picked up in the next room.
Beyond that, you're in the lap of the gods. I originally put it down to
cheapness. However last year, I acquired an old Belkin router we used at
work. I *know* this routers signal managed to push through 2 buildings to
get picked up in the office we had next door to us - about 100ft. Yet
using that at home was no better than the cheapie.

The only thing I can think is our internal walls are proper brick (built
in 1963) which strangles the signal. But that said, the signal was
punching through 5 brick walls at work.

WiFi is great for convenience, and simplicity. But I would never *rely*
on it as a primary network path.

Jethro wrote:
On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 10:20:05 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

My wireless router is in the cellar and works all over the house. Next
door too.

My (admittedly cheap) wireless router can be picked up in the next room.
Beyond that, you're in the lap of the gods. I originally put it down to
cheapness. However last year, I acquired an old Belkin router we used at
work. I *know* this routers signal managed to push through 2 buildings to
get picked up in the office we had next door to us - about 100ft. Yet
using that at home was no better than the cheapie.

The only thing I can think is our internal walls are proper brick (built
in 1963) which strangles the signal. But that said, the signal was
punching through 5 brick walls at work.

If so, then you probably have co-channel interference from another Wifi
router nearby. Try changing channels.

The new BT Home Hub 3 makes a point of having the best range around, and
it does this by continously monitoring that it is using a clear channel,
and moving if necessary.


--
Tciao for Now!

John.

On 05/08/2011 16:11, Jethro wrote:
On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 10:20:05 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

My wireless router is in the cellar and works all over the house. Next
door too.

My (admittedly cheap) wireless router can be picked up in the next room.
Beyond that, you're in the lap of the gods. I originally put it down to
cheapness. However last year, I acquired an old Belkin router we used at
work. I *know* this routers signal managed to push through 2 buildings to
get picked up in the office we had next door to us - about 100ft. Yet
using that at home was no better than the cheapie.

The only thing I can think is our internal walls are proper brick (built
in 1963) which strangles the signal. But that said, the signal was
punching through 5 brick walls at work.

Lots of internal walls in the 50/60s was built from cinder block (i.e.
powerstation slag compressed into blocks). That has a high carbon
content, and seems particularly good at attenuating WiFi.

WiFi is great for convenience, and simplicity. But I would never *rely*
on it as a primary network path.

+1

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 16:58:51 +0100, John Williamson wrote:

Jethro wrote:
On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 10:20:05 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

My wireless router is in the cellar and works all over the house. Next
door too.

My (admittedly cheap) wireless router can be picked up in the next
room. Beyond that, you're in the lap of the gods. I originally put it
down to cheapness. However last year, I acquired an old Belkin router
we used at work. I *know* this routers signal managed to push through 2
buildings to get picked up in the office we had next door to us - about
100ft. Yet using that at home was no better than the cheapie.

The only thing I can think is our internal walls are proper brick
(built in 1963) which strangles the signal. But that said, the signal
was punching through 5 brick walls at work.

If so, then you probably have co-channel interference from another Wifi
router nearby. Try changing channels.

Went up and down them - no change. Anyway, nothing to try now. I got some
homeplugs, and never looked back.

The new BT Home Hub 3 makes a point of having the best range around, and
it does this by continously monitoring that it is using a clear channel,
and moving if necessary.

I would rather fry my eyes in garlic than have anything to do with BT. In
my case this is backed up by the fact that my basic BT connection is
currently 3MBps and my basic Virgin is 10MBs. I didn't want BT - it's who
my company use to provide homeworking broadband. And despite just having
to come and fit a line and provide broadband, I can report they are no
better than they were when I decided not to use them 20 years ago.

On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 17:00:57 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

On 05/08/2011 16:11, Jethro wrote:
On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 10:20:05 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

My wireless router is in the cellar and works all over the house. Next
door too.

My (admittedly cheap) wireless router can be picked up in the next
room. Beyond that, you're in the lap of the gods. I originally put it
down to cheapness. However last year, I acquired an old Belkin router
we used at work. I *know* this routers signal managed to push through 2
buildings to get picked up in the office we had next door to us - about
100ft. Yet using that at home was no better than the cheapie.

The only thing I can think is our internal walls are proper brick
(built in 1963) which strangles the signal. But that said, the signal
was punching through 5 brick walls at work.

Lots of internal walls in the 50/60s was built from cinder block (i.e.
powerstation slag compressed into blocks). That has a high carbon
content, and seems particularly good at attenuating WiFi.

Interesting ... I guess it's akin to draping carbon fibre over the
walls ? Of course at the office, it was going through bog standard brick
walls.

Jethro wrote:
On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 16:58:51 +0100, John Williamson wrote:

Routers Try changing channels.

Went up and down them - no change. Anyway, nothing to try now. I got some
homeplugs, and never looked back.

Fair enough, then. When I move later this month, I'll be installing
ethernet to all rooms. The laptop will still be on a wireless
connection, though, as its limit isn't the connection speed, but its
internals. I'll just need to site the hub so the connection works in the
garden.

The new BT Home Hub 3 makes a point of having the best range around, and
it does this by continously monitoring that it is using a clear channel,
and moving if necessary.

I would rather fry my eyes in garlic than have anything to do with BT. In
my case this is backed up by the fact that my basic BT connection is
currently 3MBps and my basic Virgin is 10MBs. I didn't want BT - it's who
my company use to provide homeworking broadband. And despite just having
to come and fit a line and provide broadband, I can report they are no
better than they were when I decided not to use them 20 years ago.

Shrug My experience with BT has always been good. As I don't stream
video from the internet much, the predicted 3.5Meg speed at my new
location will probably be indistiguishable from the 7 or so I get here.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

In article , Jethro
scribeth thus
On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 10:20:05 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

My wireless router is in the cellar and works all over the house. Next
door too.

My (admittedly cheap) wireless router can be picked up in the next room.
Beyond that, you're in the lap of the gods. I originally put it down to
cheapness. However last year, I acquired an old Belkin router we used at
work. I *know* this routers signal managed to push through 2 buildings to
get picked up in the office we had next door to us - about 100ft. Yet
using that at home was no better than the cheapie.

The only thing I can think is our internal walls are proper brick (built
in 1963) which strangles the signal. But that said, the signal was
punching through 5 brick walls at work.

More "reflecting" around....


WiFi is great for convenience, and simplicity. But I would never *rely*
on it as a primary network path.

--
Tony Sayer

In article , John Williamson johnwilli
scribeth thus
Jethro wrote:
On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 10:20:05 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

My wireless router is in the cellar and works all over the house. Next
door too.

My (admittedly cheap) wireless router can be picked up in the next room.
Beyond that, you're in the lap of the gods. I originally put it down to
cheapness. However last year, I acquired an old Belkin router we used at
work. I *know* this routers signal managed to push through 2 buildings to
get picked up in the office we had next door to us - about 100ft. Yet
using that at home was no better than the cheapie.

The only thing I can think is our internal walls are proper brick (built
in 1963) which strangles the signal. But that said, the signal was
punching through 5 brick walls at work.

If so, then you probably have co-channel interference from another Wifi
router nearby. Try changing channels.

The new BT Home Hub 3 makes a point of having the best range around, and
it does this by continously monitoring that it is using a clear channel,
and moving if necessary.

As does the one next door .. and the one next to that and next door the
other way and so on;!,....



--
Tony Sayer

Timothy Murphy writes:

My wireless router is in the cellar and works all over the
house. Next door too.

My Linksys (Cisco) WRT54GL router works everywhere in a very large
house. I don't understand this passion for Ethernet.

I have some batteries and don't understand this passion for mains
electricity. Horses for courses, etc...

I suppose drilling holes in the ceiling and that sort of thing appeals
to DIY people.

Making the holes in the ceiling invisible and maintaining their fire
integrity/ thermal & acoustic insulation/ separation from other services
appeals to us more! But we DIY people are a bit strange like that.

--
Mark

Jethro wrote:
On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 17:00:57 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

On 05/08/2011 16:11, Jethro wrote:
On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 10:20:05 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

My wireless router is in the cellar and works all over the house. Next
door too.
My (admittedly cheap) wireless router can be picked up in the next
room. Beyond that, you're in the lap of the gods. I originally put it
down to cheapness. However last year, I acquired an old Belkin router
we used at work. I *know* this routers signal managed to push through 2
buildings to get picked up in the office we had next door to us - about
100ft. Yet using that at home was no better than the cheapie.

The only thing I can think is our internal walls are proper brick
(built in 1963) which strangles the signal. But that said, the signal
was punching through 5 brick walls at work.
Lots of internal walls in the 50/60s was built from cinder block (i.e.
powerstation slag compressed into blocks). That has a high carbon
content, and seems particularly good at attenuating WiFi.

Interesting ... I guess it's akin to draping carbon fibre over the
walls ? Of course at the office, it was going through bog standard brick
walls.

im all foil backed plasterboard. NOT good.

On 06/08/2011 11:27, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Jethro wrote:
On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 17:00:57 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

On 05/08/2011 16:11, Jethro wrote:
On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 10:20:05 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

My wireless router is in the cellar and works all over the house. Next
door too.
My (admittedly cheap) wireless router can be picked up in the next
room. Beyond that, you're in the lap of the gods. I originally put it
down to cheapness. However last year, I acquired an old Belkin router
we used at work. I *know* this routers signal managed to push through 2
buildings to get picked up in the office we had next door to us - about
100ft. Yet using that at home was no better than the cheapie.

The only thing I can think is our internal walls are proper brick
(built in 1963) which strangles the signal. But that said, the signal
was punching through 5 brick walls at work.
Lots of internal walls in the 50/60s was built from cinder block (i.e.
powerstation slag compressed into blocks). That has a high carbon
content, and seems particularly good at attenuating WiFi.

Interesting ... I guess it's akin to draping carbon fibre over the
walls ? Of course at the office, it was going through bog standard
brick walls.

im all foil backed plasterboard. NOT good.

So are we upstairs... However having the router downstairs means there
seems to be adequate penetration through the floors to get coverage
upstairs.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/