Wireless SRX technology

[gaf at blu.org (Jerry Feldman)]

Thanks. I was just curious on this. He'll be buying a laptop in the
next few weeks. Before that he's go to get high speed internet. He's
been procrastinating about calling :-)

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 13:15:12 -0400
"Mark J. Dulcey" <mark at buttery.org> wrote:

> Jerry Feldman wrote:
> > I was checking the prices online for a Wireless-G router for a friend
> > of mine and I noticed the Linksys Wireless-G Broadband Router with SRX.
> > Linksys advertises that this has a wider range than the standard
> > Wireless-G. 
> > My friend lives in a condo in Somerville, and he wants to use wireless
> > for a new laptop in another room.  The standard Wireless-G can be
> > obtained for under $60 where the SRX is about $180.  My feeling is that
> > the SRX is a total waste of money unless he has a very big house or
> > wants to use the wireless outside, which I'm sure he will not. 
> 
> If you really want range, look at the pre-N products from Belkin and 
> Netgear. You get amazing coverage if you use it at both ends, and a 
> significant enhancement even if you only use it at the router/AP. And 
> they're cheaper than the overly expensive SRX products.
> 
> > In any case, this leads to another related question. I have an older
> > wireless-B router that I use only when my daughter visits or on
> > occasion with my laptop. The router is downstairs and the signal is a
> > bit weak upstairs. I don't need the extra speed of the G router.  Is
> > the signal strength of the G routers stronger than the older B routers?
> 
> The signal strength is likely no higher; most routers put out the legal 
> maximum. Some older ones don't, though. The newer hardware probably also 
> has better receive sensitivity; the technology has improved over the years.
> 
> Now, if somebody would combine the ParkerVision receiver technology 
> (they only make 801.11b hardware, but seem have to achieved receiver 
> sensitity at least 5dBm better than anyone else -- but at a price tag 
> higher than I care to pay for B) with MIMO (like the pre-N hardware is 
> using)... then we would REALLY have something. We can expect wireless 
> range and speed to continue to improve over time; the RF and DSP guys 
> haven't yet wrung all the potential out of wireless.
> 


-- 
Jerry Feldman <gaf at blu.org>
Boston Linux and Unix user group
http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9
PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.blu.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20050612/e5b7e150/attachment.sig>