Slashdot Mirror


Garage Tinkerers Claim Wireless Last-Mile Solution

BrianWCarver writes: "The NYTimes is reporting that two guys in their garage have designed a low-cost wireless broadband solution that can transmit up to 20 miles. (A previous story described a 7km achievement in Australia.) Their company is called Etherlinx and they use the Wi-Fi 802.11b standard in a repeater antenna that people can attach to the outside of their homes. The technology, which apparently costs under $100, has been operating in a small for-pay trial in Oakland, CA for a year. Is this a solution to the 'last-mile' problem, hope for rural areas, and the death of cable/DSL? Read and be the judge."

246 comments

  1. So the real questions now... by LawGeek · · Score: 4, Funny

    How many nodes can you stuff on a single broadband account, and how many favors can you think for your neighbors to do for you, anyway?

    1. Re:So the real questions now... by dirvish · · Score: 1

      Have two neighbors each pay half and then you get it for free.

    2. Re:So the real questions now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If she's hot, I can think of a simple, repetitive favor that will suffice.

    3. Re:So the real questions now... by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      If she's hot, she'll probably be much more interested in a new air conditioner than wireless internet access.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    4. Re:So the real questions now... by agentZ · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps a set of good blinds to keep those X10 cameras away...

  2. But what kind of data connection do they get 250? by thedanceman · · Score: 1

    I don't think I will be ready to trade in my dsl till they show how fast these puppys can connect at.

  3. NY Times Login by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    username: privatenospam
    passwd: privatenospam

    1. Re:NY Times Login by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      My bad. It's suppossed to be

      username: privatenospam0
      passwd: privatenospam

  4. truly rural needs by green+pizza · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have several friends from the upper midwest (North Dakota and South Dakota). While dialup is available everywhere and DSL within 18K - 30K feet from small towns, there really is no broadband solution for the fairly large number of homes located 15 - 30 miles from a town with any services. Some areas are more than 50 miles from anything modern. Montana and Wyoming are even worse.

    What would be *really* helpful would be some solar+battery powered WiFi repeaters located thruout the countryside (perhaps bolted on the side of analog cell towers?) to serve these areas.

    1. Re:truly rural needs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      This is in many ways similair to the advent of telephones nearly a century ago. Originally AT&T was only intrested in selling telephones and the service to buisnesses located in urban areas. It was independent companies which moved to connect rural homes, seeing that a housewife stuck on a farm might be willing to pay for the ability to talk with the neighbors without a long walk.

      Competition from these rural carriers is one of the reaons AT&T to really pushed into uniform residential service accross the entire country.

    2. Re:truly rural needs by macjerry · · Score: 2, Funny

      15-30 miles?
      Hell, I'm in a major metropolitan area and can't get DSL. What really sucks is there is a Bellsouth building 2 blocks from my house.

      Wonder what they'd say if I showed up there office with the end of a long cable and asked if I could plug it in??

    3. Re:truly rural needs by delta407 · · Score: 2

      If you place repeaters everywhere to form a virtual circuit, you run into bandwidth problems with lots of users in said 15-30 mile stretch, because they would share the same "pipe" (as it were). Of course, it would still beat out dialup.

    4. Re:truly rural needs by AlgUSF · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't be suprised if they did, as long as you pay them $50/mo.

      --


      I want my rights back. I was actually using them when our government stole them after 9/11.
    5. Re:truly rural needs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That situation is just begging for a modified beige-box hack...

    6. Re:truly rural needs by saridder · · Score: 3, Interesting

      At least with 802.11g coming out, the bw will jump to 54 MB (A's speed), be backwards compatable with B clients and use B's range and frequency.

      --
      --- RFC 1149 Compliant.
    7. Re:truly rural needs by glenmark · · Score: 2

      That wouldn't be a big problem. We are talking about a rural area, with an extremely low population density. I doubt that there would be more than a few households in said 15-30 mile stretch where there would be an interest in broadband access.

      --
      *** Quantum Mechanics: The Dreams of Which Stuff is Made ***
    8. Re:truly rural needs by praedor · · Score: 2

      I'm rural now (4 months now) and I'm just 8 miles from Purdue University. There will NEVER be DSL where I am now, NEVER be cable. There is no broadband option even this close to a major university like Purdue.


      My ONLY hope is forthcoming...Purdue is in the process of building a campus-wide wireless network. With any luck, with my 30+ dB directional antenna I will be able to pull a signal from the campus when they finish late this year and do some form of broadband that way...incidently, are there any electrical engineers around willing to put up simple schematics for a 2.4-2.5 GHz amplifier design that could be built with RadioShack parts? I have in mind making an amp that has switchable amplification for 1 W, 2 W, 5 W, and 10 W amp (yeah, I know the technical rules concerning power output, etc, WRT WiFi/802.11b but I don't care right now...I just want the designs to build from).


      How about posting such a design on a website? Pleeeeze? I could probably pull in a connection with such an amp combined with my directional...

      --
      In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
    9. Re:truly rural needs by billcopc · · Score: 1

      50$/mo ain't so bad for broadband, especially if it's direct from the commercial feed. You know they'll work double-time to keep that one up, unlike the residential crap.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    10. Re:truly rural needs by billcopc · · Score: 1

      Even if you theoretically have 30 bandwidth kiddies downloading warez 24/7, they still each get approx 350kbit (50kb/sec). Compared to a noisy 56k running at 31200, I'd take the crowded wi-fi any day.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    11. Re:truly rural needs by AlgUSF · · Score: 1

      I don't know about your Mega Merger Telco, but ours (Verizon) has a very good DSL service (at least in St. Petersburg, FL they do). I have heard my share of horror stories though!

      --


      I want my rights back. I was actually using them when our government stole them after 9/11.
    12. Re:truly rural needs by Cyno · · Score: 1

      That's theoretical bandwidth. I hear the average will be between 10 and 20 Mbps.

  5. The Article (no free req req'd ;-) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
    2 Tinkerers Say They've Found a Cheap Way to Broadband

    By JOHN MARKOFF

    UPERTINO, Calif., June 7 -- Anyone looking for the next big thing in Silicon Valley should stop here at Layne Holt's garage.

    Mr. Holt and his business partner, John Furrier, both software engineers, have started a company with a shoestring budget and an ambitious target: the cable and phone companies that currently hold a near-monopoly on high-speed access for the "last mile" between the Internet and the home.

    At the core of their plan is the inexpensive wireless data standard known as Wi-Fi or 802.11b, which is already shaking up the communications industry, threatening to undermine the business plans of cellular phone companies by offering a much cheaper method for mobile access to the Internet.

    The pair's company, known as Etherlinx, has taken the 802.11b standard and used it to build a system that can transmit Internet data up to 20 miles at high speeds -- enough to blanket entire urban regions and make cable or D.S.L. connections obsolete.

    Their secret weapon is a technology known as a "software-designed radio," which has permitted them to create an inexpensive repeater antenna that can be attached to the outside of a customer's home. The device, which the Etherlinx executives said they believe can be built in quantity for less than $150 each, would communicate with a central antenna and then convert the signals into the industry-standard Wi-Fi, or wireless fidelity, signal for reception inside the home.

    Because of the staggering costs of wiring the nation's homes for high-speed networking, only 7 percent, or 7.5 million homes, now have high-speed Internet access, according to a February report from the Federal Communications Commission.

    The two Etherlinx executives say they have a religious fervor to change that by making broadband available widely and cheaply.

    "We're bandwidth junkies, and I can't imagine a world in which people don't have broadband," Mr. Furrier said. "That's our mission."

    Without venture capital backing, in a garage just six blocks from the garage where Steven P. Jobs and Stephen Wozniak launched Apple Computer 26 years ago, Mr. Holt is making his clever and inexpensive radio repeater by modifying inexpensive Wi-Fi cards, the circuitry that sends and receives the signals.

    Although he has partially broken with the Wi-Fi standard, he argues he is doing just what the unlicensed radio spectrum was originally set aside to encourage -- innovative wireless network designs.

    Mr. Holt, a 54-year-old software designer and engineer who began his career at the Lockheed Corporation in Sunnyvale, Calif., replaces the software that supports the Wi-Fi 802.11b standard with his own code, thereby dramatically extending the range of the cheap, mass-produced hardware. Each repeater contains two cards -- one that Mr. Holt has enhanced and another that is able to speak the 802.11b standard to a home computer.

    Today, while most of the Wi-Fi industry is working on a more complex technology known as "mesh routing," which involves lashing together hundreds or even thousands of short-range transceivers, the Etherlinx developers believe they have found a crude, cost-effective approach that is capable of leapfrogging the last-mile problem.

    "A French engineer would say this isn't the most elegant solution," Mr. Furrier said, "but we didn't care about that. We took advantage of these cheap commodity chips and we just wanted to make it work."

    In doing so, they say they believe they not only will be able to skate around the cable and phone companies but dodge the growing industry fears of congestion in the unlicensed Wi-Fi radio band, which is also supporting competing uses such as Bluetooth, an alternative, short-range wireless standard, as well as some wireless telephones.

    "The Wi-Fi industry is heading for a train wreck," Mr. Furrier said.

    The Etherlinx technology has been operating in a small for-pay trial in Oakland, Calif., for a year. The company began trials here last month using an antenna atop a high-rise building in neighboring Campbell, Calif., where the company has its corporate offices.

    Etherlinx is already beginning to attract serious attention from both government officials who are interested in last-mile solutions and corporate executives who believe the lack of high-speed Internet connections is the biggest obstacle to growth in the computer industry.

    "We have a huge incentive to see the last mile open up," said Graham Wallace, chief executive of Cable and Wireless P.L.C., one of the world's largest Internet backbone companies.

    To attract industry attention, Etherlinx cobbled together a demonstration antenna on the back of a Jeep Cherokee and took it to an industry conference in Southern California last month. Parked in front of the conference hotel, the founders were able to show Intel's chief executive, Craig R. Barrett, that their technology was capable of offering Internet access to the entire hotel as well as to the homes on a ridge behind the conference center.

    "I don't think there is a method that has emerged yet as a winner," said Leslie Vadasz, a veteran Intel executive who heads the company's venture arm, "but we are talking to these guys. What they have done is a very smart way of reusing engineering that has been done for other purposes."

    Etherlinx began the for-pay trial in Oakland last year after the company failed to get venture capital in Silicon Valley. The company is now selling Internet service commercially to about a dozen customers.

    "The V.C.'s are licking their wounds and they don't believe us," said Mr. Furrier, a 36-year-old networking engineer. "That's why we have taken a go-to-market approach."

    So far, the company has been run on about $200,000 in private investment -- far less than the tens of millions of dollars that have been poured into other Wi-Fi startups.

    Etherlinx is not the only company taking new approaches to sending wireless data over longer distances in the unlicensed portion of the radio spectrum. The communications and computer industry is now at work on a second-generation standard known as 802.16, which is intended to address longer-distance communications challenges.

    The latest efforts follow the collapse of an earlier attempt to establish a commercial wireless industry based on line-of-sight technology known as the Multipoint Microwave Distribution System, or M.M.D.S. Giant companies like A T & T, Sprint and WorldCom and startups like Winstar and Teligent all developed M.M.D.S. service, but they have either halted development on their systems or declared bankruptcy.

    Industry experts said the M.M.D.S. technology failed in part because it required the receiver to be within sight of the transmitter, but also because it required expensive installation and a huge upfront investment to license the spectrum from the government.

    "The cost of the license for the spectrum killed them," Mr. Holt said.

    Etherlinx is by no means alone in its approach.

    Several other companies are also beginning to explore alternatives not requiring line-of-sight that they believe will be more resistant to interference and will be easy for customers to install without expensive on-site help.

    Nokia has a research group in Silicon Valley that has been trying to develop such technologies, and Iospan Wireless Inc. of San Jose, Calif., and Navini Networks in Richardson, Tex., are selling products that are along the lines of the Etherlinx approach.

    However, Mr. Furrier said he hoped that speed would outweigh size or capital in determining the success of a business in the market. In addition to the company's Oakland trial, Etherlinx is planning to offer commercial service in Campbell, which is not currently served with D.S.L., and in wealthy surrounding suburbs such as Los Gatos and Saratoga.

    He argues that the absence of venture funding has actually been an advantage for his company.

    "What we've hit on is a low-cost design point and used our fast design to get to market first," he said.

  6. Speed... by Kernel+Corndog · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well I know the theoretical speed is published in the standard... (and I've conveniently forgotten that too) But are there any realistic published speeds? What about speed vs. distance degredation? And speed vs. subscribers in 20 mile radius ...etc????

    1. Re:Speed... by squison · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is from etherlinx.com: "We have operationally "lit up" the South Bay and Oakland areas with 2MB Ethernet " If they're getting 2MB in their test, I'm guessing a full fledged service can do even more than that.

    2. Re:Speed... by ealar+dlanvuli · · Score: 1

      Not really, 2MB is the reliable applicable range for most wireless in my experiences.

      It does go faster, but not if you roam alot and get weak signals ect. In most situations thats more than plentiful anyway.

      --
      I live in a giant bucket.
  7. Re:But what kind of data connection do they get 25 by Lemon+Wacky+Hello · · Score: 1

    You're quite the John Travolta, aren't ya? :-)

  8. Great by GMontag · · Score: 2, Informative

    The linked site leads with a story by the infamous John Markoff. Hopefully this story has some facts in it.

    1. Re:Great by Skjellifetti · · Score: 1

      I think that I'll trust Markoff rather than some idiot cracker who still sounds like a spoiled 15 year old teenager who thinks that the world owes him a living. Mitnick fsckd up and needs to come to grips with the fact that he alone is responsible for his own actions and subsequent problems.

    2. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like you are the 15 yr old.

      The parent was only commenting on the inaccuracy of Markoff's reporting. Didn't see any arguement of "innocent" for mitnick in his post at all.

    3. Re:Great by Skjellifetti · · Score: 1

      You obviously did not read the links posted by the parent. They are self-serving press releases by Mitnik claiming that Markoff libeled him. They sound just as I stated in my original reply: like the voice of a whining child. Perhaps Markoff did libel Mitnik, but I won't believe that until I see a reasonably independent analysis of the case.

    4. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mitnick did plenty of things to go to jail over, but Markoff made things up about Mitnick.

      That certainly does not absolve Markoff of sensationalist, clueless reporting. Is this too hard for you to grasp? Two people are wrong and ONE is the author of an article related to this wireless story, he is criticized for being dim and proof is submitted of his dimness.

      NOBODY on this thread absolved Mitnick of anything, his situation is just evidence against Markoff.

    5. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... but Markoff made things up about Mitnick.

      Sources, Please? And I don't mean Mitnik on Markoff. Is it too hard for you to grasp that simply quoting a party who has an axe to grind does not constitute proof of anything?

  9. Satellites? by jezreel · · Score: 1

    What about 'em? Isn't that the more low-cost alternative for broadband access in rural areas? But I have to clue about bandwith and pi(iiiiiiiiiiiii)ng.
    So they've been testing it for a year? How come in our dot-com-future that this took so long to hit the streets (or better the rural farmways)?

    --
    0 001 11 1
    1. Re:Satellites? by praedor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Satellites SUCK. For broadband, they are the only option I have besides dialup so I am sticking with dialup. Satellites are EXPENSIVE. To get more than 3 TV channels, I've had to go satellite TV. That costs ~$40/month and isn't worth it so it turns out. 155 channels and STILL nothing on worth watching (all the history channel ever shows is WWII crap over and over and over...but that's another story). Anyway, I am already shelling out ~$40/month on sat-TV. For sat-internet, it costs ~$70/month! Bullsh*t I'll EVER pay that much for high-latency, sub-DSL quality internet connectivity. If you have to choose between satellite or dialup, as I do, it is better to stick with dialup. Really.

      --
      In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
    2. Re:Satellites? by delta407 · · Score: 2

      Low-cost for consumers, possibly, but do you have any idea how much a satellite costs? Besides, you still need a modem for uploads (and HTTP requests), so you get screwed with latency from the modem, the 'net, and routing through a satellite.

    3. Re:Satellites? by Mr.Sharpy · · Score: 1

      Satellite as it is now SUCKS. There is major latency just due to physics and the fact that the satellite is in geosyncronous orbit. And beyond that, it's just not very fast. My experience with DirecPC (when it was one way, maybe different now, doubt it though) was about 200kbps most of the time. And then there was the fair access policy that slowed the downstream speed to about 20kbps if you downloaded more than 120mb in any 60 minute period. And let's not forget that if it rained hard, it was GUARANTEED to disconnect.

      It's also expensive. My DirecPC was $49/mo but I also had to have a phoneline and a dial-up internet connection so the real cost was closer to about $100. (They also had a deal where you could use their crappy isp service for $59, but you would still need the phoneline.) The 2-way satellite internet services online right now are $69/mo. Or at least they where a year ago back when I was looking at them.

      No, satellite is not a viable alternative in my opinion. At least not in it's current incarnation. Someday, when there are constellations of low earth orbit communications satellites then just MAYBE satellite will have a better chance. But I wouldn't even want to guess on the expense of such a system.

    4. Re:Satellites? by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 4, Informative
      "Low-cost for consumers, possibly, but do you have any idea how much a satellite costs? Besides, you still need a modem for uploads (and HTTP requests), so you get screwed with latency from the modem, the 'net, and routing through a satellite."

      This will change soon. Star Choice in Canada is sending up a new satellite that will allow both upstream and downstream through the dish.

      Plus, since their satellite TV sercvice was launched with elliptical as opposed to round dishes, it is possible for the dish to receive signals for 2 satellites at once.

    5. Re:Satellites? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canada is sending up a new satellite that will allow both upstream and downstream through the dish

      Unfortunately, speed is limited by the flying squirrels that carry the packets.

    6. Re:Satellites? by Mr.Sharpy · · Score: 1

      Not anymore bucko! Now you can get two way Hughes' DirecWay service or Echostar's StarBand (Echostar/Microsoft/Gillat). Two way satellite, expensive, kinda slow. Very high latency, what with having to go 23,000 miles out of the way in both directions.

    7. Re:Satellites? by shepd · · Score: 1

      >What about 'em? Isn't that the more low-cost alternative for broadband access in rural areas?

      Nope, satellite broadband costs over and above $500 US for equipment ($2500+ US for two-way, or you can pay through the nose for the service, your choice), and service will often cost $55-$80 US a month (one-way, two way is often $100 a month or more).

      There's a lot more room on the ground for antennas than on the horizon, so you pay for that with increased fees.

      My bill, for an always on 21.6k connection + 8 Gigs of satellite broadband -- $120 CDN / month, and I had to pull some serious strings to get a deal like that (including using a 10 ft. C-Band dish to pull in the weak signal!).

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    8. Re:Satellites? by scott1853 · · Score: 2

      DirectPC has two way. I don't use it, but I was really considering it when Adelphia was 8 months late on delivering broadband to my area. The local Radio Shack saleskid was running Napster (this was a couple years ago) and had 8 songs simultanously downloading, each at around 20KB.

      Of course the hardware was around $300 and then the monthly service charge was $70 for two-way ($35 for one way).

    9. Re:Satellites? by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Starband is about $700 US startup costs, including one TV reciever and the "everything pack" of programming. The service is about $110 US a month for Internet and TV. It is two-way, unmetered.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    10. Re:Satellites? by shepd · · Score: 1

      s/is/was/

      IIRC, Starband is now bankrupt, sorry to say.

      It was probably their low prices that were probably less than their operating costs that did them in.

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    11. Re:Satellites? by shepd · · Score: 2, Informative

      >Star Choice in Canada is sending up a new satellite that will allow both upstream and downstream through the dish.

      Starchoice has been saying they'll offer high-speed internet via satellite since '99 (I've asked them yearly after that -- I figure some Canadian company has to be able to provide satellite internet at less than $100/gig). I don't expect their tune to change...

      Besides, two way satellite internet has even worse latency problems than one way, worse rain fade problems, slower than modem upload speeds once there's enough users on the service, and most all places require you to have it installed professionally. :-(

      The only benefit? Its always on (except during a storm). But you can usually cut a deal with an ISP that will cost less to have an always-on modem connection + one-way service than two-way (unless you can get two-way for under $120-$130 US a month)...

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    12. Re:Satellites? by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      They filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, they are not bankrupt, and they are still operating.

      It had nothing to do with their prices, Echostar defrauded them on their contract to turn over accounts in Feburary. Starband has not seen any of the revenue from their customers, because Echostar has been illegally intercepting it.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    13. Re:Satellites? by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
      "Starchoice has been saying they'll offer high-speed internet via satellite since '99 (I've asked them yearly after that -- I figure some Canadian company has to be able to provide satellite internet at less than $100/gig). I don't expect their tune to change..."

      Are you using starchoice right now? I am seriously considering switching from expressvu anyway because the quality of the TV service has gone down and down. The guide is wrong half the time and sometimes you cannot see even 1 hour ahead into the future programming. How is starchoice on these issues?

    14. Re:Satellites? by AstroPup · · Score: 1
      Besides, you still need a modem for uploads (and HTTP requests), so you get screwed with latency from the modem, the 'net, and routing through a satellite."

      This will change soon. Star Choice [starchoice.ca] in Canada is sending up a new satellite that will allow both upstream and downstream through the dish.

      The latency will still suck. You're talking about sending a signal around 22k miles to the satelite and then 22k more miles from the sat to the transponder. At the speed of light you're talking about 250ms for the packet to be sent and another 250ms for the response. That sucks! I'm sticking with ISDN until I have another choice. Fortunately Time Warner laid cable in the neighborhood recently and it should go live soon.
    15. Re:Satellites? by vidnet · · Score: 1
      (all the history channel ever shows is WWII crap over and over and over...but that's another story)

      Yes, they do say history repeats itself.

    16. Re:Satellites? by irix · · Score: 2

      because the quality of the TV service has gone down and down

      Really? I have ExVu, and I don't have any complaints about the guide - I can count on one hand the number of times the program has been incorrect. This is bound to happen sometimes too, since the brodcaster does change tings at the last minute. Also, I can always see 72 hours into the future, even with my old (1998 vintage) receiver. My inlaws and my neighbor both have Starchoice, but I don't see any reason to switch myself. If I had originally bought Starchoice equipment, I would probably be sticking with that too.

      As for who will have 2-way highspeed up first? I'd bet on ExVu. Their current 1-way service is based on DirecPC from the US, and since they are now running a 2-way service there I would imagine it will make its way up here sooner than Starchoice manages to launch a new bird...

      --

      Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
    17. Re:Satellites? by raju1kabir · · Score: 2
      Satellites SUCK

      Satellites are great for one-way transmissions (TV, GPS, etc.) but, yes, they royally suck for anything with real-time two-way requirements (phone calls, TCP, etc.). Ever make an international call across a satellite link? These days, you'd have to call somewhere in Africa, a remote part of Asia, or an isolated island, but if you ever get one of these links, you'll know it - there's such a delay that the conversation gets all messed up with people talking through each other.

      The only solution would be to fill the skies with enough satellites so that the signal didn't have to travel thousands of miles to reach one.

      You raise money for that; I'll be here wiring at ground level.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    18. Re:Satellites? by raju1kabir · · Score: 1
      Of course the hardware was around $300 and then the monthly service charge was $70 for two-way ($35 for one way).

      Did they have three-way for $105?

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    19. Re:Satellites? by scott1853 · · Score: 2

      To get three-way with DirectPC you have to do a mod, and it doesn't work so good. Those circuit boards have some pretty sharp components on them ;)

    20. Re:Satellites? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Feet, not miles. You're placing the satellite orbit nearly three earth-widths away from us....

    21. Re:Satellites? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Besides, you still need a modem for uploads (and HTTP requests)

      Not with Starband. Two-way satellite dish. Less than $1000 USD to set up (for the person who said it was $25000+ for two-way satellite) and $70/month.

      They've recently filed Chapter 11 though.

    22. Re:Satellites? by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Well, you'll be switching from Adelphia soon. Trust me.

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
  10. Potentially useful even in towns... by fizbin · · Score: 1

    DSL available in small towns? Maybe in the midwest.

    I live in Burlington, NJ. It's technically a city, but really more of an overgrown town in the middle of the Philadelphia suburbs. We'll be getting DSL service about the same time hell freezes over.

    1. Re:Potentially useful even in towns... by alernon · · Score: 1
      I think part of the reason that small towns in North Dakota can get DSL (my parents live 2 miles outside of a town of 800 people, and they could get DSL) is that Senator Byron Dorgan is now a pretty powerful figure on the hill and one of his biggest pushes is to bring broadband access to everyone across the state. In a speech I heard him give he actually compared the importance of rural broadband access to getting telephone access to rural areas at the beginning of the century.


      I think we get a lot of help technically and financially to make it possible.

    2. Re:Potentially useful even in towns... by AsylumWraith · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but surely some type of broadband is available to you. I live in Browns Mills, approx. 15 miles southeast of you, and I have cable internet access through Comcast (yes, I know, not the best solution.) If they have it out in the sticks, they HAVE to have it out there in the middle of civilization.

      And by the way, Burlington isn't so much an overgrown town as an overgrown slum. :p

    3. Re:Potentially useful even in towns... by green+pizza · · Score: 2

      I think part of the reason that small towns in North Dakota can get DSL..... Senator Byron Dorgan is now a pretty powerful figure.....

      Could be. But another big plus from what I understand (and as another poster pointed out) the numerous clued small telephone companies and rural telephone co-ops have used their heads and offered some pretty decent DSL solutions. Then there's also the whole "what else are you going to do while snowed in" thing! :-)

      But as yet another poster mentioned, there are still many problems to overcome.

      Either way, it looks as though things are slowly improving.

    4. Re:Potentially useful even in towns... by chris_mahan · · Score: 1

      I am in the middle of Northridge, CA, 900 feet from California State University in Northridge. That's in the middle of the San Fernando Valley. I was told I could not get DSL. Imagine that. There's 1.3 million people in the valley, 2 airports, 40 Billion+ corps, and 90% of the world's porn industry. I KNOW there has to be DSL somewhere. Yet Pacbell (SBC really) says no, so sorry.

      Granted, I can get high speed cable. But why can't I get DSL too?

      --

      "Piter, too, is dead."

  11. Re:Damn by Jacer · · Score: 5, Informative

    I live in Iowa, Armstrong to be exact. We got sick of waiting for a for a large company (ie qwest, mediacom, ect.) to come in with broad band, so our town of around 1100 people spoke with our local phone company, cable company, and our current ISP. Our ISP let us use them as a backbone provider, and our phone/cable company became our dsl provider. They even put some of the green boxes in the country, so availability is very wide spread. It's a little bit more expensive than normal, I pay $5=60 for 256k/s (even though I get 1.2 megabits, a resriction of the modem) but it is better than dial up!!

    --
    --fetch daddy's blue fright wig, i must be handsome when i release my rage
  12. Re:But what kind of data connection do they get 25 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's best for people like me - I live only 5kms (3miles) from the city limits - on an acreage. Due to low population
    density, the Telco is in no rush to get DSL setup for us!

    But there is something similar to this article already offered in Alberta (Canada eh?) :
    http://www.oagroup.com/airlink/forbus_Overview.c fm ?selected=250

    Don't know if it's the same technology as they haven't (yet) responded to my requests for more
    detail ....

  13. Read it while you can. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    ....before They squish it, like the 200 mpg carburetor, Cold Fusion, and the personal levitation device invented in 1956.

  14. Nice but what about interference? by st0rmshad0w · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't think this is a last mile solution for broadband (at least in denser population areas) so long as it uses that stretch of unprotected spectrum. With the growing level of noise as the equipment becomes more commonplace I would really need some type of guaranteed reliability before adopting this. Tho I must admit, it is pretty nifty nontheless.

    1. Re:Nice but what about interference? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My microwave oven kills my home 802.11a network every time I turn it on, and my cordless phone frequently kills it, depending on what channel it happens to be using. It also dies from time to time for no reason I can detect, possibly from my neighbors' microwaves or cordless phones. I've replaced my wireless links with a few of Linksys's new powerline bridges. So far, they work perfectly.

    2. Re:Nice but what about interference? by Geekboy(Wizard) · · Score: 1

      I dont know what you know about Oakland, but it's a fairly decent sized city. Huge industrial area, the main dock yard for the San Francisco Bay. If it's been running there, that is a huge accomplishment. Hrm, I live about 15 miles from Oakland, I think I'll sign up. =)

    3. Re:Nice but what about interference? by jaoswald · · Score: 1

      Do you have a 2.4GHz cordless phone? Why??

      In my experience, the 900 MHz band is good enough for cordless, and this 2.4GHz trend is just silly "my number is bigger" marketing.

    4. Re:Nice but what about interference? by zonker · · Score: 0

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but 802.11a isn't on 2.4Ghz is it? I thought that was b only (and g will be backwards compatible to b when it's out).

    5. Re:Nice but what about interference? by jaoswald · · Score: 1

      True, I guess I read the original post too quickly. I don't know many people who buy 802.11a (5 GHz) equipment for home use, however, and the fact that the microwave oven interferes makes me believe that the original poster still meant 802.11b.

  15. And in other news.... by jrwillis · · Score: 5, Funny

    A large group of FCC agents decended on the town of Cupertino, Ca. today to investigate reports that no cordless phone will work within a 20 mile radius of the town.

    --
    Keep Austin Weird!
    1. Re:And in other news.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ya, let's keep extending this negative Orgwellian slashdot mentality.

      After all, if one of these ubiquitous broadband solutions actually succeeds then we'll no longer be the underground dorks that we are.

      I'm so tired of the negativity and fear that's rampant on this site. Technology is dead in the water right now...mostly because of this kind of isolationist crap.

    2. Re:And in other news.... by John+Jorsett · · Score: 2
      A large group of FCC agents decended on the town of Cupertino, Ca. today to investigate reports that no cordless phone will work within a 20 mile radius of the town.

      The last time I reported intense interference on the AM radio band in a particular location to the FCC, I got a lackadaisical phone call from some dweeb promising to check into it. She made a phone call to the power company to go check their lines. Called a little later to ask if it was still there. "Yes." No further action. Moral: don't count on the FCC to get out of its office chairs to track down your interference problems.

    3. Re:And in other news.... by jrwillis · · Score: 1

      Yea, I can DEFINIATLY relate. There is a tejano station that broadcasts in the area that I live in (rural east texas) that bleeds over into the other FM stations so bad that I can't listen to most of the stations that are even local. On a cheap radio the entire dial picks up the station as if it were tuned directly to the station in about a 15 square mile area. Calls to the FCC have done nothing. Luckily I listen to my XM radio or CDs most of the time, but it just really showed me how little the FCC cares.

      --
      Keep Austin Weird!
  16. Useful in the UK by jondogreen · · Score: 1

    If this tech really is a viable replacement for DSL then I want it. I only live 20 Miles from Liverpool and we still havn't got cable TV let alone cable internet.

  17. Long on hype, short on details by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No patents mentioned, for example, which kind of implies that even if this does play nicely in the contended 2.4Ghz band, it will be assimilated by an incumbent. Perhaps (being cynical or realistic as you prefer) that's the idea though: hype a "new" technology, then sell out to whichever Big Business offers you a cheque to go away and stop generating awkward questions from their customer base.

    Kudos for providing a good laugh though:

    • Smart Spectrum(tm) enables a fully secure "unhackable" security layer

    I take it that's "unhackable" in the Oracle "unbreakable" sense of (soto voce) "Claim is for advertising purposes only, has no basis in reality and should not be inferred to imply a warranty of unhackability or fitness for any particular purpose."

    Hey ho. As they themselves say, seeing is believing. I'll believe it when I can either buy it or replicate it.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    1. Re:Long on hype, short on details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Perhaps (being cynical or realistic as you prefer) that's the idea though: hype a "new" technology, then sell out to whichever Big Business offers you a cheque to go away and stop generating awkward questions from their customer base.


      I'd agree with you, if I thought that my ISP cared an iota about the opinions of their customers.
    2. Re:Long on hype, short on details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure it is (unhackable). With 2.4 Ghz, you have to "sniff and detect" anyone around you presently using any spectrum prior to putting up a carrier. I also assume it's spread spectrum @ low power which looks like noise to the average CW receiver.

    3. Re:Long on hype, short on details by PJPorch · · Score: 1

      If you are going to quote the page and says its "for advertising purposes only and has no basis in reality"
      At least quote them correctly.

      "Smart Spectrum(tm) enables a fully secure security layer"

      As you can see the parent inserted the "unhackable". Its one thing to say there claims are wrong, but something else to make up quotes for them and insult them on this inaccurate quotes

  18. Sad by gazbo · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    I've never seen a more pathetic attempt to get FP. Let me guess...You saw a story with no comments, and thought you could get FP without being modded down by referring to the subject in hand in some vague way.

    In fact, you were no way near first post, loser, and you will shortly be modded to -1, redundant.

    1. Re:Sad by Jacer · · Score: 1

      that makes little to no sense jcak ass. when i saw it there were around 10 comments. and even if i was modded -1 redundant, i'd still be at +4 intresting. it's not like i'm a karma whore by any means

      --
      --fetch daddy's blue fright wig, i must be handsome when i release my rage
  19. But what about the health effects by binkless · · Score: 0, Troll

    It's well known that WiFi causes cancer and affects peoples brain waves and sleeping patterns. Studies by the Sweedish Public Health authorities have confirmed all of this in detail. The wireless industry has been successfull in surpressing all of this for years, but once the cable providers hear they're about to get cut off, all of it will suddenly become public, causing a flood of testimonials about dead relatives to appear on Oprah. The invisible microwave menace is about to be exposed, and we'll all be able to return to a happier time when radiation induced mental illness was unknown and nobody lived long enough to contract cancer.

    1. Re:But what about the health effects by rob-fu · · Score: 0

      This article talks about the health risks involved with WiFi.

      An excerpt:

      The next time someone warns you about the cell phone or Wi-Fi card or microwave oven say, honey, there's no enough energy by the time it hits me to change the temperature of water a millionth of a degree.

      Essentially, you have to be ~1/10 of an inch away from the source to get any potentially harmful effects. You're probably safe...

    2. Re:But what about the health effects by snowberg · · Score: 1

      Is this an attempt to be funny or a real post? if the later I would love some references to the Swedish Public Health research you mention.

  20. Almost certainly illegal in Europe by Moderation+abuser · · Score: 4, Informative

    The power regulation of the 2.4GHz band in Europe is severely limiting the growth of community access wireless networks[1]. The UK currently has additional regulation[2] which also disallows ISPs from making commercial use of the band.

    [1] 100mW EIRP.
    [2] Seems to be under review at the moment.

    --
    Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
    1. Re:Almost certainly illegal in Europe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good, and don't export any more of your euro-sillyness to the USA any more!

    2. Re:Almost certainly illegal in Europe by ViGe · · Score: 1

      The power regulation of the 2.4GHz band in Europe is severely limiting the growth of community access wireless networks[1]. The UK currently has additional regulation[2] which also disallows ISPs from making commercial use of the band.

      Yes, you are right about the fact that this system would be illegal in Europe. However, I'd like to point out that there are restrictions in the US as well. The limit there is 1 W if I recall it correctly; It's a lot more than in Europe, but it's a limit anyway...

      --
      It has to work - rfc1925
    3. Re:Almost certainly illegal in Europe by jeffn7 · · Score: 2, Informative

      the UK and the EU are reviewing their restrictions on 2.4ghz. Primary driver is that the European telco providers are swimming in debt they need to maintain, and looking to wifi as potentially strong revenue sources. Ironically, the debt they carry is for all of the ridiculous 3G licenses they bought at auction from the very governments that regulate such issues. Perhaps that's why the governments are fastracking these issues, they would rather not see their telcos goes bankrupt and have the finger pointed back at them.

    4. Re:Almost certainly illegal in Europe by walkern · · Score: 1
      The UK government has allowed ISPs in the to begin making use (taking over) this spectrum - as of today.

      The Register's Story

  21. Cheaper? by cipset · · Score: 1

    Whatever normal people are inventing cheaper, corporations will find a way to implement it not that cheap...

  22. Well, at Summercon... by GMontag · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Their secret weapon is a technology known as a "software-designed radio," which has permitted them to create an inexpensive repeater antenna that can be attached to the outside of a customer's home. The device, which the Etherlinx executives said they believe can be
    built in quantity for less than $150 each, would communicate with a central antenna and then convert the signals into the industry-standard Wi-Fi, or wireless fidelity, signal for reception
    inside the home."

    Alan Clegg described pretty much the same thing with off the shelf hardware at Summercon recently. Except his solution was staying inside 802.11b and using a 2.4Ghz amplifier.

    Granted, his objective was different and the "new" solution is a couple of bucks cheaper, but there are already off-the-shelf solutions that are there for the picking, without adding another licensing layer to the solution.

    1. Re:Well, at Summercon... by ahfoo · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I thought the problem was the backbone monopoly rather than the last mile monopoly. Toys to set up far-ranging wireless networks have been around for awhile, but that cheap DS3 so you've actually got content for the network remains elusive.

    2. Re:Well, at Summercon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cogentco.com provides REALLY cheap bandwidth: $1000/month for 100mpbs and $10000/month for 1Gbps. So, you could serve 50 concurrent 2mbps wireless users on a $1000/month connection. Considering that ISP's routinely have subscriber/modem ratios of 8:1 (as most people are not online at the same time), and not every online wireless user will saturate a 2mbps connection (allowing for even more subscribers on the same connection), you are talking well under $10/month/subscriber for an upstream connection.

    3. Re:Well, at Summercon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, but paying for stuff like that just rubs me the wrong way ;-)

    4. Re:Well, at Summercon... by ahfoo · · Score: 2

      Hmm, I didn't know about these guys, thanks for the info big trucker. I thought it looked doable for $1000 a month for DS3 level service. I got a link off an old /. story for some 802.11 based bridges that were supposed to go 40 miles for about five grand on unregulated bands and I thought, hey why not run an ISP into a rural area and then I found that PacBell and Cox both wanted five grand a month to hookup and there was no way it was profitable at that level. If it's true, you're right, that's very cheap and potentially profitable.

    5. Re:Well, at Summercon... by timeOday · · Score: 0

      No way. Long haul bandwidth is cheap. There's a glut of it.

  23. Just a firmware for 802.11 cards by af_robot · · Score: 1

    "By the use of innovative software, firmware, and data networking algorithms, EtherLinx can take standard 802.11 hardware components and deliver unprecedented security and speed at a cost structure that is far superior to current wireless and wired methods."
    "We have operationally "lit up" the South Bay and Oakland areas with 2MB Ethernet"
    Not so hot.

    1. Re:Just a firmware for 802.11 cards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you say "not so hot"? Standard hardware plus some special firmware giving better performance than a T1 seems pretty damn cool to me.

    2. Re:Just a firmware for 802.11 cards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no not to rich idiots like you who have DS-3 lines in their homes...

      please, shut up until you have a clue. because from every comment you have EVER posted here on slashdot, we all now know... you are dumber than a small salad bar.

    3. Re:Just a firmware for 802.11 cards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2MB is good for broadband, assuming it's not 2MB shared between all customers. From the looks of it, it's a 2MB link for every customer. That's as good as my cable modem, and theoretically better than most DSL.

      If you're unimpressed with 802.11b only getting 2MB, well, they're doing it at a lot more than 150 feet. A bit of a speed decrease is acceptabe in this case, IMHO.

  24. Second Hand Broadband! by Gorbie · · Score: 3, Funny

    I dunno. How long before the folks in Cali start to get up in arms about being subject to your internet transmission waves. They could cause cancer!

    Maybe if they just ban the waves from public places....

  25. No technical details by Keeper+ofthe+Keys · · Score: 4, Interesting

    After reading through their site, I found no real details of what they are claiming.

    They claim 20 mile connections: OK, I can believe that, since I have some running at 26 miles. A guy in British Columbia has some connections running nearly 50 miles. Nothing new here.

    Their product acts as a "repeater" from the customer premise: Again, nothing new here. Nokia has a reasonably well designed product called RoofTop that also works at 2mbps.

    I would be curious to see how they are addressing the issue of spectrum re-use, since 802.11b only has 3 clear channels to operate on. In a haphazard deployment using customer premise equipment to repeat, RF collision is terrible. What happens during a power outage in a neighborhood? Does the whole area drop out, or is the homeowner required to provide UPS? What happens when the unthinkable happens, and a key repeater/customer terminates his service, and that repeater has to come off the house?

    So many questions, so few answers

    1. Re:No technical details by Mr.Sharpy · · Score: 1

      The way I read it, it seems to me that their will not be one repeater in a neighborhood, but one on each house. And it would be more than a router, but rather something to convert and route their non-standard flavor of 802.11b to regular 802.11b for use inside a person's house.

      I dunno, there is something that feels off to me. Their website is so sparse, and where it's not it's full of buzzwords. It reminds me of those SEC scam pages designed to educate consumers.

    2. Re:No technical details by MattC413 · · Score: 1

      Well, my take on it is that this isn't exactly a "5 nines" reliable solution, and thus if there was a power outage, it wouldn't be such a huge thing. Cable modems are known to have reliability problems, and yet people still get them.

      Secondly, if there *is* a power outage, wouldn't that mean those people wouldn't have their own computers running? It's nice to have bandwidth, but it's also nice to have something to access it..

      Anyhow, if people are using such a solution instead of the more traditional reliable connections (T1, etc) then you can be assured that these people would be paying for consumer quality connections without uptime guarantees.

      -Matt

    3. Re:No technical details by seinman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the point isn't whether you have power or not, it's whether the repeater does. for example, i could have power, but three blocks over, the power could be out on the repeater... meaning while my computer is working fine, i still wouldn't have access to the network.

    4. Re:No technical details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't the customer's repeater something which listens to their hacked up 802.11 and repeats out on it's real 802.11, so that it acts as a provider for the customer's premises but not necessarily the neighbor ?

      In other words, if you are paying, you have your own repeater/gateway, connecting directly to him. If you are taging off of your neighbor, well, it's cheaper but it's just like sharing his cable modem with an ethernet cable thrown over the fence -- if he goes down, you loose acsess.

    5. Re:No technical details by HipSavvy · · Score: 1

      The original article the started this thread seems to imply that Etherlinx is *not* doing mesh routing, but is broadcasting a strong signal that will cover an area.

  26. limitations by SaturnTim · · Score: 5, Informative

    As someone who has worked with 802.11b outdoors, There are some problems they are going to have to overcome.

    1) Outside, you are pretty much limited to line-of-site. Bodys containing water do a great job of blocking the signal. This includes people, trees, cacti, etc.

    2) The problem with repeaters is that, if an early one goes down, the rest of the chain looses the connection. When hoping to span great distances, this is a problem.

    3) hopping via repeators will cut down on bandwidth, and you are limited to very few hops before you get some severe latency

    4) There are limitations to the amount of power you are allowed to use to boost a signal, from the spec:

    ---- begin copy & paste ----
    (3) Except as shown in paragraphs (b)(3) (i), (ii) and (iii) of this section, if transmitting antennas of directional gain greater than 6 dBi are used the peak output power from the intentional radiator shall be reduced below the stated values in paragraphs (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section, as appropriate, by the amount in dB that the directional gain of the antenna exceeds 6 dBi.

    (i) Systems operating in the 2400-2483.5 MHz band that are used exclusively for fixed, point-to-point operations may employ transmitting antennas with directional gain greater than 6 dBi provided the maximum peak output power of the intentional radiator is reduced by 1 dB for every 3 dB that the directional gain of the antenna exceeds 6 dBi."
    ---- end copy & paste ----

    So, while their plan sounds interesting, they have some serious issues to overcome, and I don't see how they are going to do it with off the shelf parts. I'll wait till I see a working prototype before I shell out my VC

    --
    http://www.theMediaBunker.com
    1. Re:limitations by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, most of this is true in poorly designed systems. My system does not have any of these problems.

      how? simple... you design it like the internet... multiple routes. I have approximately 6 routes from one end to the other on my public WiFi. Yes, it increases cost... it does whenever you do naything in a redundanf fashon. and anyone making a system like that that does not build in redundancy is wasting their and everyone elses time.

      I also have the advantage of load balancing across the multiple routes.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:limitations by WhaDaYaKnow · · Score: 1

      1) Outside, you are pretty much limited to line-of-site. Bodys containing water do a great job of blocking the signal. This includes people, trees, cacti, etc.

      Oh no! Not cacti! What am I going to do?

      - Steve in Montreal.

  27. The swedes??? HA HA HA HA HA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're known for:

    Meatballs,
    Borking,
    Saabs

    Thanks, but I'll wait until maybe the CUBAN'S come up with something.

  28. Just what I need for my (other) home in th country by jonr · · Score: 2

    This is just what I need for my parents. They have rickety wireless phone (around 10km) and are lucky if they get over 28kbs connection. ISDN will probably never be available there (and I'm not even dreaming about xDSL). Just put up ISDN in some residence in the nearest town, 2 atennas, and voila, decent connection. I do hope that this is for real, I would be ready to try it out.

  29. No hassle false NYTimes account setup by grandmofftarkin · · Score: 2

    Go to this url, http://www.majcher.com/nytview.html and paste this address into the form:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/10/technology/10WIR E.html&submit
    Then just press submit. It'll create you an account and log you right in. Nice and simple!!!! :-)

  30. I'm really surprised by binkless · · Score: 1

    that anyone took this seriously. Doesn't the part about Oprah and the testimonials reveal this as a joke? I was hoping to be moderated up as "Funny" but instead I'm a "Troll!" Boo Hoo!

  31. be the judge? by jsse · · Score: 2

    we've been giving legal opinions even though majority of us saying 'IANAL'. Now you want us to be the judge? IANAJ, but....(here we go)

  32. Re:But what kind of data connection do they get 25 by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
    "It's best for people like me - I live only 5kms (3miles) from the city limits - on an acreage. Due to low population density, the Telco is in no rush to get DSL setup for us!"

    That is almost exactly identical to my situation. Soon now I will look into getting a T1 and then using 802.11b and letting my neighbours pay for it.

  33. In a related story by MagicMerlin · · Score: 3, Funny

    The sales of Pringles shot up 124% this quater. "We can't explain it," says company execs. "Young IT professionals just can't seem to get enough of our chips"

    1. Re:In a related story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I can see it now.

      A commercial involving tech freaks dancing around, and snacking on Pringles, and then setting up wireless transmitters.

      Gotta hack some Pringles!

      Man, they could make a fortune. :D

    2. Re:In a related story by T1girl · · Score: 2

      I can see it now. A commercial involving tech freaks dancing around, and snacking on Pringles, and then setting up wireless transmitters.

      I can see it, too -- Chips 'n Dips!

      *At the end of the world, if there's only one dollar left, there will be two hands on it. One will be Gates', the other will be Redstone's. - John Malone*

    3. Re:In a related story by RadioTV · · Score: 1

      No, because Slashdot would post a story about the Pringles can not being open source. Then there would be a story about hacking your own can out of a paper towel tube, some aluminum foil and a roll of duct tape. Then everyone would think that you weren't a true geek if you didn't make your own can.

      --
      I have great faith in fools - self confidence my friends call it. - Edgar Allan Poe
  34. History Channel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    all the history channel ever shows is WWII crap over and over and over...but that's another story

    I like to call it the Hitler Channel.

  35. WTF they talking its, its just 802.11 by Jeff+Knox · · Score: 4, Informative

    What the heck, why does this justify a NYT article. Basically, they have an 802.11 card, in a small formfactor PC of sorts, with probably some custom built access point software. Their are only a few dozen companies that offer the exact same product, since it is just vanilla 802.11. http://www.musenki.com/ is one, with their M-3 product. 20 Miles? Woopity, anyone can get that with 802.11 and an high gain attenae/amplifer. Their are a multitude of companies offering this service with the same equipment. http://www.techsplanet.com comes to mind. NYT journalist should do their studying before they write lame articles.

    --
    Jeff Knox
    1. Re:WTF they talking its, its just 802.11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the heck, why does this justify a NYT article.

      Maybe John Markoff ran out of BS to spread about Kevin Mitnick, so he is now expanding his cluelessness to broadband?

      Side note, whenever one has an opportunity to see Markoff speak ask him to sign your Free Kevin bumper sticker ;-)

    2. Re:WTF they talking its, its just 802.11 by PhiberKut · · Score: 0, Interesting

      The journalist new exactly what he was doing. He wrote an article that would get attention.

      Attention = Advertising revenue

      --
      Elijah Chancey www.elijahsadventure.com nomadic IT consultant, bicycling across america "all that you touch / and all
  36. What's with the French Engineers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    From the article: "A French engineer would say this isn't the most elegant solution," Mr. Furrier said, "but we didn't care about that. We took advantage of these cheap commodity chips and we just wanted to make it work."

    Since when was French Engineering the best? The Eiffel tower is full of holes, they gave the Statue of Liberty to New Your and it's falling apart, they can't even put up a security fence to keep people out of the channel tunnel!

    I say "A French engineer would be too busy drinking wine, making love to his mistress and kissing his male work colleagues (possibly at the same time) to even get round to thinking about this device, but we got it working. Now we're done, pass the Buckfast, and does anyone fancy a quick snog?"

    1. Re:What's with the French Engineers? by drooling-dog · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Screw the broadband... I'll take the wine and the mistress!

    2. Re:What's with the French Engineers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll take the wine and the broadband and screw the mistress!

    3. Re:What's with the French Engineers? by raju1kabir · · Score: 1
      Since when was French Engineering the best?

      I thought his point was that a French engineer was more predisposed to complain than a normal (i.e., nonfrench) person.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    4. Re:What's with the French Engineers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they are so occupied in the quest for perfection

      Take a look into a Peugeot turbo diesel...

      I have measured a 2.4 meter oil hose under the hood of my car!

      too much wine I guess

    5. Re:What's with the French Engineers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      french engineer is an oxymoron

    6. Re:What's with the French Engineers? by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

      hmmmm....now there's an oxymoron....french engineers.....LOL
      No offense....I mean...The French did come up with French Fries....among other things.

      but damn.....I really want/need this.
      Living on crappy dialup (19.2k) in the heart of the Silicon Valley all because broadband isn't available in my area.....

      *sigh*

    7. Re:What's with the French Engineers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pov'con de ricain...
      Next time, u go to see a movie, think about us, we invented it. And when u will go home in your your shiny new car, thank us again, we also invented them.
      Please, choke on your next french fries ...
      It is so easy to dislike americans, at the same time ignorant and arrogant...

    8. Re:What's with the French Engineers? by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

      Movie? French? AHAHAHHAHAAHHAHA wasn't that by Edison? Car? French? naw.....The internal-combustion engine used today in cars, aka a four-stroke engine by the name of the Otto-cycle engine was invented by a German engineer and the Diesel engine was invented by a German engineer (born in France). But it's not like the French didn't contribute.....the first automobile that ran on stream was by a french inventor and the first internal-combustion, a single cylinder two-stroke engine was also by a french inventor. However, they weren't all that good. 2mph (with frequent stops) for the steam engine and 4mph for the two-stroke (which burned kerosene). The Austrian, German, British, and American inventors perfected it. (so it was a global accomplishment....and not just a french thing). It's like the paradox of the electric light blub. Edison didn't invent it, he perfected it and made it practical. Besides, I like Italian and German cars, not Renault or Peugeot though I have a Peugeot bicycle. But like I said....no offense. Hell I like French cruisines. It's not like American and British cruisines are as distinct as French and Italian cruisines. And such bad grammar. Learn some english....o wait...I forgot the French policy of not using foreign languages in their own. Just please think about things you say before saying them. (hell, you think I'm ignorant and arrogant....look at yourself, your no better). besides, your own comments prove the comments made about "french engineers" (cooks are different....they NEED to be artistic).

  37. All the News that's Fit to Print? by Schlemphfer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This piece shows the hazards of relying on journalism vs. engineering journals for assessing the potential of a company. I had to wonder, why was this company able to get the attention of the NY Times, when it seems as though there are better funded companies using comparable technology.

    Details like Etherlinx's garage being a scant six blocks from Jobs' and Wozniak's first garage are cute, but they tell us less than nothing about the company's potential. I couldn't help wondering if Etherlinx hired some media-savvy marketing person, whose job it was to unearth cute little details like that in order to get journalists' attention.

    Finishing that article, my main feeling wasn't "Gee...it sounds like these guys have some great technology that might overcome the last mile issue." Instead, I came away thinking, "How was it that these guys got the attention of the NY Times without demonstrating anything substantially new?"

    --
    I'm generally "Interesting," "Insightful," and even "Funny" here. What the hell happens to me at parties?
  38. A slightly offtopic observation by GePS · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    has anyone noted how arguments about processors never really win anyone over. AMD's good, Intel's good too, the competition keeps the price down, and the consumer wins. yay.

    Now just imagine if there were such competition for a certain software company in Redmond...

  39. Unanswered questions by KC7GR · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is a great idea, but the NYT article leaves a number of questions unanswered.

    First: It says they used 'software' to extend the range of the system. I don't see how that's possible unless there's some software tweak that increases the transmitter's output power beyond legal limits. Even then, I question whether the transmitter could handle such overdrive for extended periods as a device designed under FCC Part 15.

    Now, with that said: It -is- possible to enhance existing WiFi hardware with a better antenna, but the transceiver in question would have to have a connector for an external antenna designed right in. You can't just attach something with a clip-lead, and hope it'll work; Not at 2.4 GHz!

    Next up: I've checked Etherlinx's web site as well. It is, if possible, even less detail-rich than the article. I plan to send an E-mail query to try and dig some details out of them.

    Another point: Something that the WiFi peddlers are all neglecting to mention is that 2.4 GHz is (among other things) an amateur ('ham') radio band, and that ATV (Amateur Television) on that band is getting to be mighty popular, especially in the Bay Area. Slashdot has already run an article on the issue of low-power interference on 2.4 gigs... I can't help but wonder how well a big WiFi network would deal with the output signal from an ATV repeater when said signal could range anywhere from a couple of watts to the amateur max limit of a thousand watts.

    And no, there is no regulation protecting Part 15 devices from interference. Quite the opposite. Read the label on any such device, and you will find that it is 'required to accept any interference, including that which may cause undesired operation.'

    Just as one example, Carnegie Mellon University has, apparently, already taken this problem into account. Note this article from their Computing Services folk. They don't even want other 2.4 gig devices in operation on campus because of their own WiFi network.

    Finally, the issue of security on WiFi has already been beat to death, but I'll mention it again anyway. I don't believe it's possible right now, outside of using some heavy-hitting 3rd party encryption hardware at each end of a link, to get security that's as good as that available on hardwire networks (One word: AirSnort). If anyone can prove me wrong on that point, please do so and I will cheerfully shut up about it! ;-)

    The 'death' of cable or DSL? Not bloody likely. Not until it can offer the same security as hardwire, be interference-free in both transmission and reception, offer the same SPEED as you can get from hardwire, and can do so for a price that won't run us all into the poorhouse.

    --

    Bruce Lane, KC7GR,

    Blue Feather Technologies

    1. Re:Unanswered questions by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      what you dont understand is that High bandwidth = high power for X distance..

      you can transmit voice to anywhere on the globe at 144MHZ by nailing 1500 watts into a 30DB gain antenna pointed at the moon.

      i can also send the same message with 45 watts into a 9dbi gain antenna aimed at the moon.. by taking the voice, slicing it up into packets and transmitting it very slowly. Say 20 minutes to send a 3 second message. it's all in dropping the baud rate to the point that the lower power can transmit the data over the distance...

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:Unanswered questions by nolife · · Score: 1

      Finally, the issue of security on WiFi has already been beat to death, but I'll mention it again anyway

      This is a valid concern. Even though I live only a few miles from huge data centers including one from AOL, I am still somewhat rural. For this reason I will have to wait years for broadband. I would give up some amount of security for bandwidth if given the choice.

      The 'death' of cable or DSL? Not bloody likely

      I agree, but in areas where the others are not available it seems like a good choice.

      --
      Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
    3. Re:Unanswered questions by regen · · Score: 3, Interesting
      It says they used 'software' to extend the range of the system. I don't see how that's possible unless there's some software tweak that increases the transmitter's output power beyond legal limits.

      There are several ways to use software I quickly thought of that could increase the range.

      1. Software controled antenna array.

        By have several antennas in an array and use software to control the power output and phase to each antenna, you can create a highly directional and steerable beam. A similar aproach can be used to control the sensativity of the array in different directions. This could be used to make a very effective attenna that could automattically align itself to the strongest signal, hence reducing install costs.

      2. Adding additional error correction.

        By adding additional error correction you can trade bandwidth for reliability and therefor use a less reliable channel. Since as the range increase reliability of the channel decreases, this can effectively be used to extend the distance at which the devices operate.


      3. That was with about 5 minutes of thought. I could probably (as could most decent comm. engineers) come up with several more if I spent 1/2 an hour thinking about the problem.

    4. Re:Unanswered questions by LinuxHam · · Score: 2

      you can transmit voice to anywhere on the globe at 144MHZ by nailing 1500 watts into a 30DB gain antenna pointed at the moon

      Anywhere on the half of the earth you and the moon currently share, that is, perfectly placed sporadic E and F2 notwithstanding.

      --
      Intelligent Life on Earth
  40. www.speednetllc.com by Arethan · · Score: 3, Informative

    They provide broadband over the air. It's simply DOCSIS piped over the airwaves. The bonus is that these guys are actually using FCC regulated space, so they won't have cordless phones and microwave ovens interfering with their service. These guys are able to transmit 30 miles, and their installation is up and running in two locations right now.

  41. Competition for Redmond by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now just imagine if there were such competition for a certain software company in Redmond...

    What do you want? OS's? There is Mac OS, flavors of Unix and Linux, Palm, etc etc etc.

    Office suites? Star, Corel, etc.

    Browsers? Netscape, Mozilla, Opera

    Media players? Well, ever hear of Real

  42. Re:But what kind of data connection do they get 25 by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Your dancing should be classed as an offensive weapon. I think it's given me post traumatic stress disorder.

    --
    That was classic intercourse!
  43. Re:Starband = bankruptcy by jeffn7 · · Score: 1

    Starband, one of the satellite broadband providers, filed for bankruptcy recently, as late as last week I believe.

    The latency issue is killing all of the satellite services, as is the cost of providing it.

  44. Large infrastructure companies the problem by --daz-- · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    As long as major companies like AT&T are gobbling up smaller companies, and Congress is removing all semblance of competition, these companies will continue to gobble up all the bandwidth until just a few companies own it all.

    And as long as that is the case, they are going to purposely keep supply short so bandwidth prices remain high which renders broadband-to-the-home just about as useless or expensive as it is today.

    If these companies would open up their pipes, or at least 10% of the bandwidth they're holding back, the prices would plummit and having a 10mbps 2-way connection to the house would be cheap.

    These companies are actively resisting commoditizing bandwidth. That's the major reason Enron collapsed. Enron was known for commoditizing non-traditional markets. They bet the whole company on trading bandwidth as a commodity and all the big telcos shut them down.

    Apparently AT&T and the like prefer colluding with their "competitors" to reduce supply and keep prices rediculously high.

    1. Re:Large infrastructure companies the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the major reason Enron collapsed. Enron was known for commoditizing non-traditional markets. They bet the whole company on trading bandwidth as a commodity and all the big telcos shut them down.


      No, Enron collapsed because they were fucking crooks.
    2. Re:Large infrastructure companies the problem by rasper99 · · Score: 1

      When I worked at Enron Broadband Services doing second level support for bandwidth trading it was one percent of Enron's business. I don't think it brought Enron down.

    3. Re:Large infrastructure companies the problem by --daz-- · · Score: 2

      If you look at the whole story of what happened to Enron, they were gearing up for major acquisitions in the bandwidth trading business. They raised billions and shifted debt to attrat investors. They spent billions in the market trying to forge industry alliances. When AT&T and the like finally walked away from the table, Enron was sitting with billions in hidden debt that they could hide no longer. The calls started coming in and the house of cards collapsed. Had the big telcos not colluded to prevent commoditization, then Enron perhaps would still be around today. Crooks, thieves, and felons, but still around. And damnit, my first post WAS NOT OFFTOPIC!

  45. Commercial services like this exist by gambitdis · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We are a WISP (wireless ISP) outside of Philadelphia. While our area does not lend itself to 20 mile shots, we have been doing shorter range service. Our service is just starting up and more information is available at gambitwireless.com. I know of other WISPs doing the 20 mile shots with amps and within FCC regs.

    --derek

    gambitwireless.com

  46. Silly rabbit, broadband is for cable and telco's! by Orangedog_on_crack · · Score: 2, Interesting

    With the financial difficulties that the cable and telco's are having, they will fight tooth and nail to keep this new flavor of broadband access in obscurity. Broadband and related services are one of the few parts of their companies that have potential for future revenue growth. Where else are they going to be able to expand their revenue base....? Digital cable? Not likely. Too many people don't want to pay the premium over standard cable service. Long distance? Hardly. There is no real margin in that anymore. Cellular phone service? Possibly, but almost everyone already has a cell phone of some kind. The companies that get more maket share will be the ones who can package better deals. The telecom/ISP industry is very weak right now and will remain so until demand increases and after some more consolidation in the industry.

  47. Re:But what kind of data connection do they get 25 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "That is almost exactly identical to my situation. Soon now I will look into getting a T1 and then using 802.11b and letting my neighbours pay for it. "
    I looked into a satellite transceiver for the same purpose : http://www.c-comsat.com/english/default.asp

    But the linux implmentation needed a custom ($$$) router from Helius (http://www.helius.com/)....

  48. Software Engineering? by helleman · · Score: 1

    Two software guys designing hardware - uhh... I smell disaster!

    Until they hire a guy who knows how to use a spectrum analyzer, I can guarentee you they won't pass any certifications and are probably interfering with aircraft and satellite users...

    1. Re:Software Engineering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      MOD the parent up!

      I am a software engineer, and even I know that the first rule in a software shop is:

      Never ever let the engineers touch the hardware.

      (when you see a crowd of software engineers huddled around the xerox machine with tools in their hands, you know it's time to buy a new xerox machine)

    2. Re:Software Engineering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is an old saying: "beware of programmers who carry screwdrivers."

    3. Re:Software Engineering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, those of us software guys that actually *do* understand hardware and are comfy with scopes and analyzers are the only ones that are able to convince the EEs that the problem at hand is *not* a buggy driver, but a real hardware issue. :-)

  49. Uhm, pardon me, original genius by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn, we're reeling them in today, aren't we!

    YHBT.
    YHL.
    HAND.

  50. ... and the death of cable/DSL? by Frobozz0 · · Score: 1

    I think we're getting a little ahead of ourselves, here. Wireless is not a secure solution out of the box. I'm sticking to wires. After all, my desktop using ain't that portable... nor do I want it to be. :-)

    --
    "Politicians find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the people."
  51. 700 mhz by randomErr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The old 700 mhz frequency is coming open with the FCC soon. Why not set that aside for data transmission?

    --
    You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
  52. Down with the broadband monopolies. by purpledinoz · · Score: 1

    I hope this gives the high speed providers some healthy competition. We've been push around by high speed providers for long enough. I think it's time to push back.

  53. How secure is powerline ethernet? by xerofud · · Score: 1

    How secure is the Linksys Powerline product in an apartment complex?

    Also, how well does it scale if everyone in the apartment decides to "plug in"?

    1. Re:How secure is powerline ethernet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You give the bridge a passphrase when you first set it up, and according to the documentation it uses 56-bit encryption to communicate only with other bridges set up with the same passphrase. The documentation is very short on details, though; I have no idea how secure it really is.

  54. Road trip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great idea! I can see it now:
    Tripping through the countryside, taking your trusty cutters, collecting solar-powered WiFi repeaters as we go.

    Wide open areas are notoriously hard to patrol regularly.

  55. North Dakotan Here! by El_Nofx · · Score: 2

    I'm in Fargo, grew up in Bismarck. This kind of stuff would be perfect up here. We actually can get wireless at T1 speeds for fairly cheap, around 50 bucks a month. It is so flat that there are no obstacles to worry about.

    I work for a dial-up company now and most of our customers are actually from out of the towns, within local calling range. We tried wireless but it was just too unreliable.

    --
    It's not the OS it's the user that sucks. If it's user friendly, you get stupider people. - clinko
    1. Re:North Dakotan Here! by Afrosheen · · Score: 2

      If wireless was too unreliable, you had a poor implementation of it. I have a t1 quality wireless connection to my office, completely flawless even in crazy thunderstorms with lots of lightning. Airband must have spent some serious cash for their hardware.

  56. One question: Are there any hidden cables? by ralico · · Score: 1

    like the Magic Box hoax?

    --

    SCO to Hell
  57. Now the last 50 miles problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    why are people so cought up on the "last-mile" problem when even more people have the "I live 50 miles from town problem"

  58. How are they going to eat all those chips? by mlg9000 · · Score: 1

    A 802.11b based wireless repeater at does 20 miles for less then $100? How are they going to eat all those pringles chips? Does bbq have a better range then sour cream and onion? Seriously, this sounds like what wardrivers (www.wardriving.com) have been doing for a while now. An empty pringles can and $25 in odd parts and you can create your own antenna with a 10 mile range. Guess this just makes it that much easier to "explore" a few networks in the next town.

    1. Re:How are they going to eat all those chips? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read article no pringles

  59. Same ol' same ol' by Misuta+Supakulo · · Score: 1

    Just like all other last-mile broadband solutions it has some major disadvantages. Such as: 1) snow and heavy rain = no link, 2) limited to line of sight only (most cities are semi-flat so this is a real problem), 3) infrastructure needs to be built. Unless there is some better way to do the antennae at both ends, especially at the upstream link, this is not even remotely a viable solution. Right now every connection would require it's own medium gain antenna (even if it is only an inexpensive can) which needs to be mounted with a line of sight to the home / biz and needs to be connected to the POP. As in the bad old days of the telephone when each line required its own wire you can see that this kind of situation rapidly deteriorates into insanity (imagine the necessary thousands or tens of thousands of antennae on the roof of the ISP). Other methods might be possible, but then you move away from the "off the shelf cheap solution".

    --

    --
    He lied to us through song. I hate when people do that!
    1. Re:Same ol' same ol' by Pyramid · · Score: 1

      "snow and heavy rain = no link"

      Wrong! This is a myth. We're not talking about DirectTV here. 2.4 Ghz links are reasonably robust as far as weather is concerned. Contrary to popular mythology, 2.4 Ghz is not the resonant frequency of water; go crack open a physics book.

      I've seen 15 mile links barely show a change in latency during extremly heavy storms. The real problem is having cheap antennas take on water; they quit working until they dry out.

      --
      ~Any apparent grammatical or typographic errors are caused by defects in your display device.
    2. Re:Same ol' same ol' by isbhod · · Score: 0

      you have obviously not tried to use driect TV in wisconsin. damn snowstorms woudl interupt my tv viewing all the damn time, then in spring the lightning stomrs would do the same. Check you facts before you speak.
      You Fail! sit down!

    3. Re:Same ol' same ol' by Pyramid · · Score: 1

      Hey dink! Learn to read! My post clearly states that 2.4 GHz systems are robust during weather situations *UNLIKE* DishTV and it's ilk.

      DirectTV!=2.4 GHz

      I did check my facts; why don't you before you blather on like the ignorant jackhole you are?

      Move to the head of the dunce line! Simple minded prat!

      Cheers

      --
      ~Any apparent grammatical or typographic errors are caused by defects in your display device.
  60. uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sure these guys'll be found face-down, dead, in a ditch within the next year. The telcos are never going to go for this. Probably won't change anything though. Wires are dead!

  61. It's HOAX!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    For all those who are boasting 10 miles with PRINGLES Cans. Please tell me where your located. And I'll fly down to witness this spectacle. I've been working with pringles antennas and theres no way you can generate enough dbi to get that far with a 9 inch pringles can.

    so we're discussing 20 mile links here?? I'd hope people who boast these figures could prove it theoretically and not waste everyones time! :)

    WiFi rocks!
    iStumble

  62. Re:Silly rabbit, broadband is for cable and telco' by ahfoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They don't have to fight tooth and nail, they've got monopoly superpower, they own the backbone and they keep it expensive through totally deceptive, yet absoultely legal means. You learn about this when you go to buy a piece to start your wireless ethernet network and their eyes roll back like a shark preparing to eat and they start rolling off these new car salesman stories about how the backbone was built with these future services in mind like video conferencing and various voice telephone service add ons that nobody in their right mind would buy for the prices they're talking about. As a prospective ISP you wonder if they're totally insane. They must realize the market isn't like they think it is, but then you realize they don't really think it's like that. It's all just an excuse to keep the backbone costs high. If you think about it you realize that these overpriced gimmicks that are never going to fly the vastly overpriced way the incumbents have it laid out can at least easily be explained to a seventy year old senator or courtroom judge. After all, that's where the game gets played. If you can win in the courts, fuck the technical stuff. You own them bitchez. And if you've already got the money, all you have to do is play dumb and wait. That's what they're doing and you'd probably do the same if you had more money and power than was good for you.
    It's really just about adding costs to the backbone in any possible way to keep the small players out. ATM/Sonet add vast costs to the backbone infrastructure when you compare them to today's ethernet, but low cost is not desireable for the monopolies. They come up with any excuse not to use straight ethernet switches in place of outdated and expensive ATM/Sonet and tell you that it has to be this way for Quality of Service and anything else would be irresponsible. Arguing the other way is easy on Slashdot and very difficult in Congress or the courts.

  63. 20 mile range? Too bad they're breaking the law! by Pyramid · · Score: 1

    Too bad FCC rules state 2.4 GHz SS equipment is limited to a maximum range of 5 miles, 1 watt power output and 36 dBm (4 watts ) effective radiated power. Or that in practice, the ERP requred to get said 20 miles is above FCC rules as well.

    How do I know? I worked for a wireless ISP that did this 2 years ago. Old news.

    Too bad that these for profit networks must accept all interference with no legal recourse or rememdy since they operate under Part 15 guidlines. Or that I could fire up an amatuer radio transmitter in that band (with much higher power output levels), put the smack down on their throughput and I would have priority; the company would have to take it where the sun don't shine.

    The exact scenerio happened where I worked and the clueless Prez of engineering told the amateur to buzz off. Then said amateur brought the FCC and ARRL down on his has with much speed and voracity.

    Read the fine print of the FCC code. The info's buried in there.

    --
    ~Any apparent grammatical or typographic errors are caused by defects in your display device.
  64. Re:20 mile range? Too bad they're breaking the law by pozar · · Score: 3, Informative
    Too bad FCC rules state 2.4 GHz SS equipment is limited to a maximum range of 5 miles,



    No where in Part 15 is this defined.



    1 watt power output and 36 dBm (4 watts ) effective radiated power.



    This is defined for point-to-multipoint. Point to point you can do 20 miles. In fact we are doing this on a 22 mile link across the San Francisco Bay with 1/4 watt amps and 24 dBi antennas. Legal under Part 15.247.



    Tim

  65. Re: I got your Swedish reference right here: by Denial+of+Cervix · · Score: 1

    Hurn de Flee der verda hoon de biggen do zu--

    Bork bork bork!


    Note - parent was troll...

  66. Same ol' FAILURE TO READ THE ARTICLE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    not line of sight. Part of the whole point is that the infrastructure is cheap, it isn't a million dollar base station, it's a few hundred dollars. And where does it say that each connection requires it's own anntenea ? No mention of "inexpensive can" is there, just because slashdot used to run a pringles can / free broadband story every day, doesn't mean every 802.11 story has a pringles can in it.

    Do you work for a telco or cable company ?

  67. Even worse! by Moderation+abuser · · Score: 2

    You can't increase the gain of the system in Europe. If you use a high gain, directional antenna, you have to *lower* the power output top remain within the law.

    --
    Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
  68. Does it scale? by Animats · · Score: 2
    There's no problem building a single RF link to transmit data 20 miles or so. It's operating hundreds or thousands or tens of thousands of them in the same area that's hard.

    And what's the recent Slashdot fascination with New York Times articles? Is VA Whatever planning to sell Slashdot to the NYT, or what?

  69. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will we not rest until every each of the earth is blanketed with radio waves from our technology? Is it too much to not be "connected" all of the time, everywhere? Enough

  70. don't forget Cringely's warning by e40 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Cringely says 802.11b is in trouble, and no one seems to care.

    1. Re:don't forget Cringely's warning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because he is wrong.

      2.4 GHz magnetron "lights" have been around for a long time. The narrowband interference is easy to remove using software routines during the DSSS decode process. They also are easy to eliminate using frequency hopping and directional/space diversity antennas.

    2. Re:don't forget Cringely's warning by fotoguzzi · · Score: 1

      Could those lightbulbs be used to transmit data?

      --
      Their they're doing there hair.
    3. Re:don't forget Cringely's warning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Theoretically yes. Microwave oven magnetroncs can be on-off keyed (OOK) or AM modulated. There are a couple of amateur radio operators doing something like this already, even bouncing their signals off the moon.

      The bit rate would be quite low, and magnetrons tend to drift in frequency

  71. duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No shit dumbasses, stick a bigger antenna on anything and of course you get farther range. I've had a ad-hoc 802.11b setup going across town (about 15 miles) to a friends house for sometime now. This is why slashdot sucks, people don't have a clue.

  72. One word deserves another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Finally, the issue of security on WiFi has already been beat to death, but I'll mention it again anyway. I don't believe it's possible right now, outside of using some heavy-hitting 3rd party encryption hardware at each end of a link, to get security that's as good as that available on hardwire networks (One word: AirSnort).


    One word: ipsec

  73. Re:20 mile range? Too bad they're breaking the law by Pyramid · · Score: 1

    I omitted the important fact that the 5 mile radius is for point to multipoint only. Find one manufacturer that states a radius greater than 5 miles for their P to MP systems. Who said Part 15 is the only part of the CFR that has bearing on this type of operation?

    --
    ~Any apparent grammatical or typographic errors are caused by defects in your display device.
  74. RealNames guy involved by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

    Read the bios of the two guys running this company, and you'll see that one of them used to be an exec at RealNames, that lame company that got ticked off at Microsoft for not using their stupid scheme. I smell something fishy here...

  75. Mod this off topic by CommieLib · · Score: 1

    You probably know this, but the full Adams quote is:

    Twenty times in the course of my late reading have I been on the point of breaking out, "This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!!!" But in this exclamation I would have been as fanatical as Bryant or Cleverly. Without religion this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company, I mean hell.
    -- John Adams, quoted from Charles Francis Adams, ed., Works of John Adams (1856), vol. X, p. 254

    --
    If your bitterest enemies are people who hack the heads off civilians, then I would say you're doing something right.
  76. Standards are made to be broken by winse · · Score: 1

    when reality dictates that there is an easier or more effective way to accomplish a goal than to follow standards, the hack wins in my book.

    --
    this sig is deprecated
  77. Another Nodak Here by ari_j · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As you know from growing up in Bismarck, not all of North Dakota is either flat or as populous as the Fargo area, which isn't saying much. I'm presently 17 miles from Watford City, ND, and only have line of sight to any part of said town because I'm 100ft of elevation higher and most of the intervening hills are lower than that. I've been thinking about some kind of wireless solution for a while, as it is possible in Watford to get T1 and now, thanks to a spinoff by 3 companies (one in Watford, one in Dickinson, and one in Bismarck), DSL. The service really sucks, even within the city limits, but unreliable 512k is still better than the 24k that my phone line is letting me get today (I got about 50k once), which isn't reliable anyhow as it's also through the same ISP as the DSL.

    There is an initiative to deliver wireless to all of North Dakota's rural areas, not just the 50% of our population that lives between I-29 and the Red River (of the North, for those of you Suthroners reading), but it's a long ways off and some of the people in charge aren't ambitious enough to pull it off.

    Someone else mentioned the possibility of putting repeaters or transmitters on the cell phone antennas across the countryside. That would work great, IF said cell phone antennas were even capable with their much-greater-than-wireless-networking range of covering the entire state, but they're not. With a high-power bag phone, on a clear night, I can get enough 'service' to make a call, maybe understand the incoming side of it, etc. The nearest digital tower is circa 60 miles from me, in Williston, and is so weak that digital service doesn't become available until you come over Indian Hill about 10 miles from Williston. Granted that service in Minot, Grand Forks, Fargo, and Bismarck (and marginally so, Dickinson) is better, but there are still a lot of people, the real heart of North Dakota, that aren't included among those that live in our 'cities'.

    There needs to be a statewide solution, and we've not had much luck finding one yet. Any ideas?

    1. Re:Another Nodak Here by utexaspunk · · Score: 0

      how 'bout high-altitude solar-powered drones circling above your town, beaming up/down your data? could be better than satellites...? -wm

    2. Re:Another Nodak Here by El_Nofx · · Score: 2

      Ya, that is a problem in the western half of the state, some guys in Bismarck tried to get wireless going, they should of just put all the transmitters on the water towers, I don't think they could pull if off though, everyone their has DSL and Cable or Dial-up through BTI

      I have been thinking about the statewide problem. I remember when Schafer said he was going to run t1's to every school in the state and spend a few million doing it. I thought, ok, way too expensive to lay cable to every small town in the state, there has go to be a better way. So you either use wireless or existing cables in the ground. Every small town obviously has a phone line and a power line running to it. Phone line is out, dsl is way to hard to get to everyone so that leaves powerline networking. I don't know too much about it but I hear it is offered all over. That would seem to make sense to me. Everyone already has the line running right into their house and all you would have to do is setup switches at the junction boxes from what I understand, teaching farmers how to use computers is a whole nother problem.

      The sad part is places like ND, SD, MT, etc.. We are just too spread out, and to be honest with you 50 years from now most of the towns 500 will be gone. The people left could just get satelite internet. The Idea with the cell towers is pretty good though, those are everywhere around us.

      You are up in Watford? Good deer hunting, I was offered a contract job up by there one time, in Williston I think. Installing about 40 pc's for a car dealership and setting up a simple little network for them, They only wanted to pay me $8 an hour and give me 3 hours driving time total to go from Bismarck up there. I told them to shove it. Some east coast company.

      --
      It's not the OS it's the user that sucks. If it's user friendly, you get stupider people. - clinko
    3. Re:Another Nodak Here by El_Nofx · · Score: 2

      Ya know, after thinking about this more I started to wonder if the DEMAND is even out there for these fast connections. Sure the schools want them but does anyone else? I know ALOT of farmers out there and not one of them has ever said that they wanted a better internet connection. Even people in the small towns that I have met don't want them. Maybe a few kids here and there and the town GEEK, but most people in towns I have been to don't seem to be making it a priority. Seems more like a political thing. Bring North Dakota into the 21st century type deal. I mean almost everyone can get Dial-up out there can't they? You keep hearing about all these companies trying to roll out cable and dsl that are going broke, and that is in cities, there is no way they are going to make it in the rural areas.
      I don't know. North Dakota is destined to fall off the map anyway. We aren't even on it for most people in the US

      --
      It's not the OS it's the user that sucks. If it's user friendly, you get stupider people. - clinko
    4. Re:Another Nodak Here by ari_j · · Score: 2

      It's a chicken-and-the-egg problem. Watford's economic development department has been continually trying to get tech firms to move in. There is a geography company that did actually set up shop, and there was a programming firm that was going to come in (I even went to the job fair they hosted here and all that; covered in mud and wet from snow from being out 4-wheeling with the '76 IHC Scout, of course ;-D), but it seems the main problem is getting people to move in. We lack a few things that you and I real people require: entertainment. Yep, that's a few things. At least a movie theater and high-speed Internet. But keep in mind that the people who'd want to live here (me, for example) want to live here due in part to the isolation the country affords one, so they want to live outside of town. Figure that most of them will be 5-10 miles out. It's that 'doughnut' that broadband would have to cover, and then the geek infrastructure would be present and the firms could move in, thus creating the missing demand. Chicken and the egg.

      Oh yeah, and we're working on the movie theater dilemma (we had one long ago, but it's been closed for nearly 20 years). We're looking at setting up a digital (Lucas-friendly) theater in the near future, probably 2 screens.

      As to falling off the map, we're dangerously close as it is. Letterman had an electoral voting map, just showing each state in red, blue, or green, during the Bush/Gore election. He explained that red states' votes went to Bush, blue states' for Gore, and the states colored in green became Canadian. >8^)

    5. Re:Another Nodak Here by ari_j · · Score: 1

      Cheap bastards. For what it's worth, I spent a couple days back in Grand Forks doing some computer forensics for $125/hr last week. I'm a student taking advantage of what will probably be my last summer in western ND, so it's nice to have that $2k "summer job" all done with, so I can move on to my daily goals: Kill a prairie dog, go for a Jeep ride ('48 Willys, like WWII), go 4-wheelering, go 4-wheeling (that's with a truck ;-D), ride a horse, ride a motorcycle, go to Saskatchewan to visit 'the woman', play guitar, or workonmythesis. But I'm even behind on /those/ goals. It's terrible!

      As to deer hunting, it's great here! I'm 5 miles from the edge of hardcore Badlands, so we get whitetail deer and fantastic mule deer very close by, and we have a friend with a ranch down on the Little Missouri, the /real/ time-zone line (don't trust time.gov! They're wrong!) with a great abundance of both, and we own some farmland on the Yellowstone with its own breed of whitetails that have recently become very smart due to idiots from Williston coming down and hunting without permission. I've often thought about sniping /them/ off. ;-D I had venison last night (whitetail, Yellowstone, muzzleloader, 2000 season), in fact, and also have another window open to 'hunt' for the perfect scope to put on the new Weatherby SuperPredatorMaster .308.

      Okay, way too much off-topic info; I bet I lose all my karma from that high-ranking parent of this message, eh? ;-D (I'll post -1 for protection. ;-D)

  78. BFD by smammon · · Score: 1

    BFD - Get the Lucent/Orinoco "outdoor router". Been doing that for years.

    I helped to found an ISP that offers 802.11 broadband. We have "towers" around the city that are basically repeaters aiming back to the CO. I believe our longest hop from a tower to the CO is 6 miles (not KM). And then our futhest customer is at least that far away from the tower - you do the math.

    One problem we have had is that over 10 miles or more than one repeater you start to have latency issues on that link. Nothing like Satellite, but it's there.

    Lots of tricks in the interference and power limit areas. This is where our "trade secrets" reside and keep us the #1 provider in our area. My advice - talk to an actual RF engineer or at least a ham that plays with sattelite and microwave modes...

    --
    "Smile, listen, agree, and then do whatever the fuck you wanted to do anyway." ~Robert Downey Jr.
  79. Did you even read the article? Re:limitations by kbs · · Score: 1

    (4) They don't use 802.11b, they've hacked it with a p2p solution to the home.
    Their secret weapon is a technology known as a "software-designed radio," which has permitted them to create an inexpensive repeater antenna that can be attached to the outside of a customer's home. The device, which the Etherlinx executives said they believe can be built in quantity for less than $150 each, would communicate with a central antenna and then convert the signals into the industry-standard Wi-Fi, or wireless fidelity, signal for reception inside the home.
    ---
    (2-3) They don't use repeaters, (see above comment).
    Today, while most of the Wi-Fi industry is working on a more complex technology known as "mesh routing," which involves lashing together hundreds or even thousands of short-range transceivers, the Etherlinx developers believe they have found a crude, cost-effective approach that is capable of leapfrogging the last-mile problem.
    ---
    (1) They don't require line of sight.
    Etherlinx is by no means alone in its approach. Several other companies are also beginning to explore alternatives not requiring line-of-sight that they believe will be more resistant to interference and will be easy for customers to install without expensive on-site help.
    ---
    I believe they've already overcome all the problems you claim they need to.
    -k

    --
    yours,
    kbs
    1. Re:Did you even read the article? Re:limitations by nmos · · Score: 1
      Unfortunately the article was pretty much content free when it comes to actual details of what they are doing.


      (4) They don't use 802.11b, they've hacked it with a p2p solution to the home.
      Their secret weapon is a technology known as a "software-designed radio," which has permitted them to create an inexpensive repeater antenna that can be attached to the outside of a customer's home. The device, which the Etherlinx executives said they believe can be built in quantity for less than $150 each, would communicate with a central antenna and then convert the signals into the industry-standard Wi-Fi, or wireless fidelity, signal for reception inside the home.


      Someone is being VERY optomistic about the costs here. This "repeater antenna" really sounds like a SBC with one "normal" 802.11b card and one with a customized firmware plus an external antenna and mast. The SBC will have to be enclosed in a weatherproof box. There is no way this is going to cost anything like $150. Don't forget that the customer is going to need yet another wireless card and adapter inside their house too.

      2-3) They don't use repeaters, (see above comment).
      Today, while most of the Wi-Fi industry is working on a more complex technology known as "mesh routing," which involves lashing together hundreds or even thousands of short-range transceivers, the Etherlinx developers believe they have found a crude, cost-effective approach that is capable of leapfrogging the last-mile problem.


      Unfortunately this "cost-effective approach" is nothing more than some sort of magical firmware....

      (1) They don't require line of sight.
      Etherlinx is by no means alone in its approach. Several other companies are also beginning to explore alternatives not requiring line-of-sight that they believe will be more resistant to interference and will be easy for customers to install without expensive on-site help.


      While they may be able improve things somewhat by taking advantage of multipath and/or improving error correction to improve matters in situations where you have short distances and lots of solid objects in the way but there's not a thing they can do about trees and hills, at least not with magic software alone.
  80. clarification Re:Did you even read the article? by kbs · · Score: 1

    What I meant by "not using repeaters" was that they don't use multiple repeaters. The implication from the article seems to say that they have a single repeater that goes to the home, connected to a central office within 20 miles of the house.
    -k

    --
    yours,
    kbs
  81. Filing for bankruptcy protection means.... by Out4Blood · · Score: 1

    ...that you are bankrupt. You do not have the cash available to pay required debts (i.e. you're insolvent).

    "A bankruptcy is a legal proceeding that occurs when the liabilities or debts of an individual or firm exceed their assets or revenues over an extended period of time. When individuals or firms declare bankruptcy, their assets are taken and allocated to various creditors, and courts may impose restrictions on their future borrowing capacities." - http://canadianeconomy.gc.ca/english/economy/bankr uptcy.html

    Being bankrupt does not preclude a firm from continuing to operate. If a firms becomes insolvent, then they can voluntarily declare bankruptcy, or a creditor can petition them to be declared bankrupt. Any firm that applies for bankruptcy protection is, by definition, bankrupt.

    --
    - Consult the dictionary frequently to avoid mispelling
    1. Re:Filing for bankruptcy protection means.... by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/11/ch11.html

      You cite a Canadian site... this is US law we are talking about here.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  82. "Round" (Re:Satellites?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And the winner in the "strangest link ever" competition is a link from the word "round" to http://www.expressvu.ca/ WTF?

    1. Re:"Round" (Re:Satellites?) by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
      "And the winner in the "strangest link ever" competition is a link from the word "round" to http://www.expressvu.ca/ WTF?"

      My point was that the Bell Expressvu satellite TV service uses round dishes as opposed to elliptical ones.

  83. yet more nodaks (sorta) by green+pizza · · Score: 2

    There needs to be a statewide solution, and we've not had much luck finding one yet. Any ideas?

    You may want to email Colin Anderson (colin at beyondboxes dot com), he's my former roommate and seems to be on top of many ND broadband deployments. At one point he became so fed up that he had a T1 installed to his rural farmhouse for several different projects!

    I'm going to zip him an email too, letting him know about this thread. Not sure what he's up to these days, but it's worth a shot.

  84. Garage? by _ph1ux_ · · Score: 2

    we all know that any company that started in a garage - and is realted to cool technology will fail ultimately. just look at HP.

    oh... wait...

    1. Re:Garage? by jaoswald · · Score: 2

      Of course, HP's garage invention consisted of

      "HP's first product -- the resistance-capacity audio oscillator (HP 200A), an electronic instrument used to test sound equipment.

      The oscillator uses an incandescent bulb as part of its wiring scheme to provide variable resistance, a breakthrough in oscillator design....The HP Model 200A is so named `because we thought the name would make us look like we'd been around for awhile,' says Dave later."

      from HP's history page.

      Somehow, I don't think the NY Times ran a story about this, or that many people thought this was extraordinarily "cool."

  85. Rural Broadband by Jim+the+Anti-Bob · · Score: 1

    I can't remember where I saw the write-up on this (Wired maybe), but some folks from Colorado setup a COOP to do something like this... http://www.rric.net/

  86. probably out of jurisdiction by SethJohnson · · Score: 4, Funny


    The station is probably broadcasting from Mexico. You didn't say how far north of the border you are. If the station's located outside the US, then the FCC is
    not really going to be able to do much .


    I wish I was in Tiajuana

    Eating barbequed iguana

    I'd take requests on the telephone

    I'm on a wavelength far from home

    I feel a hot wind on my shoulder

    I dial it in from south of the border

    I hear the talking of the dj

    Can't understand just what does he say?

    I'm on a mexican radio

    I'm on a mexican radio

  87. Probably 300+ miles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Probably 300+ miles from the border. Possibly 500 miles or more.

    Not much of East Texas is that close to Mexico. The border is out west. (unless you're counting the border with Louisiana) From what I've heard, generally when people use the term "Rural East Texas" , they mean somewhere in the northeastern part of the state near Longview or Tyler. That's about 500 miles from the border.

    So...I'd bet the station that is bleeding over is U.S. based and withing the FCC's jurisdiction.

    1. Re:Probably 300+ miles by jrwillis · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the area that I'm talking about is about 20 miles south of Tyler.

      --
      Keep Austin Weird!
  88. Well professor by gazbo · · Score: 3
    I don't know if you understand what comment 'threads' are, or what 'moderation' is, but if you were not such a fucking moron you would know that I was not replying to you. I was replying to this comment, by SledgeHBK.

    Might sir suggest that sir browse at -1, nested rather than whatever ungodly configuration you use at the moment which confuses you so?

    I await apology in the form of being removed from your freaks list. Only special people go there. thx n advnce!

  89. Err, sorry but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...the beginning of the century was last year ;)

  90. Three most dangerous things in engineering: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Software engineer with a soldering iron.
    2. Hardware engineer with a patch.
    3. Manager with an idea.

  91. History Channel & WWII by jaoswald · · Score: 1

    That's because WWII is both the last popular war with enough footage to fill a cable channel. The Gulf War had good footage, just not enough.

  92. Last-Mile Wireless Solution Claims Garage Thinkers by Snafoo · · Score: 2

    Reuters - In a stunning example of the dangers of high-frequency communication technology, two garage thinkers were baked crispy gold by microwaves.

    Warning: Contents of Garage may be hot!

    --
    - undoware.ca
  93. Well then... by Out4Blood · · Score: 1

    You have no excuse for ignorance. Maybe you should read the U.S. Code to which you linked.

    --
    - Consult the dictionary frequently to avoid mispelling
  94. Here's a better link to use to educate yourself by Out4Blood · · Score: 1

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/topics/bankruptcy.html
    Since you are probably too busy to actually *read* the links that you cite to back up your arguments.

    --
    - Consult the dictionary frequently to avoid mispelling
  95. Former NoDak by Nate+Enderle · · Score: 1

    My parents still live about 25 miles from Dickinson, and they have dialup, but they would love to see some sort of high speed internet out there. While they are not exactly computer whizes, they can still apreciate instant web browsing. Each time they visit me in school, (Golden, Colorado) we try to figure out some way of getting them high speed as well. All of the solutions available, and they do exist, are far too expensive. The current wireless solution requires a $1000 dollar transmitter, and going through the DirectTV system is also pretty expensive. Someday, perhaps.

  96. Switchable probably won't be an option by leonbrooks · · Score: 2

    Not at 2GHz. But a modular design with different components in the grunt stage (ie `switch' with an SMD iron). Also, a 10W 2GHz-capable RF power transistor is going to run you a little, so don't blow the sucker up! If you're throwing that many watts, have you considered a phased array of Milo tins? You could probably get near 40dB...

    We have 35km to cover, so will probably need carefully-adjusted tins at both ends or a relay hop.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  97. RoadRunner, RoadRunner... by MsGeek · · Score: 2
    I am in the middle of Northridge, CA, 900 feet from California State University in Northridge. That's in the middle of the San Fernando Valley. I was told I could not get DSL.

    Go for RoadRunner. You should thank your lucky stars you are in Time Warner territory rather than Adelphia territory. Adelphia cable modem in the East San Fernando Valley blows chunks.

    What counts is distance between you and your Central Office. It doesn't matter whether you are 900 feet from CSUN or 900 feet from Vivid Video's world headquarters or 900 feet from wherever, if you are more than a few miles from your Central Office, you are screwed until SBC puts in a DSL repeater in your neighborhood. (nomenclature check: what's the real name of those little boxes the telco installs to enhance DSL range?)

    Anyway, I'm sorry to hear that you can't get DSL at this moment. Again, RoadRunner is great, despite their moving to bandwidth caps. You will prolly get more speed from RoadRunner than from SBC DSL anyway.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
    1. Re:RoadRunner, RoadRunner... by chris_mahan · · Score: 1

      Thanks, that was my plan anyway...

      --

      "Piter, too, is dead."

  98. 'last mile' already being tested by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The 'last mile' system in Australia, being run by the division of TIP at CSIRO, is already up and running and into the testing phase.

  99. Re:20 mile range? Too bad they're breaking the law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FCC Part 15 rules are a function of power density (microvolts/meter) NOT distance. You don't have a clue about what you're talking about.

  100. Re:20 mile range? Too bad they're breaking the law by Pyramid · · Score: 1

    "FCC Part 15 rules are a function of power density (microvolts/meter) NOT distance"

    Thanks for proving my point so clearly!

    Part 15 is not the only set of rules that governs the operation of above mentioned equipment. 18 comes to mind.... Hmm, ya think there might be others as well? You'd do well to search for all relevent regulations for Spread Spectrum devices operating in the ISM band.

    Perhaps you should search a bit deeper, since there ARE regulatory differences between point to point, point to multipoint (sector) and point to multipoint (omni) systems. If they're not mentioned in 15 (duh), maybe they're enumerated elswere? Ya think?

    Toot, toot! That's the sound of the clue train leaving you behind.

    --
    ~Any apparent grammatical or typographic errors are caused by defects in your display device.
  101. Re:History Channel & WWII...off topic by praedor · · Score: 2

    I was in Desert Storm, I don't need footage. As for WWII...hell, screw that. The point is that there is a LOT more to history than a couple wars. I don't want to see a buch of Vietnam stuff either. I want Minoa, ancient Greece, the Roman Empire, the ancient Egyptian empire, the Middle Ages, the Celts...real good history. Enough WWII, Vietnam, Desert Storm, etc. Done to death. Do HISTORY (and quit with the _Blacksheep Squadron_. What crap. Give me _Connections_ (a GREAT series that spans real history) instead.


    "The History Channel" should be renamed the "WWII Channel", or as another poster referred...call it "The Hitler Channel". It sure as hell isn't any longer a REAL history channel.

    --
    In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.