Slashdot Mirror


Idaho Companies Tout New Wireless Record

pavelvp writes "A small wireless Internet service provider in Idaho and a wireless equipment start-up claim to have set a new record for transmitting data across a wireless link this week. Microserv Computer Technologies, based in Idaho Falls, and Trango Broadband Wireless, a fixed-wireless broadband equipment maker, announced that they transmitted data over unlicensed wireless spectrum 137.2 miles." This unverified record would beat the previous record holders from the DefCon WiFi Shootout covered earlier on Slashdot.

22 of 146 comments (clear)

  1. What I want to know is... by It+doesn't+come+easy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Did the equipment include any Idaho Potato Batteries (tm)?

    --
    The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
  2. Been there. Done that. by Moonwick · · Score: 5, Informative

    Uhh, I'm pretty sure voyager 1 has the record for data transmission across a wireless link.

    --
    Only on slashdot can a posting be rated "Score -1, Insightful".
  3. Doesn't it have to be 802.11x? by utopianfiat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was under the impression that the record reflected everything on the 802.11x band, not any wireless transmission.
    In this case, technically NASA would win by sending wireless info from sattelites. :/
    Maybe I'm just not RingTFA correctly.

    --
    +5, Truth
  4. Proprietary != Better by NorbMan · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From TFA:
    "What sets apart the 125-mile record set at the Defcon Wifi Shootout Contest is that it was subject to a strict verification and certification process administered by four independent judges."

    That, and the fact that the Defcon record was set using standard 802.11b radios rather than proprietary technology, and that the proprietary technology only beat Wi-Fi by 12.2 miles.

  5. The Defcon records... by stienman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Note that Defcon has records for unamplified long distance links.

    -Adam

  6. I for one welcome our new wireless overlords... by LuciferBlack · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Okay it's unverified, but that's a good distance if it is indeed true. :) But it begs the question - "How are we going to secure a wireless area that large if there's issues with smaller coverages?" What is the benefit of an area that large if they select who has access to the network? Any ideas on how they'd regulate people just hopping on the signal?

    --
    I'm working on a good joke about your mom being /.'d, but it's not finished yet.
  7. Competition for cable by thc69 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Maybe this sort of thing can compete with cable for rural broadband...DSL doesn't go to my house.

    Too bad somebody beat me to the potato battery joke.

    --
    Procrastination -- because good things come to those who wait.
  8. Apples & Oranges by gclef · · Score: 4, Insightful

    DefCon: unamplified 802.11b; 11Mbps link; judges present & claim verified.

    These guys: closed, proprietary protocol; 2.3Mbps link; no one around to verify facts.

    As far as I'm concerned, the DefCon claim holds.

  9. Re:Been there. Done that. by nxtr · · Score: 2, Informative

    That's on a liscenced frequency, you insensitive clod!

  10. Another record by nizo · · Score: 4, Funny

    They now also hold the record for the biggest and most obnoxious ad at the top of their webpage.

  11. Hometown by kallx · · Score: 2, Insightful

    At least one good thing came out of my hometown. Now if they can just make wireless recivers less than $600 dollars they may have something.

  12. Re:Been there. Done that. by NorbMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It could be argued that there is no current body with the authority to license spectrum outside of Earth.

    Unless the FCC claims the whole of our solar system in it's domain.

  13. Laser WiFi? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 3, Interesting

    All these long-distance radio records are being set with antennas attenuating all the signal into a (directional) narrow cylinder, rather than an (omnidirectional) sphere. What kind of performance could we get if we used a "radio laser", of coherent light in the 2.4GHz band, collimated into a long needle? Could we get transcontinental beams? Is it especially hard to make lasers in that band, and to modulate them for the WiFi signal? Is there a lot of latency, as the light bounces around in its resonant cavity before emerging coherent and pumped up to useable power? Couldn't we just modulate the "raw" laser as it was leaving the cavity?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Laser WiFi? by forand · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Who is moding this interesting? Come on people, as someone in replied already THE EARTH IS NOT FLAT. You can go about 12 miles before the curvature of the earth stops you from having line of sight. "Lasers", as you say, using radio frequencies are traditionally called Masers but operate at higher frequencies than radio(Microwave), it is very difficult if not impossible to create a radio frequency coherent source since the size of the emitting region needs to be rather large and completly uniform on a very small scale.

  14. Wait a minute by JHromadka · · Score: 3, Funny

    I thought it was a well-known fact that Idaho does not exist.

    --
    "The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved." -- John Ashcroft
  15. Not sure what's more impressive... by PhatboySlim · · Score: 3, Funny
    I don't know whether to be more impressed by the fact they broke the wireless record...

    ... or by the fact there is a technology company in Idaho.

    --
    Be sure to remember the Programmers Prayer
  16. Licensefree AND legal? by Transcendor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    AFAIK if you want (in Germany at least) to use one of the several freely available radio frequency bands,you'll have to stay in tight barriers when it comes to a)output power b) signal "precisity" (do not spread into other bands AND DO NOT INTERFERE with electronic equipment) and c) antenna gain.
    so - 200dB antenna just would be illegal. There's nothing with license-free since you in fact would violate laws and void your permission to use the bands.
    Maybe that's unimportant since all that record has in common with previous records in Wifi-distance are frequency.
    --be smart today. emit a bit. and get bitten!.

  17. What I want to know is... by Fuzzball963 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I have to say having experienced Microservs broadband links I'm not impressed. The mileage of the connection is impressive however their service routinely sucks. Dropped coonnections, low uptime, high prices for slow speeds.They have good latency when it actually works properly though :). Qwest DSL or CableOne has Microserv beat all hollow. Even the local Teton Wireless internet kicks their ass. But Teton wireless does have some pretty impressive speeds for a long range wireless link (I've seen it get as high as 5Mbps down and 2Mbps up).

    --
    "The boy is dangerous, they all sense it, why can't you?"
  18. Re:Been there. Done that. by grozzie2 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Licensing is just a silly artifact of local regulatory requirements. Yes, voyager was unlicensed, nobody on earth has the jurasdiction to claim ownership of the spectrum out where it is. On the recieving end, no license is required to recieve the signal, and even if it was, there's plenty of places on this planet where nobody has jurasdiction to regulate such things. It's trivial to put an hf link on a couple of boats, set em half way around the world from each other, in the open ocean, and claim 'unlicensed', and actually get reliable communications. Since they are on the high seas, there is no regulatory body with jurasdiction, and they can use whatever spectrum they want, however they want.

    This whole business of 'records' for wireless transmissions is just so silly, a game of 'mine is bigger than yours'. Until these folks are actually communicating with stuff that's farther from this planet than geostationary orbit, then, there's already plenty of folks communicating without wires, over distances far greater than 137 miles, as part of normal everyday operations, so common in fact, nobody thinks twice about it. For one off custom setups, well, there's a couple of little robots traversing around mars that do it daily. For highly specialized 'record breaking' stuff, look out to cassini and beyond.

  19. What Kind Of Record Is Involved Here? by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "The equipment used was not based on standard 802.11 wireless technology, but instead was based on proprietary radio technology from Trango."

    This would seem to be irrelevant to the Defcon record which was unamplified standard 802.11.

    It's comparing apples and oranges, isn't it?

    I suppose you can say it's a new "wireless" record, but then what about the Navy's ULF submarine communication methods? Aren't they "wireless"? And they go a lot further than 100 miles.

    This seems like an advertising stunt to me.

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  20. Re:Publicity Stunt! by arbitraryaardvark · · Score: 2, Funny

    A good article about
    some weird, gang-style rivalry coming from a falling out between the founders
    might be quite slashdotworthy. Got one?

  21. Re:Been there. Done that. by cashman73 · · Score: 2, Funny
    Unless the FCC claims the whole of our solar system in it's domain.

    Mod parent DOWN! Let's not give George W. Bush any ideas!!!!