SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tony Viola who wrote (158619)2/13/2002 12:21:31 PM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 186894
 
"but is 5 GHz worse than, say 4 or 3 GHz?"

5GHz is worse than the 2.4GHz of 802.11b. As far as why, well, radio isn't really my area of expertise. Our radio engineers have told me this, and I've seen the results of our tests. I do know that the reason why Intersil is pushing 802.11g, which does 54mbit on the 2.4GHz band, is wall penetration.

I wish I had a better answer for you.



To: Tony Viola who wrote (158619)2/13/2002 12:45:40 PM
From: Joe NYC  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 186894
 
Tony,

but is 5 GHz worse than, say 4 or 3 GHz? That's the implication I got. From my EMR experience, higher frequencies always penetrate better than lower ones. Is there anything different about 5 GHz?

With no EMR experience, I was under the impression that it is just the opposite.

Joe


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News