Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SilentZ who wrote (265444)	12/21/2005 12:37:40 AM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573682

"Wireless for Everyone, Even Appalachians" As I commented on your site, I doubt it. I think it would be neat, and it is certainly consistent with the dredging of canals and the building of railroads or highways as far as infrastructure is concerned, but there are certain technological hurdles that need to be overcome. Not the least of which is the fact that radio is an art form, not a science. Ok, not strictly true, bt determining the coverage of a wireless network needs shoes on the ground with the right tools. It isn't something that you can look at a map and get a good idea. And it changes with the seasons. Because trees and foliage can make a huge difference. And, to se your example, the Appalachians are a worst case. Not only do they have the so-called mountains, they also have trees. Lots of them. Both make multi-path distortion a problem. That means the signal is reflected off many different things. The best way to solve these problems is to use a lower frequency, like the 900 MHz band. But that means a lower data rate. Ok, something like ultra wide band can be used, bt UWB is experimental at this time. Given the cap of environmental hazards, it might not be significantly better. Having said this, the concept probably works fine in most urban areas. But that is a different claim.