At 05:07 AM 27/02/2016, Frank O'Connor wrote: >And no matter what you say the range of radio frequencies (and hence >cchannel and data carrying capacity) is vastly limited compared to itâs >electromagnetic cousin, light. And that doesnât even begin to look at >problems of scalability, interference, cross channel interference, range, >error and other quality issues that WiFi incurs - as well as a host of the >other issues that others have raised (power, maintainability, repairability, >technology mix issues and the like)
Great point, Frank, about the capacity. And isn't it true that because the fibre frequencies are contained, the frequencies are reusable if in distinct fibre cables, no matter what the wavelength, unlike wifi which requires physical separation by distance to avoid overlap interference? That is a BIG bonus, especially for high density living environments with individual 'message packet' needs. You sort of say that above. I was just thinking about how it's all about frequencies, the light spectrum being part of it that happens to travel well in the glass medium. Whatever happened to future proofing? Mal T just 'past-proofed' Australia. Gee thanks. Jan I write books. http://janwhitaker.com/?page_id=8 Melbourne, Victoria, Australia jw...@janwhitaker.com Twitter: <https://twitter.com/JL_Whitaker>JL_Whitaker Blog: www.janwhitaker.com Sooner or later, I hate to break it to you, you're gonna die, so how do you fill in the space between here and there? It's yours. Seize your space. ~Margaret Atwood, writer _ __________________ _ _______________________________________________ Link mailing list Link@mailman.anu.edu.au http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
