Siduhe;487845 Wrote:
> Things like repositioning the router (higher up better,
But, but... that's not how omni antennas work. Instead of radiating a
sphere they trade vertical radiation for horizontal. Without
obstructions, you want both antennas in the same plane, and polarized
the same. I've al
seanadams;495420 Wrote:
> What speed test are you referring to? If it's on a web site then your
> bottleneck is most likely your internet connection (WAN), not your
> wireless. A web speed test will report the lower of the two speeds.
>
> Secondly, do not confuse kbps (kilobits per second) and k
Mnyb;488044 Wrote:
>
> In my home i get a reliable 3000kbps mostly if i do the speed test
What speed test are you referring to? If it's on the internet then your
bottleneck is most likely your internet connection (WAN), not your
wireless.
Secondly, do not confuse kbps (kilobits per second) an
Mnyb;488044 Wrote:
> Eeh there is one argument not investigated here when people say that a
> squeezebox would not gain anything by being a N device.
>
> If you have *one* squeezebox and one accesspoint/router i totally get
> the argument the speed needed is lower then 801.11g anyway. (...)That'
Eeh there is one argument not investigated here when people say that a
squeezebox would not gain anything by being a N device.
If you have *one* squeezebox and one accesspoint/router i totally get
the argument the speed needed is lower then 801.11g anyway.
But how many squeezeboxes playing flac
Siduhe;487859 Wrote:
> (...)If you're stuck with your router position and already on the best
> channel, then upgrading your router may be a good option. I get much
> better coverage from a recent Netgear RangeMax (not dual band) than my
> old Belkin router.Ah, interesting. I will first try to
dSly;487853 Wrote:
> Yes Dave, I understand N would be better if my Boom had it. But could
> dual-band routers also accommodate two separate G-Band networks on two
> different channels for example?
>
> I have done some basic troubleshooting Siduhe but since I have 5 other
> wireless devices in
DaveWr;487842 Wrote:
> The big advantage with N networks is they can be at 5 GHz. No
> interfering neighbours on G networks, and no microwave oven effects. It
> would really help in many cases if squeezeboxes were upgraded.
>
> DaveYes Dave, I understand N would be better if my Boom had it.
dsly, before you shell out for a new router - have you tried the basic
troubleshooting steps set out in the wiki? Things like repositioning
the router (higher up better, away from other electronics) and changing
the channel can make a massive difference, depending on your
environment. I have two
The big advantage with N networks is they can be at 5 GHz. No
interfering neighbours on G networks, and no microwave oven effects. It
would really help in many cases if squeezeboxes were upgraded.
Dave
--
DaveWr
DaveW
Very interesting original post. I am getting unsatisfactory wireless
performance from my Squeezebox Boom. I heard that the Boom's wireless
was not the greatest but I also have a pretty old microwave that may be
interfering. If I understand correctly, it might be advantageous for me
to replace m
seanadams;263735 Wrote:
> Just make sure to put them at least five channel numbers apart.
The Apple Airports have an 'auto' channel select mode where they sense
what else is out there, so they 'defaulted' to 1 and 6. I had always
read at least 3 channels apart, but this certainly works.
The
I agree, great post. Although for me, support for 802.11n would be
most useful in the wireless bridging case. Hardly a dealbreaker,
though.
On Jan 29, 2008 4:58 PM, Mark Lanctot
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Excellent, I plan to mercilessly dig this thead out next time a newbie
> wonders at the
Excellent, I plan to mercilessly dig this thead out next time a newbie
wonders at the short-sightedness of Logitech for not making the SBR or
next big thing 802.11n. :-)
--
Mark Lanctot
Ben Klass: "I won't even eat a pre-7.0 meal. Well, unless it involves
bacon."
Eric Seaberg;263710 Wrote:
>
> I have TWO wireless networks in my house; 1-802.11N (B/G compatible)
> and 1-802.11B/G.
Just make sure to put them at least five channel numbers apart.
--
seanadams
seanadams's Profile:
Thanks for that! Just started 'rolling out' N APs in my house and now
feel that it's worth it (although there was a hunch...)
--
Sike
Sike's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2458
View this thread: h
Sean, thanks for the info. That's exactly what I started doing with my
network 9-10 months ago.
I have TWO wireless networks in my house; 1-802.11N (B/G compatible)
and 1-802.11B/G. Only my wife's older Apple MacBook accesses the B/G
network as it is 802.11B only. All newer MacBook Pros in t
I recently met with Rick Bahr, VP of engineering at Atheros, and was
able to get clarity on a few of the questions that frequently come up
here about wireless performance.
Q: DOES THE MERE PRESENCE OF AN 802.11B DEVICE SLOW DOWN AN OTHERWISE
ALL-G OR ALL-N NETWORK?
A: YES[/B] THIS IS OF COURSE A
18 matches
Mail list logo
