"Phil Kane" wrote in message . net...
On 22 Feb 2004 01:02:36 GMT, N2EY wrote:

I undertand
that they would use a band of frequencies which would "endanger" our
2.4 Mhz allocations. But like I posted somewhere else earlier, I'll
trade 2.4 Mhz for 14 Mhz any day.

The 802.11b "Wi-Fi" LAN technology operates at 2.4 GHz, not MHz.

QSL.

The nice part about that is that Wi-Fi Channel 1 (IIRC) falls
totally within the portion of the band that is shared between
Amateur and Non-Licensed Part 15 users, and (theoretically, at
least) a licensed ham can hang a super-high-gain antenna and a power
amp on a commnercial Wi-Fi unit (CompUSA "special") operating on
that channel, modifications that non-licensed Part 15 users cannot
do.

Just think what 1500 W TPO would do to the neighborhood Wi-Fi users.

DX records. "King of the Hill".

****er-offer to end all.

But would it be any worse than the days when the first consumer TV
receivers hit the shelves and hams "invented" TVI? How long ago?? It's
all circles.

Some of them do and that's not good. Others are in the 5 GHz region.

802.11g - "Wide-Area" LAN or WAN. The Bay Area Wireless
Communications Alliance members were discussing this about 5
years ago when I was active with that group. A higher-powered
version requiring a point-to-multipoint microwave system license
was starting to be pitched to a different crowd from the 802.11b
(2.4 GHz) users.

What is most important is that we can have a protected slice of GHz *and*
those technologies can exist.

The current show-stopper for the 802.11 crowd seems to be a lack of
standards and coordination. Which is very typical of fledgling
technologies,

These ARE standards. Just different applications.

Depends on what/how/who defines a "standard". Touch-tone pads are
standard. The rest are questionable on that scale, and in the case of
the instant topic very questionable. I spend a good bit of time
cruising the financial news, London Financial Times, Reuters, Business
Week, anywhere where I don't have to cough up coin to get into like
the WSJ. The technologies which will matter down the road are those
Wall Street buys into. The rest will be orphaned. Good collection of
articles by the investments pundits on the likes of Wi-Fi and the
related standards problems they see in this field.

http://www.businessweek.com/technolo.../tc_04wifi.htm

Speaking of orphans . . I have yet to run into a single peep about BPL
anywhere in the tech investments rags so far. I think this silently
speaks volumes about the future of BPL.

Carl Stevenson
is a national and international expert on them.

Yup, would have been nice to have him in this thread.

And eventually evolutionary forces will do what they've
always done and some 802.11 type system or another will be ready to
market on a global scale.

Both the 802.11b (short-range) and 802.11g (long-range) systems have
been marketed on a global scale for several years. Don't confuse
them with the differing standards for cellphoes and color TV - USA
vs the rest of the world.

You're right.

BINGO! I knew you'd get it. Just like VHS smacked Beta's rear years ago.

What makes you think that Beta died when VHS became the consumer
standard? The TV and broadcast industry standardized on Beta for
field recording, but alas Sony is no longer supporting it, having
had it replaced by digital technology. Look for the same thing to
happen with VHS - "everyone" is going to DVDs.

They're selling computers which don't have floppy drives. I tried to
remember when I last used a floppy. Years ago.

w3rv