"John Smith" wrote in message
...
JB wrote:

...
I concur. I like the Huntgate solution but prefer to use Ethernet for
the
run. However, there is a problem with using a high gain omni antenna in
an
urban area where there is a lot of channel loading. Your throughput
drops
because you are spending a lot of time with collision avoidance. This
might
work at night, but not if everyone leaves their wireless up all the
time.

WiFi was meant to be short range. When you improve your range, you
compound
your interference problem exponentially. If you use a Pringles can you
have
a big advantage because it is as if you moved your low gain antenna
closer
to the AP but you still have the problem of the connections the AP hears
but
you don't hear and can't avoid colliding with. At least you aren't
being
bombarded with broadcasts.

Simply put, there are limitations to performance when you put yourself
in a
crowded situation.


Taking in your text, "overall", I fail to find anything I would nit-pick
at ...

But, you know, as well as I, we are going to attempt to expand range to
and even beyond "its' limits", like a mountain--just because it is
there. :-)

I mean, "That is what we do!" grin

Regards,
JS

Any excuse to raise the noise floor--

JB wrote:


Any excuse to raise the noise floor--


Hmmm, I thought you "bright enough", guess I was wrong ... :-(

Your newsreader has no filters? You are not "bright enough" to use them?

You are not "bright enough" to have figured this out?

You are not "bright enough" to get by without someone telling you?

Etc.?

Filter me, IDIOT!

Regards,
(but STOP your incessant bitching, trust me, the wife is enough ... if I
need more, I'll ask you ... trust me, I won't go wanting ... ROFLOL!)
JS :-)

JB wrote:

...
Any excuse to raise the noise floor--


Whoa ... I apologize to the wife ... she just read the previous post, I
made, to this one ...

She pointed out that you are MUCH WORSE than her--she asked me if you
were gay or had "problems", she did NOT laugh ...

I will not repeat that mistake (next time I won't show her ...
HEHEHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!)

Regards,
JS

JB wrote:

...
Simply put, there are limitations to performance when you put yourself in a
crowded situation.


You know, JB? Ever since you have entered here, I found you to be an
idiot? I mean, I don't want to be rude, or anything ... now, you have
fertile ground to prove me wrong! I will pause for the words of wisdom
which change my life ...

But then, what are you? Do you have a book you quote from? Do you have
any antennas you are experimenting with? Are they ancient ones, ones we
have seen a dozen times before now? Are you one who wishes to "buddy up
with one(s)" already quoting one (or more) of the "great minds of
yesterday?" Are you here to quote from books for the poor?; i.e., those
who can't afford the books so you "throw quotes out, and bits-of-wisdom
for ignorant and starving minds?" Are you here to "enlighten my mind?"
Are you here to enlighten us all?

What are you about? Whatever it is, please get on with your "big bad
self." My patience grows thin and I am beginning to think you have
NOTHING to offer other than I have already seen? (and seen, many, many
times yawn)

But then, a pause, let us be "be-dazzled!" ... your forum awaits you ...
I now hang upon your every word! :-) Go forth and cure my ignorance!

Regards,
JS

"Bill Kearney" wrote in message
t...

"DaveC" wrote in message
obal.net...
Looking for outdoor omni "whip" antenna for 2.4 GHz.

Whip antenna? What is this, for a vehicle? For a stationary location it
seems like it'd be an extremely bad idea to use an antenna that 'whipped'
around.

Is there any reason to not go for the greatest gain antenna, given that
cost
is not too important (within reason)?

Alligator effect. Wide mouth receiving everything. If you don't need to
pickup everything then why bother? It just makes it harder for your WiFi
router to cut through all the noise of distant stations it doesn't
communicate with. Get the right antenna suited for your installation, no
more, no less.

Which leads to the constant request, when you ask a question POST WHAT
GEAR YOU'RE USING.

In your case it would also help to define what sort of connection you're
trying to make. Point to point, metropolitan, etc.

-Bill Kearney
Since you have included the HAM radio newsgroups as your first choices,
with the Internet Wireless as your last choice,
then - as was mentioned above - what are you trying to accomplish
with this 2.4Ghz outdoor antenna ??

Since you used the term "whip" it tends to imply some physical motion or
vehicle,
vs a "vertical" which implies a stationary location.
And both imply a omni pattern - like a general Access Point -

Dave wrote:
Short Pringle's can, 1/4 wave probe, 1/2 wave from closed end, soldered
to female TNC.
===================================
Yes these cans work well ; the problem is the type and length of coax .
A suitable arangement is a WiFi router near the antenna (if necessary in
a wx proof box ) with an ethernet cat5 cable running to the equipment.

Another possibility is a USB WiFi adaptor in the focal point of a
satellite dish with a USB to ethernet converter.

Frank KN6WH

On Nov 21, 2:38*am, DaveC wrote:
Looking for outdoor omni "whip" antenna for 2.4 GHz.

Is there any reason to not go for the greatest gain antenna, given that cost
is not too important (within reason)?

There are scads of these on the 'net. I'm looking for someone who has
experience with one or more of them and can make a recommendation for one..

Thanks,
--
DaveC

This is an invalid return address
Please reply in the news group

I recently built a Franklin antenna for 2.4Ghz.
I highly reccommend it. Google WiFi and franklin antenna.

Jimmie

Since you used the term "whip" it tends to imply some physical motion or
vehicle,
vs a "vertical" which implies a stationary location.
And both imply a omni pattern - like a general Access Point -

-=-=-=-

OK, time to clarify...

Wifi (2.4 GHz). outdoor omni vertical (not whip), permanent mount on pole, to
be connected (very short pigtail) to pole-mounted wifi router in client mode.
Max output: 250 mW.

Is it true that the higher the gain the flatter the "donut" shape of the
sensitivity field?

(And yes, my terminology is rudimentary... please forgive.)

Thanks,
--
DaveC

This is an invalid return address
Please reply in the news group

DaveC wrote:
Since you used the term "whip" it tends to imply some physical
motion or vehicle,
vs a "vertical" which implies a stationary location.
And both imply a omni pattern - like a general Access Point -

-=-=-=-

OK, time to clarify...

Wifi (2.4 GHz). outdoor omni vertical (not whip), permanent mount on
pole, to be connected (very short pigtail) to pole-mounted wifi
router in client mode. Max output: 250 mW.

Is it true that the higher the gain the flatter the "donut" shape of
the sensitivity field?

(And yes, my terminology is rudimentary... please forgive.)

Thanks,
--
DaveC

dropped the x-posting to the ham groups -
--

why omni on a pole in "client mode" ?

If you are attemtping to connect to a specific Access Point,
this has been discussed here zillions of times,
and there are other questions, clarifications, and solutions available -
other than an omni -
Where are you in relation to the Access Point, how far, line of sight, etc

This requires a little different "thinking" than just putting up a bigger
stick
to talk to a 2m, 220, or 450 repeater -

DaveC wrote:

Is it true that the higher the gain the flatter the "donut" shape of the
sensitivity field?

(And yes, my terminology is rudimentary... please forgive.)

I'm the one who initially committed than terminological crime so forgive
ME! Where is that big omni gain going to come from if not from the
vertical beamwidth? Start with the isotropic model pictured as a
spherical balloon. Squeeze it however you want to. Nothing about an
antenna can add volume to the model, its just a matter of how you
squeeze it.

-Bill