FCC Says Go for 'Super Wi-Fi' – Wi-Fi on Steriods

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
What I envision is the final push of "broadband" into rural US communities. AT&T, Comcast, etc. put up an antenna in a slightly populated area and connect it to a wired fiber optic connection. The company then sells/leases point to point antenna that are installed at houses by company technicians to connect to the company's antenna.

Now, everyone in a X mile radius of the antenna has "broadband" (not 56k dialup) access. From there, the company offers packages of combined telephone, internet, and eventually cable tv.

Once most people in the area have converted, all of the landlines in the area (telephone & cable, if they were there anyway) are done away with due to maintenance costs.

AT&T, for example, operates on the 400 Mhz band. Verizon operates on the 500 Mhz band. .... Competition in all areas depending on where the towers are built. (Sound familiar, it should... as this is the cell phone model.)
 
[citation][nom]amk09[/nom]This is amazing. 5-10 years down the road Wi-Fi will be as easy to get as a cellphone signal.[/citation]

It will most likey be easier considering some phones now a days rarley even get signles "Thanks Apple"!
 
[citation][nom]x3style[/nom]I don't know if you ever worked with a wireless device those specs you posted are for high range point to point antenna, the problem here was about omnidirectional antenna like your wireless router that transmits 360 degrees in all 3 dimensions. Point to point antenna range of 320km is nothing new. Omnidirectional antenna of 320km would be the stuff of the future soon although the wi-fi communication is not like radio broadcast it also requires the clients to be able to send back trough that range in order for two-sided communication to occur.[/citation]

Nice to see you bothered to look at the linked page.

LMAO
O see there is pritty pictures for people that can not yet read.
Ooohhh 2x radios at 1Watt so 1 can point to point and 2nd can local Wifi-AP.
ROFL

I wonder what this can do with a omni-directional antenna at 1Watt versus my 300feet 48mbps thru walls $30 dd-wrt junk at 17mw or 800feet thru walls @180mw 36mbps junk router.

So if this is one of the few products that can do what the FCC is thinking of doing and selling at $600 then mass producing this same item would translate into $120 retail ?

We know with it's 2 inbuilt radio's it can do 1Watt max, 200miles max line of sight, so should be able to cover 1mile at 108mbps for home users if incorrectly installed and poorly configured and it does not have to deal with heights / curvature of the earth and other signal interferences over 200miles.

Stupid question 200miles that means it might interfere with the low orbit satellites or might bounce off stealth F114's when they fly over like with the GSM signals in Germany in 1998.

With 1watt power adding a omni-directional 15dBm antenna if not happy with the decent antenna that comes with it you should be able to cover at least 300Feet minm. to 15miles avg. at max 108mbps and minm. 24mbps.

Surely this is still much better than the proposed FCC's new idea's of ??300feet?? thru walls at max 20mbps ??

Damn can get a 1gbps wall plug and no need for slow 20mbps wireless.
http://www.belkin.com/IWCatProductPage.process?Product_Id=496178

Hey Forrest is life still like a box of chocolates ?
You never know how stupid you are until you use your NASA rocket science PHD to do something omni-directional ??

ROFL LMAO.
 
muwhahahahahahaaaa P2P networking evil to destroy DRM now it's like having a dial up modem but better as you can now pull down from alot of networks and there'll be now way to track you down. i felt bad for television stations getting screwed out of their future (tv could switch to hulu type broadcasting) by the internet providers demanding the FCC take away televisions band, but this makes me feel better about it as it ultimately will screw over the people that demanded it. wow hacking and piracy just got easier/updated.
 
[citation][nom]amk09[/nom]This is amazing. 5-10 years down the road Wi-Fi will be as easy to get as a cellphone signal.[/citation]

Still have a problem getting cell signal.. hope its better! :)
 
[citation][nom]husker[/nom]You will NOT see this for home users. This is a potential moneymaker for government. Licenses to use this spectrum will be sold to organizations with the capability to build or lease large towers with the power needed to broadcast the signal over a large area. These businesses will then sell a service to the home user, much like cell phone service is now, or just use it for their own internal network. In order to use this spectrum to its potential would require way more equipment and money than a normal person could afford, not to mention the government red tape.[/citation]
Yes, thank you, now back to reality.
You say this will not be for home users, but later say it will be bought by 3rd party business to sell to the home user.
So it IS for the home user then.

The thing we are trying to understand is how a cost effective device, that sits in your home next to your PC, and costs less than $100 like an existing router, also not requiring a 30ft antenna or a microwave emitting dish on the side of your house...
...how is it going to transmit a signal through your house, through the next 50 houses around you, across 10 miles of city comprised mainly of concrete and steel, all the way to the original transmitter.

Anyone with a Phd and 25 years experience working at NASA please answer, everyone else just dont bother.
 
@back_by_demand
I never said the home user would be able to send anything via this method. I just said it would be a service. What I meant by "not for the home user" is that they will not have the equipment at home to transmit a signal in this spectrum. Nobody could send anything back to the t.v. stations on these frequencies either, but it was still a service provided to the home user. But I could venture a really, really, good use for this technology that is still for the average person: Users could upload data using conventional wireless methods, but the downloads would be via this new technology. Thereby drastically lowering the total data throughput on current wireless plans, which is significant since both AT&T and Verizon both have caps on their wireless data plans now. My guess is that you will see current wireless companies buying up this spectrum and adding it to their stable of technologies.

And sorry, I'm not at liberty to discuss my dealings with NASA.
 
[citation][nom]thillntn[/nom]This should help mainly rural areas that cannot get anything but dialup[/citation]

...So they can put their dial up through a "super wifi" router and share it, making it even slower? Doesn't make sense. I think your confusing an ISP with a simple router. Having dial up hooked up through a wireless G, N, etc doesn't make the ISP any faster.
 
"Super Wi-Fi routers will be able to reach for miles."

Just great. Now instead of just having to worry about my neighbor's degenerate, criminally inclined teenager trying to hack my computer, I get to worry about the rest of the little criminals in a how many mile square radius? Think I'll stick with wires in the house.
 
[citation][nom]Trueno07[/nom]This would be awesome for universities. Currently they run many many extenders all linked together, but imagine one router at the center of, say, a dorm quad or academic quad of some sort.[/citation]

I have to wonder about things like bandwidth with all those users accessing through a single point. I'm sure they'll figure that out... but just my 2 cents.
 
a router that could potentially reach 100s of clients....
This would kill any consumer level router out there, current consumer level router can barely handle 4 clients before taking a nose dive in performance, just the raw computing power needed to process and deliver hundreds of request (legitimate or otherwise) would plonk this in the hexa core and above bracket, based upon just raw processing power required the cost for this thing is going well outside the $100 ball park
 
[citation][nom]husker[/nom]@back_by_demandI never said the home user would be able to send anything via this method. I just said it would be a service. What I meant by "not for the home user" is that they will not have the equipment at home to transmit a signal in this spectrum. Nobody could send anything back to the t.v. stations on these frequencies either, but it was still a service provided to the home user. But I could venture a really, really, good use for this technology that is still for the average person: Users could upload data using conventional wireless methods, but the downloads would be via this new technology. Thereby drastically lowering the total data throughput on current wireless plans, which is significant since both AT&T and Verizon both have caps on their wireless data plans now. My guess is that you will see current wireless companies buying up this spectrum and adding it to their stable of technologies. And sorry, I'm not at liberty to discuss my dealings with NASA.[/citation]
This is pretty much what I said earlier.
You will still need a traditional broadband service to give packet reciepts and uploading.
This will assist the vendor for charging, a single mast could beam out for the whole cities wifi, but you are charged by the company whose uploading/packet reciept service you subscripe to.
 
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]This is pretty much what I said earlier.You will still need a traditional broadband service to give packet reciepts and uploading.This will assist the vendor for charging, a single mast could beam out for the whole cities wifi, but you are charged by the company whose uploading/packet reciept service you subscripe to.[/citation]
Ah, sorry I missed your earlier comment. Then we are in agreement on this, once again confirming that great minds think alike.
 
Who cares whether or not it would be a service provided by another company ? I'm all for ANYTHING that adds more competition to broadband/TV/cell phone markets. In my area, I only have 2 choices for broadband: Comcast/Xfinity and Verizon FIOS. For TV, it's the same since I don't have a clear view of the southern sky for satellite dish use. Adding a 3rd option would definitely benefit the consumer and help bring down prices on some of these services.
 
My friend lives out in the country where all he can get is dial up...so instead he just doesn't have internet. If this is implemented soon we can finally play some video games over the net!
 
[citation][nom]husker[/nom]Ah, sorry I missed your earlier comment. Then we are in agreement on this, once again confirming that great minds think alike.[/citation]
Aye, but one thing still bothers me, I can see wired services for upload/receipt, but if they try to utilize more cell-based systems aren't the existing network bursting at the seams? More smartphones are squeezing the service to breaking point and they could potentially have household service pile on top?

The only way to alleviate that would be a radical overhaul of the cell-tower network. The billions they spend on that they may as well just invest in fiber-optic cable to every home and dispense with super wi-fi completely.
 
Dear God,
Please allow this technology provide competition to greedy cable internet providers insane prices. When I first got internet service it was $25 a month today people pay almost triple that price. I truely feel that I've been rippedoff for far too long and it's time for them to get what's coming. Much like Blockbuster did when Netflix and Redbox showed up.

FYI,
I can't get any other cable service. I can't get AT&T, Verison or Qwest internet service. Infact for broadband internet Charter has a local monopoly in my area. They are my ONLY option (Other than cell phone company providers which all charge excessive prices as well. It's total bu;;sh1t.) I don't understand how cable companies are allowed to have monopolies like that.
 
[citation][nom]thillntn[/nom]This should help mainly rural areas that cannot get anything but dialup[/citation]

According to the state, cable wouldn't have a chance of making it to my Dad's farm in less than 20 years. Probably longer. They have a party line for the entire length of 4 Mile Rd., (no dialup). They already have a CB net that allows the phone to used essentially for emergencies only, (or when someone is phoning home from Afganieland or whatever). Using the existing infrastructure to repeat WiFi amongst themselves would open the 21st century to a rural population that could only hear about it otherwise.
 
I tested wireless for years at large hightech firm and grew to hate it. Ethernet is faster, has the lowest latency and is FAR more reliable. No serious gamer would use it. But if you got to look at 4chan in Starbucks I guess a cable sucks. Oh BTW, get off my lawn.
 
[citation][nom]XZaapryca[/nom]Jesus....I need more coffee. "No serious gamer would use wifi." Why are you still on my lawn?[/citation]

Yup and if it gets better then you would still be stuck with Stupid ISP company giving crappy internet in the USA via cable or fibre for normal slow speeds that you use a ADSL lines for or a poorly configured DNS server causing major routing problems. ( dnsbench "grp" / namebench "google code")

You should check out the MOTOROLA SB6120 Up to 160 Mbps Downstream, up to 120 Mbps Upstream at newegg as it will max out your cable connection and not limit the thru put because of crappy cable modems from your isp.
Several guys I know is using this at almost max speeds instead of 20Mbps they pay for, have to take the top of the line connection from your isp "uncapped" .

Same goes for the Zyxel 100Mbps - 100Mbps VDSL2 modem or their modem + wifi in a box that does VDSL2 back to ADSL compatible under the business, DSL CFE link.

Zyxel Model: P870M-I1 v2 100Mbps/ both ways modem.
Zyxel Model: P870HW-51a v2 100Mbps/45Mbps Wireless N VDSL2

I have tested the VDSL2 in Mexico with great results(Telmex).
 
wasn't part of this whole tv band change supposed to be for somekind of actual data system like 3g/4g type thign or did i just compeltely misread it. cause if it was just for logner range wifi thats cool but i thought there was more to it
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom