Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windows.networking.wireless (
More info?)
i have the same dropped connection problem that plauges me every few days.
sometimes have to restart 10 times. did ms design this? may be a leak that
shuts it down, but the linux kernel doesn't seem to want to load it back up.
no i'm also having problems keeping it tapped to the internet. i hope its
not faulty. i might also add that the problem seemed to crop up around the
time i moved it to from room temp to a 50 degree room and haven't tried to
move it back. seems odd a cooler temp would have something to do with it but
it could be related. i was one of the first purchasers of the device, and i
couldn't believe my eyes when i saw their marketing junk. sure, when it
works it outperforms anything on the market including some 500mw cards i've
used, but the router can be so sporadic. btw, the pcmcia card does work with
netstumbler. when they tell you it has 800% the coverage, the scientific
principal deployed in their marketing leads you to believe they have used the
same standard as everyone else, distance from the router. i believe it does
have 800% the coverage, but bearing in mind coverage is considered in terms
of area, not distance. one must take the square root to gauge its
performance against the standard of using distance, which comes up to 2.5
times the distance, roughly. they still have a fault in their advertising,
though. you can find in the current manual, they don't say 800% the coverage
of the competition, they say 800% 'wider' coverage. This is clearly
deceptive as wider now alleges 8 times the distance, when its actually still
around 2.5 times. i've emailed them numerous times to get the 'wider' taken
out of the advertising, but it still remains. should one wonder if they even
are smart enough to make the distinction, one need only to look at the box
with the two bubbles around the home where the belkin bubble is clearly 8
times wider than the competitions. one shows a few rooms, theirs shows the
whole city. although not to scale, it affirms they belittled a very solid
product that was genuinly superiour by leading consumers to believe it was
roughly 3 times the product it actually is. when i first got mine, i
couldn't believe my eyes when i saw the manual. On the cover, it states,
superior performance and 'twice' the coverage of the competition. on the
same page, it says, '800% wider coverage'. if thats not bad enough to screw
up the same stat on the same page by a factor of 400%, turn to page 3 where
they screwed up the speed quantification by almost the same margin of error.
when i emailed them about this and also noted it was on the pdf at their
website, they had it retracted and corrected before i got off the phone with
them, although they still refuse to revoke the 'wider' terminoligy. luckly,
for your entertainment i saved a copy of the old pdf before they changed it.
you need only look at the first page to see what i'm talking about, but you
could turn to page 3 where they do it again. what a shame to take a boafide
product well over twice the value of the competition and mangle the
advertising this corruptly. and as you guessed, i furnish for your
entertainment the original manual at
http://goodbodys.dyndns.org/holyjesusthisdontlookgoodonus.pdf . if you own
one of these routers, you must check this out. i don't know how its possible
to butcher documentation this bad. the first page says 'twice the coverage'
at the top, and 800% the coverage at the bottom. under 800% on the bottom,
we find 600% faster. the same mistake on twice the coverage is repeated on
page 3 paragraph one, but step to paragraph 2 on the same page and we find
'five times the previous capacities'.
i advised dumping all the work they did to independently prove this products
performance and just fill up the first 3 pages with either, 'we don't really
know', or 'we don't really know how to count'.
i haven't heard back from their legal team yet, but surely curiosity won't
keep you from browsing over to their site and downloading the revised edition
to see how they pulled themselves out of this hole.
anyone with suggestions about the dropped wireless please advise. i would
greatly apprecieate it. how in the hell do you create a product so superior
in the marketplace and still can't count? bearing in mind even if they were
counting on their fingers you could still be missing 2 fingers from some
freak accident and still get up to 8 using both hands, or lose both hands and
get there counting on your toes.
drinky