3 ms·
Google Wifi in Mountain View is horrible, I can't imagine this will be much better. 2.4GHz is always a shit-show in any major city. 5GHz is an option, but not n
by freeasinfree 13y ago
Google Wifi in Mountain View is horrible, I can't imagine this will be much better. 2.4GHz is always a shit-show in any major city. 5GHz is an option, but not nearly as many mobiles have it, and the available channels on each device vary wildly. Plus that would start creating noise for a certain WISP I have a fondness for and don't want to see them affected.
- rdl 13y agoI've never actually successfully connected to it on Castro Street, although I only ever tried inside buildings. I thought it had been disabled or something, I didn't realize it was just like that normally. :(
- rhubarbquid 13y agoYou need a "WiFi modem" to use it effectively inside a building.
- rdl 13y agoDo you mean an external antenna with higher gain, and/or an outdoor antenna and internal repeater?
- revelation 13y ago5GHz comes with less range. As in life, there is no free lunch in wireless signalling.
- jrockway 13y agoDon't most working large-scale WiFi installations intentionally limit range? More computers talking to one AP is cheaper, but also doesn't work at all. So the question is: how much money does one want to spend on access points (and their locations)? If the answer is a lot, 5GHz makes a lot of sense. (Also, how much does open air attenuate 5GHz signals, anyway?) Edit: Interesting reading: http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/projects/wireless/pwr.html http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/projects/wireless/pwr.html
- eyeareque 13y agoIt has only worked for me when I was outside, but even then it was spotty. It would probably work well if you could mount a directional antenna on your roof of your house though..
- pvdm 13y agoI could barely get a signal as a Mtn View resident. I'd regard this as just a publicity stunt.