3 ms·

How many of you guys actually hook up any of your equipment to a hard line? I've used nothing but wifi for years. I'd be more interested in ultra-high speed w

by orasis 12y ago

How many of you guys actually hook up any of your equipment to a hard line? I've used nothing but wifi for years. I'd be more interested in ultra-high speed wireless that could stretch to 30m and get me to that fiber node.

pg_is_a_butt 12y ago
you do realize that your wifi router hooks into a hard line............. right?
kijin 12y ago
It's possible, but then the Wi-Fi router will be outside of your home, probably mounted on the poles, and owned/operated by your ISP. Who will be happy to charge you by the number of devices you can connect. No thanks, I would much rather have direct control over my own home network. (Sure, you could achieve that with a repeater in your home, but then what was the point of moving the Wi-Fi router to the street?) My home PC is hooked up to my router with a CAT6 cable. The router is hooked up to the FTTH modem with another CAT6 cable. So it's hard lines all the way. Both the speed and latency of this setup are much better than anything I ever got with any wireless alternative, especially when I'm trying to talk with other devices on the other side of a wall or two.
- TheMakeA 12y ago
  Who will be happy to charge you by the number of devices you can connect. ISPs (used to) do that. The solution has always been to use your own router in front of the modem. Sounds like a similar solution would work here.
  - kijin 12y ago
    Quote from GP: > (Sure, you could achieve that with a repeater in your home, but then what was the point of moving the Wi-Fi router to the street?)
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
ANTSANTS 12y ago
Wifi is very convenient, but adds latency, drops more packets than a CAT5 cable will, is (theoretically speaking) easier to eavesdrop upon, and degrades much more quickly than wired connections do when the number of clients is high. That's enough for me to prefer wired ethernet when possible in the present, and those problems would only get worse if you're sharing an access point that is outside your home/apartment, that you don't control, with dozens of people. Plus, I'm no RF-engineer, but I think the "high bandwidth" and "relatively long distance transmissions that must pierce thick walls" goals are at odds with each other, especially when working at wifi's high frequency range.

by orasis 12y ago

pg_is_a_butt 12y ago

you do realize that your wifi router hooks into a hard line............. right?

kijin 12y ago

It's possible, but then the Wi-Fi router will be outside of your home, probably mounted on the poles, and owned/operated by your ISP. Who will be happy to charge you by the number of devices you can connect. No thanks, I would much rather have direct control over my own home network. (Sure, you could achieve that with a repeater in your home, but then what was the point of moving the Wi-Fi router to the street?) My home PC is hooked up to my router with a CAT6 cable. The router is hooked up to the FTTH modem with another CAT6 cable. So it's hard lines all the way. Both the speed and latency of this setup are much better than anything I ever got with any wireless alternative, especially when I'm trying to talk with other devices on the other side of a wall or two.

TheMakeA 12y ago
Who will be happy to charge you by the number of devices you can connect. ISPs (used to) do that. The solution has always been to use your own router in front of the modem. Sounds like a similar solution would work here.
- kijin 12y ago
  Quote from GP: > (Sure, you could achieve that with a repeater in your home, but then what was the point of moving the Wi-Fi router to the street?)
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]

ANTSANTS 12y ago

Wifi is very convenient, but adds latency, drops more packets than a CAT5 cable will, is (theoretically speaking) easier to eavesdrop upon, and degrades much more quickly than wired connections do when the number of clients is high. That's enough for me to prefer wired ethernet when possible in the present, and those problems would only get worse if you're sharing an access point that is outside your home/apartment, that you don't control, with dozens of people. Plus, I'm no RF-engineer, but I think the "high bandwidth" and "relatively long distance transmissions that must pierce thick walls" goals are at odds with each other, especially when working at wifi's high frequency range.