| |
VK2AAB > WLAN 18.05.05 06:08l 36 Lines 1323 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 49226_VK2AAB
Read: DK7JAN DK5RAS GUEST DL7ALE DO6NP
Subj: Re: Packet v WiFi
Path: DB0FHN<DB0THA<DB0ERF<DB0FBB<DB0IUZ<DB0GOS<DB0EEO<DB0RES<ON0AR<ZL2BAU<
VK2AAB
Sent: 050518/0425Z @:VK2AAB.SYD.NSW.AUS.OC #:49226 [SYDNEY] FBB7 $:49226_VK2AAB
From: VK2AAB@VK2AAB.SYD.NSW.AUS.OC
To : WLAN@WW
Actually the title of the thread should be;
WiFi vs WiMax
If we are going to develop amateur radio higher speed local systems, and by
local I mean city wide, say 60 to 100km diameter area coverage, then should
we not look at the equipment used for WiMax.
Sydney is served by two ISPs who use radio for internet coverage.
They have ranges of around 5 to 10Km + .
Word is their base stations run about 25 watts. However I believe their range
is restricted because the user has a little box that sits next to his computer
with a vertical antenna about 6 cms long.
No doubt this is done to make it easy for those radio challenged people to get
it all going without hassle.
One company has 84 base stations to cover an area 140 km by about 70 Km of
Sydney and adjacent districts. Sydney is hilly and would require extra base
stations than say Melbourne which is flat as a tack.
One system is WiMax compatible and will only need a software change to make it
complient with WiMax.
If we were to establish, in an area like Sydney a WiMax like server and
amateurs using antenna with significant gain would this not be a lot better
than having little clusters of two or three amateurs connected together with
Wi-Fi ?
73 Barry VK2AAB
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
