Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Technology

Surveying New Wireless Technologies 70

QuentinAxan writes "The Economist has a look at some of the ideas under consideration to advance wireless technology. I thought the concept of ad hoc architecture was especially interesting; the writers suggest briefly that it might encourage the creation of '"mom and pop" network operators, and small community networks.' (Which probably means that the telecom companies will crush it, but it's still a cool idea.)" We've touched on several of the ideas mentioned here before, but the Economist is always a good read.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Surveying New Wireless Technologies

Comments Filter:
  • by The Gardener ( 519078 ) on Saturday June 22, 2002 @07:22PM (#3750853) Homepage

    Wasn't Michael's posting yesterday enough?. Its still on the front page.

    The Gardener

  • by Anonymous Coward
    Ultra wideband to transmit 100 mbs wirelessly (but only for distances of 10 feet...).

    Also accomplished by tossing DVD's back and forth....what's the point of that? I mean, only ten feet? Why not just use a cable at that point?
  • by Anonymous Coward
    there are several good articles about uwb at UWBPlanet [ultrawidebandplanet.com]. It appears the Economist is quite wrong about UWB.
  • Mom & Pop businesses have never tried to cheat me. Corporations do it every chance they get, most likely more often than that.
  • Come on, guys. You can do better than this. At least take a quick look at the front page every once and awhile.
  • by DonaldBeckman817 ( 587451 ) on Saturday June 22, 2002 @08:27PM (#3750989)
    we have been doing this for over a year now,
    www.newgenwireless.com [newgenwireless.com]
    IT works great, we stay on top of technology. We are currently running on 3 ISM Bands, 900, 2.4, and 5ghz systems. We get lots of business using this, and its MUCH more profitable than dial-up service.
    you gota know what you are doing though, this isn't like throwing a computer together. You have to watch out for interference, know if you need to use FHSS or DSSS, if a band is too noisy, ect... Don't even get me on packet retransmissions due to trees and water!.
    • as is said, to properly use this, you have to know how something about it. I post to wISP mailing list every day, so i tend to get lazy and assume everyone knows i am talking about 902mhz, 2.4ghz, and 5.2-5.8ghz bands. This 'junk' as you call it, is host to over 5000 wISPs nation wide now. We make more use than most (not all) HAM operators on the crapy frequencies that the govt has let us use. We (wISPs) have developed enterprise level hardware (Cisco, waveridder, breezecom, ect) based on this 'junk' as you call it.

      I love HAM operators, I have some very nice ones who are my customers. Even several major ARRL lobbyists are our customers, which has helped in recent decisions to get the govt to open more unlicensed bands.

      BTW, if you check your ARRL handbook, when it talks about ISM bands, it says HAM operators are ALSO secondary users to this band. The only primary users on this band is the few licensed users, and it states you have to make sure you do not cause interference to them, and to part15b users.

  • That with easier access to wireless internet, the /. editors will finally be able to NOT POST THE SAME THING MULTIPLE TIMES? This is truly the wave of the future ;)

  • I hear they have interesting things to say about the space program [216.239.37.100].

  • Send Slashdot headlines to Timothy's cell phone so he can find out when his stories are repeats from yesterday [slashdot.org].
  • This just mean they changed something in matrix....
  • Would somebody tell me whatr's "mom and pop"? I could not find out it in my dictionary.


    d2002xx@yahoo.co.uk
  • Smart Antennas are (Score:2, Informative)

    by vpreHoose ( 587524 )
    deaf.

    One major reason experienced operators don't go after Smart Antennas is that their gain over regular antennas is only a few dB, usually between 3dB and 7dB. The improvement is easily cancelled out by it raining (-2dB to -4dB) which it does in Europe a great deal, the user changing polarisation by moving the phone from one ear to another (-3dB).

    For 3G (Wideband CDMA) the name of the game is controlling interference from adjacent cells. Cell placement was good enough to do this for 2G, but 3G is far more sensitive to poor cell placement, with the effect felt over several cells. The way operators do this in practice is by planning the interference before placing the cell, or controlling it once the cell is built, or if it is built on an existing 2G site. Smart Antennas make simple planning very difficult, as the exact radiation pattern is not known, or more precisely it changes from one instance of the Monte Carlo simulation used for capacity planning a 3G cell to another.

    Cell breathing due to high capacity, or high power mobiles are a few more variables that make the problem of planning and then running a 3G network far too complex for operators to take a bet on a few extra dB from Smart Antennas.

I'd rather just believe that it's done by little elves running around.

Working...