🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 07:40:35 -0400, 
in article <a4OdnTAUJ-LBhMPeRVn-qQ@adelphia.com>, 
george@nospam.invalid (George) writes...
> Philip J. Koenig wrote:
> > On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 09:53:49 +0000 (UTC), 
> > in article <djkvbd$s4a$1@blue.rahul.net>, 
> > spope33@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) writes...
> > 
> >>Philip J. Koenig  <See_email_@ddress_below.This_one_is.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>His skepticism about the whole idea is not a lot different
> >>>than my own.  Like Seybold, I think interference in the 2.4Ghz 
> >>>band is going to be a monstrous issue, among other things.  
> >>
> >>There are 25 unlicensed channels in the 5 GHz band.  I assume they
> >>will deploy there -- otherwise, it is completely hopeless.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > What's the point of putting radios in 5Ghz spectrum when almost
> > no users are going to be able to receive those signals directly?
> > 
> > Telling everyone to go buy 802.11a hardware is going to be
> > a non-starter.
> 
> 
> Possibly, but a lot of technology is driven that way. 5 GHz hardware is 
> not common and expensive because everyone piled into the 2.4 GHz band. 
> If they chose for SFO the 5 GHz band they would free themselves from the 
> current issues and the 5 GHz equipment would become just as common and 
> inexpensive.


Don't be so quick to assume that using 802.11a will magically
solve all the congestion issues.  Certainly in the beginning,
there are fewer 802.11a AP's to contend with. (and also fewer
cordless phones, microwaves and baby monitors)

But it is still unlicensed spectrum, and free for anyone to put
up their own 802.11a WAP whenever they want, and point it wherever
they want, so no matter how well it seems to work on rollout day, 
things could very well turn pretty cruddy as more and more devices 
come online. (both part of the municipal system and independent of 
the municipal system)

Not to mention, having to buy 802.11a radios for end-users to 
connect with the system would fly in the face of the whole
philosophy of the project, which is to "bridge the digital
divide".  People with bucks already have fancy broadband, it's
the people without the bucks that they really are targeting.
Those people aren't likely to go out and spend $75 just so
they can use that "free" internet.



-- 
*   Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which       *
*   differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are   *
*   even incapable of forming such opinions.             -- Albert Einstein   *
*                                                                             *
* To send email, remove numbers and spaces:  pjkusenet64 @  ekahuna27 . com   *
*  Simple answers are for simple minds.  Try a new way of looking at things.  *