🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 04:47:46 GMT, 
in article <0sdrl1tcp4bpoi1qonabuuk4bkujoapgpu@4ax.com>, 
jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us (Jeff Liebermann) writes...

> A bit of math on counting the number of wireless access points
> required to cover San Francisco.
> 
> The original numbers:
> |  http://www.outlook4mobility.com/commentary2005/oct1205.htm
> 
> The revised version:
> |  http://www.outlook4mobility.com/commentary2005/oct1305.htm


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.  

Which is why I was thinking (as posted earlier) that they 
should probably consider something like proprietary, 
neighborhood-based mesh radios which local users can tap off 
of and distribute either via wires or their own WAPs.  Just 
run a "backbone" and let the end-users install the local radios 
so you can wash your hands of the local interference issues.

Then the challenge would be how to interconnect the backbone
to the local segments.  Sigh.

<evil grin>  I've got it -- Bluetooth!  Hehehehe...



-- 
*   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.  *