🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 7 May 2002 17:03:55 -0700, Philip J. Koenig
<See_email_@ddress_below.This_one_is.invalid> wrote:

>In article <3cd82415.25204412@news-server.neo.rr.com>, elroy@impaler.com (Elroy 
>the Seedy Impaler) writes...
> 
>> The WAP is located on the first floor.  The client is in the attic.
>> The signal has to pass through the second floor to get to the attic.
>> I have renter in the attic that needs net access.  Also, the three
>> other PCs are on the second floor, and get pretty darn good reception.
>> Running CAT5 cable to the attic doesn't seem fun, and it kind of
>> defeats the "wireless" benfit.  =)
>
>
>Actually I disagree.  Seems to me that the point is to relieve your
>portable computer of being tethered to a wire, and you still get
>that benefit.  

Hmmm...and I wonder what kind of wire that would be...hmmm...OH!  I
know!  CAT5 cable!!  You give the simple answer "to relieve your
portable computer of being tethered to a wire".  Well...our desktops
aren't so portable.  The whole point of wireless is to minimize the
cable you need to run to extend your network infrastructure - who
cares whether the client is portable or not?

Remember...simple answers are for simple minds.  BWAHAHAHA!!!

>As a matter of fact you get *more* of that benefit
>because if the signal is better in more areas of the house, you
>can roam more freely with the computer.
>
>It just takes more effort to install. (maybe lack of cable 
>installation was one of wireless' main perceived benefits for 
>you)

Uh...I think "lack of cable" is the main "perceived benefit" (as if
anyone ever makes a value decision on "unperceived benefit") for
everyone when they choose wireless over wired.  It isn't cost or
bandwidth, that is for sure.

Elroy


>
>-- 
>Philip J. Koenig         The Electric Kahuna Organization        [anti-spammed]
>----------------Computers & Communications for the New Millennium--------------
>* To send email, remove numbers and spaces:  pjkunet64 @  ekahuna27 . com     *
>* Civilians killed in WTC attack: 2,830  Afghan civilians killed by US: 3,767 *
>* Simple answers are for simple minds.  Try a new way of looking at things.   *