«

"JohnO" <johno@!NOOSPAM!heathkit.com> wrote in message
news:...
> I'm finding that 802.11a isn't used much, which is a shame because there
> of the benefits there, but don't tell anyone because I want the 5 GHz band
> to myself. It's just tough finding hardware that works.

Agreed. The way the 5ghz band is being ignored makes no sense to me either.
They probably could have made the N better by designing it around the 5 ghz
instead of the crowded 2.x ghz

--
Phillip Windell
www.wandtv.com

The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft,
or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
-----------------------------------------------------

"Phillip Windell" <> wrote in message
news:...
> "JohnO" <johno@!NOOSPAM!heathkit.com> wrote in message
> news:...
>> I'm finding that 802.11a isn't used much, which is a shame because there
>> of the benefits there, but don't tell anyone because I want the 5 GHz
>> band to myself. It's just tough finding hardware that works.
>
> Agreed. The way the 5ghz band is being ignored makes no sense to me
> either.
> They probably could have made the N better by designing it around the 5
> ghz instead of the crowded 2.x ghz
>
> --
> Phillip Windell
> www.wandtv.com
>

I've been joking about it here where I work, that N just makes the wireless
noise cloud even bigger. Eventually, the 2.4 spectrum is going to be
completely saturated in populated areas, rendering it useless. Last trade
show I attended was for educators, (somewhat low-tech) and even there a G
connection was barely possible and very unreliable. Try one of those
robotics or tech shows, you can forget about WiFi.

BTW, I found a couple devices this morning. Linksys has a nice dual-band USB
adapter, but the manual says it won't do ad-hoc in A mode. Zyxel has one
(AG-220) that claims you can make it into an AP. That takes ad-hoc craziness
out of the picture, but if only that AP did DHCP, too... We'll see, I
ordered one. The software shown in the manual doesn't look too bad.

-John O

"JohnO" <johno@!NOOSPAM!heathkit.com> wrote in message
news:%...
> I've been joking about it here where I work, that N just makes the
> wireless noise cloud even bigger.

Noise,...hmmm...maybe that is why it is called "N"

--
Phillip Windell
www.wandtv.com

The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft,
or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
-----------------------------------------------------

"Phillip Windell" <> wrote in message
news:...
> "JohnO" <johno@!NOOSPAM!heathkit.com> wrote in message
> news:%...
>> I've been joking about it here where I work, that N just makes the
>> wireless noise cloud even bigger.
>
> Noise,...hmmm...maybe that is why it is called "N"
>

Sounds good to me.

BTW, it looks like N actually does use 5 GHz. Apparently it uses both bands,
but I can't find a good explanation.

-John O

"JohnO" <johno@!NOOSPAM!heathkit.com> wrote in message
news:...
> BTW, it looks like N actually does use 5 GHz. Apparently it uses both
> bands, but I can't find a good explanation.

That's the first I've heard. Maybe by using both is how it gains the extra
speed? Back when I went through my "wireless classes" they only mentioned
that the "Draft N" simply just existed and was being worked on, but then
never went into any details about how it does anything. So what little I've
learned about it has been in this group and what you can read on the
"packaging".

--
Phillip Windell
www.wandtv.com

The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft,
or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
-----------------------------------------------------

"JohnO" <johno@!NOOSPAM!heathkit.com> wrote in message
news:...
>
> "Phillip Windell" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> "JohnO" <johno@!NOOSPAM!heathkit.com> wrote in message
>> news:%...
>>> I've been joking about it here where I work, that N just makes the
>>> wireless noise cloud even bigger.
>>
>> Noise,...hmmm...maybe that is why it is called "N"
>>
>
> Sounds good to me.
>
> BTW, it looks like N actually does use 5 GHz. Apparently it uses both
> bands, but I can't find a good explanation.

yes, N mode can use either 2.4 or 5 ghz bands - coexisting with G or A
networks.

--PA

>> BTW, it looks like N actually does use 5 GHz. Apparently it uses both
>> bands, but I can't find a good explanation.
>
> yes, N mode can use either 2.4 or 5 ghz bands - coexisting with G or A
> networks.
>

Can a given adapter be forced to use 5 GHz? Maybe not all of them, but can
some of them be forced? And can they do Ad-Hoc?

-John O

"JohnO" <johno@!NOOSPAM!heathkit.com> wrote in message
news:...
>
>>> BTW, it looks like N actually does use 5 GHz. Apparently it uses both
>>> bands, but I can't find a good explanation.
>>
>> yes, N mode can use either 2.4 or 5 ghz bands - coexisting with G or A
>> networks.
>>
>
> Can a given adapter be forced to use 5 GHz? Maybe not all of them, but can
> some of them be forced? And can they do Ad-Hoc?

As already replied - for infrastructure (AP) mode, all you need is to set
the AP
to either band and the laptop netcard will tune to it automatically.

Only if you initiate ad-hoc connection, you need to specify the band thru
that
proprietary parameter, because there is no other way.

Generally speaking, ad-hoc mode is much harder to implement correctly
than infrastructure, so I suspect that many vendors just cut some corners.

Also, there are country dependent regulations that forbid using
some channels; the firmware of wi-fi adapters can be limited by this.

Regards,
--PA

>> Can a given adapter be forced to use 5 GHz? Maybe not all of them, but
>> can some of them be forced? And can they do Ad-Hoc?
>
> As already replied - for infrastructure (AP) mode, all you need is to set
> the AP
> to either band and the laptop netcard will tune to it automatically.


Please keep in mind my situation...two battery-powered PCs connected
together, no AP.


>
> Only if you initiate ad-hoc connection, you need to specify the band thru
> that
> proprietary parameter, because there is no other way.
>
> Generally speaking, ad-hoc mode is much harder to implement correctly
> than infrastructure, so I suspect that many vendors just cut some corners.

Yeah, I can attest to that.

>
> Also, there are country dependent regulations that forbid using
> some channels; the firmware of wi-fi adapters can be limited by this.
>
> Regards,
> --PA

Thanks, apparently the practical details of how this works aren't easy to
locate.

-John O

"JohnO" <johno@!NOOSPAM!heathkit.com> wrote in message
news:...
> Thanks, apparently the practical details of how this works aren't easy to
> locate.

Perhaps the tech. support of your wi-fi adapter makers are just waiting your
call.

--PA