Wireless Network, And Bluetooth Interference With Cell Phones, And Cordless Phones

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by JANA, Mar 27, 2005.

  1. JANA

    JANA Guest

    Interesting scenerio.

    I have been reading a number of articles bringing up problems with cell
    phones, various wireless devices, and cordless phones.

    With the advent of the popularity of wireless networks, there is starting to
    be an interference problem with cellular phones, and the 2.4 gHz cordless
    phones, clashing with wireless networks. There are also other wireless
    devices that are effected.

    If you are buying a cordless phone, and live in an area where there may be
    wireless networks, and Bluetooth users, it is advisable to seriously
    consider a 5.8 gHz phone. These are more expensive, but are worth it, to not
    have reception problems.

    Many of the wireless systems, for computers, and industrial systems are
    working in a number of bands that are shared. These are in the approximate
    range of 320 ~ 380 mHz, 520 ~ 620 mHz, 800 ~ 900 mHz, and 1.2 ~ 2.5 gHz.
    These frequencies are approximate, and can vary in different parts of the
    world, according to their approved allocation. Over the last few years, the
    5 ~ 6 gHz bands have been opening up. If you contact your local
    communications authorities, you can find out the exact allocated frequency
    bands for your area.


    --

    JANA
    _____
     
    JANA, Mar 27, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Re: Wireless Network, And Bluetooth Interference With Cell Phones,And Cordless Phones

    JANA wrote:
    > Interesting scenerio.
    >
    > I have been reading a number of articles bringing up problems with cell
    > phones, various wireless devices, and cordless phones.
    >
    > With the advent of the popularity of wireless networks, there is starting to
    > be an interference problem


    Only if "starting to" means began about 3-4 years ago

    > with cellular phones, and the 2.4 gHz cordless
    > phones, clashing with wireless networks. There are also other wireless
    > devices that are effected.


    Garage door openers, nanny cams, etc.

    > If you are buying a cordless phone, and live in an area where there may be
    > wireless networks


    Earth

    > and Bluetooth users, it is advisable to seriously
    > consider a 5.8 gHz phone. These are more expensive, but are worth it, to not
    > have reception problems.


    Many "5.8GHz" phone bases actually transmit at 2.4GHz while the handsets
    transmit at 5.8GHz. And the fallacy that 5.8GHz is better because
    there's more hertz continues to be promoted by retailers and manufacturers.

    > Many of the wireless systems, for computers, and industrial systems are
    > working in a number of bands that are shared. These are in the approximate
    > range of 320 ~ 380 mHz, 520 ~ 620 mHz, 800 ~ 900 mHz, and 1.2 ~ 2.5 gHz.


    In the States it's 900MHz, 2.4GHz, 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz for unlicensed
    networking devices, with probably 99% falling in the 2.4 and 5.8GHz ranges.

    > These frequencies are approximate, and can vary in different parts of the
    > world, according to their approved allocation. Over the last few years, the
    > 5 ~ 6 gHz bands have been opening up. If you contact your local
    > communications authorities, you can find out the exact allocated frequency
    > bands for your area.


    Local communications authorities? You mean, like the FCC?
     
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=, Mar 27, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. JANA

    JANA Guest

    I was bringing up a point about getting out of the same band as the other
    devices. Not having something to do with the false representation that more
    gHz is better.

    You have a point about the frequency allocation for the base and the
    handset. But, the 5.8 gHz phones do solve this problem when it is apparent.

    Many sales people are putting on false representation that the higher gHz
    are better. The frequency will not really effect the actual performance of
    the phone. It is the power output of the base, the handset, and the overall
    quality of design. A good 800 mHz phone will sound just as good as a 2.4 or
    5.8 gHz phone, as long as the quality of design is there, and there is no
    interference.


    --

    JANA
    _____


    "Rôgêr" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > JANA wrote:
    > > Interesting scenerio.
    > >
    > > I have been reading a number of articles bringing up problems with cell
    > > phones, various wireless devices, and cordless phones.
    > >
    > > With the advent of the popularity of wireless networks, there is

    starting to
    > > be an interference problem

    >
    > Only if "starting to" means began about 3-4 years ago
    >
    > > with cellular phones, and the 2.4 gHz cordless
    > > phones, clashing with wireless networks. There are also other wireless
    > > devices that are effected.

    >
    > Garage door openers, nanny cams, etc.
    >
    > > If you are buying a cordless phone, and live in an area where there may

    be
    > > wireless networks

    >
    > Earth
    >
    > > and Bluetooth users, it is advisable to seriously
    > > consider a 5.8 gHz phone. These are more expensive, but are worth it, to

    not
    > > have reception problems.

    >
    > Many "5.8GHz" phone bases actually transmit at 2.4GHz while the handsets
    > transmit at 5.8GHz. And the fallacy that 5.8GHz is better because
    > there's more hertz continues to be promoted by retailers and

    manufacturers.
    >
    > > Many of the wireless systems, for computers, and industrial systems are
    > > working in a number of bands that are shared. These are in the

    approximate
    > > range of 320 ~ 380 mHz, 520 ~ 620 mHz, 800 ~ 900 mHz, and 1.2 ~ 2.5 gHz.

    >
    > In the States it's 900MHz, 2.4GHz, 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz for unlicensed
    > networking devices, with probably 99% falling in the 2.4 and 5.8GHz

    ranges.
    >
    > > These frequencies are approximate, and can vary in different parts of

    the
    > > world, according to their approved allocation. Over the last few years,

    the
    > > 5 ~ 6 gHz bands have been opening up. If you contact your local
    > > communications authorities, you can find out the exact allocated

    frequency
    > > bands for your area.

    >
    > Local communications authorities? You mean, like the FCC?
     
    JANA, Mar 27, 2005
    #3
  4. JANA

    Rebecca Guest

    JANA wrote:
    > Rebecca must be a man!!!
    >


    Oh you wish, don't you.
    Sorry, but I'm a ****.
     
    Rebecca, Mar 28, 2005
    #4
  5. JANA

    gangle Guest

    JANA, Are You Retarded? (WAS: Re: Wireless Network....)

    "JANA" wrote
    > Rebecca must be a man!!!


    How many times do you need to be told to STOP
    RESPONDING TO TROLLS and REPEATING
    THE POINTLESS CROSSPOSTING STARTED
    BY A TROLL? Are you retarded? What,
    exactly about this do you not understand?
    Do you understand ANYTHING about the
    mechanics of posting and netiquette?
     
    gangle, Mar 28, 2005
    #5
  6. JANA

    Mara Guest

    Re: JANA, Are You Retarded? (WAS: Re: Wireless Network....)

    On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 19:42:26 -0800, "gangle" <> wrote:

    >"JANA" wrote
    >> Rebecca must be a man!!!

    >
    >How many times do you need to be told to STOP
    >RESPONDING TO TROLLS and REPEATING
    >THE POINTLESS CROSSPOSTING STARTED
    >BY A TROLL? Are you retarded? What,
    >exactly about this do you not understand?
    >Do you understand ANYTHING about the
    >mechanics of posting and netiquette?


    No.

    --
    "No lusers were harmed in the creation of this usenet article.
    AND I WANT TO KNOW WHY NOT!"
    --glmar04 at twirl.mcc.ac.uk in a.s.r
     
    Mara, Mar 28, 2005
    #6
  7. JANA

    Keme Guest

    Re: Wireless Network, And Bluetooth Interference With Cell Phones,And Cordless Phones

    > <snort>
    >
    > You never heard of 5.8GHz wireless networking then, you fucktard ****?
    >
    > You really are a fucking loon.
    >

    Many of us have heard of it. It exists. It is not as common, so you're
    likely to solve a problem by switching to that band on a phone.

    And loons should be mating any day now, so if someone could help the
    K-"man" to a little birdwatching, he might be able to tell the
    difference in the future. (Or at least we'd have a little less abusive
    language on this newsgroup in the meantime.)
     
    Keme, Mar 28, 2005
    #7
  8. JANA

    °Mike° Guest

    Re: JANA, Are You Retarded? (WAS: Re: Wireless Network....)

    In <>,
    gangle took 12 lines to utter:

    >"JANA" wrote
    >> Rebecca must be a man!!!

    >
    >How many times do you need to be told to STOP
    >RESPONDING TO TROLLS and REPEATING
    >THE POINTLESS CROSSPOSTING STARTED
    >BY A TROLL? Are you retarded? What,
    >exactly about this do you not understand?
    >Do you understand ANYTHING about the
    >mechanics of posting and netiquette?


    I don't understand them; would you clarify things
    for me, please?

    --
    I'm easy to please...as long as I get my way.
     
    °Mike°, Mar 28, 2005
    #8
  9. JANA

    Jim Watt Guest

    On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 17:23:01 -0800, "Rebecca"
    <> wrote:

    >Sorry, but I'm a ****.


    That has been established beyond doubt.

    --
    Jim Watt
    http://www.gibnet.com
     
    Jim Watt, Mar 28, 2005
    #9
  10. JANA

    Damian Guest

    Jana wrote:
    > Thanks!!! That guy is about the rudest I ever saw (read)! He must
    > have no self respect at all.
    >
    > --
    >
    > JANA
    > _____


    You're a sensitive poofta, ain't 'cha.
     
    Damian, Mar 29, 2005
    #10
  11. JANA

    Jana Guest

    That depends... I can be an aggressive bitch, or be a little .......

    --

    JANA
    _____


    "Damian" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    Jana wrote:
    > Thanks!!! That guy is about the rudest I ever saw (read)! He must
    > have no self respect at all.
    >
    > --
    >
    > JANA
    > _____


    You're a sensitive poofta, ain't 'cha.
     
    Jana, Mar 29, 2005
    #11
  12. JANA

    Damian Guest

    Jana wrote:
    > That depends... I can be an aggressive bitch, or be a little .......
    >
    >
    > "Damian" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > Jana wrote:
    >> Thanks!!! That guy is about the rudest I ever saw (read)! He must
    >> have no self respect at all.
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> JANA
    >> _____

    >
    > You're a sensitive poofta, ain't 'cha.



    .... ****** It's okay if you say "be a little ****" in here, no one will
    tell your mommy.
     
    Damian, Mar 29, 2005
    #12
  13. Re: JANA, Are You Retarded? (WAS: Re: Wireless Network....)

    Mara writes:
    > "gangle" wrote:


    > >
    > >How many times do you need to be told to STOP
    > >RESPONDING TO TROLLS and REPEATING
    > >THE POINTLESS CROSSPOSTING STARTED
    > >BY A TROLL? Are you retarded? What,
    > >exactly about this do you not understand?
    > >Do you understand ANYTHING about the
    > >mechanics of posting and netiquette?

    >
    > No.


    Head back laffing, troll-enabler - the kook who made that
    mental virus needs a brain reformat. Netizens, here is a
    tip: The jealous, the rejected, the forgotten, the absent,
    the insane, filter articles posted from google groups, so
    removing garbage is easy, post from google groups.
     
    Princess Antonomasia, Mar 30, 2005
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Calvin
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    620
  2. WCH
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,258
  3. JANA
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    870
    Damian
    Mar 29, 2005
  4. JANA
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    745
    Damian
    Mar 29, 2005
  5. FREECELLS

    GET FREE CELL PHONES and CAMERA PHONES!

    FREECELLS, Feb 11, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    362
    FREECELLS
    Feb 11, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page