New AT&T Cell Tower Arguments Goes Past 2:00 a.m. in Cupertino

On 11/14/2010 1:17 PM, Fred wrote:
> John Navas<[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>>> The free hotel or restaurant wifi will go full speed one to 10 times
>>> faster than this all month for free....my point exactly.
>>
>> Except you've got to sit there the entire time; speeds are frequently
>> crappy, much slower than my cellular data; service is often unreliable
>> (completely down in my local Starbucks the past few days); lots of
>> places without free Wi-Fi; etc, etc. Doesn't look like a terribly
>> attractive alternative to cellular data to me, but as always, YMMV.
>>
>
> Maybe this is true in Californicate, but not in Charleston. That WAS
> true when I had the ****ty little 20mw wifi radio into its embedded
> crappy antenna behind the LCD panel in all that radio noise the netbook
> makes....BUT, the new 2 watt beast stuck to the window next to my table
> sure put a stop to it! Wifi at Waffle House from the hotels hundreds of
> yards away, now run as fast as is delivered at most homes by DSL or
> cable. All videos/TV/radio/games/etc., run at FULL SPEED without the
> sellphone crap balking and jerky nonsense running out of data.
>
> I've got to "sit there the entire time", anyway, because I cannot afford
> a chauffeur to drive the Smart car underway. This lame excuse to justify
> sellular data expenses is crazy. You shouldn't be using data underway.
>
> As to your last observation, sitting in my fav Waffle House with the
> boys, I used to have spotty service from Red Roof Inn across the street
> on the netbook...just 2 connections on the display. Last night, we
> counted 37 wifi hotspots with the Alfa adapter and its REAL 5.5dbi
> antenna stuck to the window above our heads on USB. Of those, there were
> 16 I could choose from that were accessible and working, with 8 I'd call
> very good connections to choose from. If Starbucks were down, I'd simply
> connect to something across the parking lot at one of the other
> establishments with free wifi, NOT an option on your smartphone or
> laptop's little 20mw peanut whistle with a piece of PC board trace for an
> antenna behind the display in all that noise. John, it's simply amazing
> what it can see AND COMMUNICATE WITH using all this RF power!
>
> Spend $32 and give it a try if you have a USB port its driver software
> can be installed on. It's a giant step ahead for wifi connectivity.
>
> (PS - Ramada Inn's password is "guest".

I believe the power limit on 2.4 Ghz under Part 15 is 1 watt into a
omnidirectional antenna and less for directional antennas


http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/projects/w...15.html#15.247

---

› See More: New AT&T Cell Tower Arguments Goes Past 2:00 a.m. in Cupertino

On 11/14/2010 1:17 PM, Fred wrote:

> Maybe this is true in Californicate, but not in Charleston. That WAS
> true when I had the ****ty little 20mw wifi radio into its embedded
> crappy antenna behind the LCD panel in all that radio noise the netbook
> makes....

Even with my netbook's built-in wi-fi, it's pretty rare for me to be
somewhere stationary without Wi-Fi. I was at the ARM Tech conference
last week and while inside the exhibit hall it was pay Wi-Fi, they had
an area with free Wi-Fi upstairs. Every coffee house, most non-fancy
restaurants, libraries, parks, airports, and businesses all have Wi-Fi
available. When I'm at a customer site they will always have a guest
network available.

For the times there is no Wi-Fi there is 3G or 4G data, but for most
people there is no need to be using multiple GB of wireless data, they
just do it because it's less trouble than bothering with Wi-Fi. I use 3G
data, but not a tremendous amount because I only use it when there is no
Wi-Fi and when I have a real need to check e-mail or do something. I'm
not streaming Pandora or downloading movies. It's just being frugal.

If I commuted by train I might want a lot of 3G data though some trains
and buses are also offering Wi-Fi. A while back I was waiting for a ride
at San Francisco Airport (which now has free Wi-Fi but didn't then) and
I was picking up Wi-Fi from my ISP (Sonic.net) and was surprised about
it, and later found out it was because the Santa Rosa Airporter bus was
parked nearby and it has free Wi-Fi.

I've been at hotels in areas where there is no 2G or 3G service, but
they still have Wi-Fi though it's often not all that fast because it's
satellite based.

On 11/14/10 1:36 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article<[email protected]>, John Navas
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Nonsense. While driving my phone is playing Pandora, Internet radio, or
>> podcasts, and giving me voice turn-by-turn directions at the same time.
>> I also use data while hiking and sailing. Wi-Fi can only compete when
>> I'm getting coffee at Starbucks.
>
> and you don't come anywhere close to 5 gig doing that daily?

I would seriously doubt it unless he's driving for UPS or something. How
much cumulative bandwidth do you think an hour of Pandora over 3g consumes?

I use my Verizon Mifi with my iPod Touch doing the same things as those
mentioned by JN. Plus I do some computing time too because not every
lunch spot I visit has wifi, plus my Mifi is more secure.

Having had the Mifi for about 9 months, I broke 2 gig in a month one
time and that was a week at a hotel where I didn't want or need to pay
their daily internet rate. I downloaded some cartoons from iTunes for
the kids that contributed to most of the usage.

In article <[email protected]>, Travis James
<[email protected]> wrote:

> >> Nonsense. While driving my phone is playing Pandora, Internet radio, or
> >> podcasts, and giving me voice turn-by-turn directions at the same time.
> >> I also use data while hiking and sailing. Wi-Fi can only compete when
> >> I'm getting coffee at Starbucks.
> >
> > and you don't come anywhere close to 5 gig doing that daily?
>
> I would seriously doubt it unless he's driving for UPS or something. How
> much cumulative bandwidth do you think an hour of Pandora over 3g consumes?

assuming a 128k stream, that's almost 1 meg per minute. at that rate,
it would only take around 80 hours of streaming to hit 5 gig, assuming
no other usage at all. that's less than 3 hours a day in a month, and
that's not that hard to do. add in other usage, including the
navigation he mentioned and especially if any of the podcasts include
video, and hitting 5 gig is very realistic.

nospam <[email protected]> wrote in news:141120101636047820%
[email protected]d:

> In article <[email protected]>, John Navas
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Nonsense. While driving my phone is playing Pandora, Internet radio, or
>> podcasts, and giving me voice turn-by-turn directions at the same time.
>> I also use data while hiking and sailing. Wi-Fi can only compete when
>> I'm getting coffee at Starbucks.
>
> and you don't come anywhere close to 5 gig doing that daily?
>

John is always full of miracles.....(c;]

Travis James <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On 11/14/10 1:36 PM, nospam wrote:
>> In article<[email protected]>, John Navas
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Nonsense. While driving my phone is playing Pandora, Internet
>>> radio, or podcasts, and giving me voice turn-by-turn directions at
>>> the same time. I also use data while hiking and sailing. Wi-Fi can
>>> only compete when I'm getting coffee at Starbucks.
>>
>> and you don't come anywhere close to 5 gig doing that daily?
>
> I would seriously doubt it unless he's driving for UPS or something.
> How much cumulative bandwidth do you think an hour of Pandora over 3g
> consumes?
>
> I use my Verizon Mifi with my iPod Touch doing the same things as
> those mentioned by JN. Plus I do some computing time too because not
> every lunch spot I visit has wifi, plus my Mifi is more secure.
>
> Having had the Mifi for about 9 months, I broke 2 gig in a month one
> time and that was a week at a hotel where I didn't want or need to pay
> their daily internet rate. I downloaded some cartoons from iTunes for
> the kids that contributed to most of the usage.
>

alt.binaries.movies.divx

alt.binaries.sounds.mp3.(your fav genre)

It never ceases to amaze me how many posters to these sellphone/Apple
groups have no idea how to use binaries off newsgroups for unlimited
entertainment at no cost....

Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Ummm... please tell me how transmitting 2 watts at your end is going
> to improve your receive sensitivity?
>
>

It's not. The 5.5dbi colinear antenna AWAY from the noisy computer chips
in the laptop DOES. There were 39 hotspots on the list tonight. What the
2 watts, FCC limits to 4W ERP, 5DBi = 3DBd = 4W ERP, DOES do is to make you
HEARD above the din of competing 20 mw ****ty laptops with a piece of pc
board with a trace on it for an "ntenna".

You must see it to believe it, I suppose, so it's only $32 to try it for
yourself....if your box has a USB port to plug it into.

Roy <[email protected]> wrote in news:QbWdncBbG-
[email protected]alleyinternet:

> I believe the power limit on 2.4 Ghz under Part 15 is 1 watt into a
> omnidirectional antenna and less for directional antennas
>
>

4W ERP....

The FCC labels are on both the box and the device, as required by law. The
company is in Arizona that's selling them here. Report them to the FCC and
see if they get ticketed or you get sued.

Thad Floryan <[email protected]> wrote in news:4CE05E4C.6090601
@thadlabs.com:

> My Internet connection is via Comcast DOCSIS 3.0

My heartfelt condolences go out to you on your 250GB/month hobbled up ****
Comcrap internet service.

......a former Comcrap slave.

In article <[email protected]>, Fred
<[email protected]> wrote:

> > In article <[email protected]>, John Navas
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Nonsense. While driving my phone is playing Pandora, Internet radio, or
> >> podcasts, and giving me voice turn-by-turn directions at the same time.
> >> I also use data while hiking and sailing. Wi-Fi can only compete when
> >> I'm getting coffee at Starbucks.
> >
> > and you don't come anywhere close to 5 gig doing that daily?
>
> John is always full of miracles.....(c;]

not the word i'd use.

On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 03:45:57 +0000, Fred <[email protected]> wrote:

>Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>> Ummm... please tell me how transmitting 2 watts at your end is going
>> to improve your receive sensitivity?

>It's not.

OK. Thanks for ignoring all the stuff on how your 2 watt trashmitter
is creating more interference than necessary.

>The 5.5dbi colinear antenna AWAY from the noisy computer chips
>in the laptop DOES.

Digital noise does have an effect on receiver sensitivity. I have no
idea which netbook you own, but my Acer Aspire one shows no indication
of deteriorated sensitivity due to noise. In the distant past,
dealing with such internal noise issues was my daytime (consulting).
If your theory is correct, you should be able to wave your 5.5dBi omni
antenna near your unspecified model laptop, and pickup sufficient
noise to trash a connection. Have you tried this?

>There were 39 hotspots on the list tonight.

I'm not impressed. I've seen hundreds. All that proves is that you
live in an area that's infested with too many radios. Incidentally,
I've seen access points that have as many at 10 SSID's running. Look
for duplicated MAC addresses.

>What the
>2 watts, FCC limits to 4W ERP, 5DBi = 3DBd = 4W ERP, DOES do is to make you
>HEARD above the din of competing 20 mw ****ty laptops with a piece of pc
>board with a trace on it for an "ntenna".

FCC Part 15 specifies 1 watt maximum. It's not horribly clear whether
that's measured at the radio or the antenna, but the current
interpretation is that the transmitter cannot belch more than 1 watt,
no matter how lossy the coax or exotic the omni antenna. Rules for
directional and beam steering antennas are different. Your 2 watt
transmitter is not legal no matter what antenna is used.

>You must see it to believe it, I suppose, so it's only $32 to try it for
>yourself....if your box has a USB port to plug it into.

I've seen it. I've been personally involved in identifying and
removing several 2.4Ghz running too much power, with overkill
amplifiers, and with monster antennas. What characterizes all of them
is that none of the owners have bothered to even try using their
system with the transmitters set at lower power. After a suitable
demonstration that it works equally well at 100 milliwatts as at 10
watts, the amplifier usually disappears.

Apparently you didn't understand what I was explaining. Your range is
determined by the lowest power transmitter. If your transmitter could
output 1000 watts, your useful range would be limited by the transmit
power of the access point you are trying to use, which is not going to
change no matter what you do. The best improvements can be made with
antennas. If you understand that, I'll explain why your omni antenna
sucks and why you should switch to a directional antenna.

--
Jeff Liebermann [email protected]
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 11/14/2010 7:38 PM, Fred wrote:
> nospam<[email protected]> wrote in news:141120101636047820%
> [email protected]d:
>
>> In article<[email protected]>, John Navas
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Nonsense. While driving my phone is playing Pandora, Internet radio, or
>>> podcasts, and giving me voice turn-by-turn directions at the same time.
>>> I also use data while hiking and sailing. Wi-Fi can only compete when
>>> I'm getting coffee at Starbucks.
>>
>> and you don't come anywhere close to 5 gig doing that daily?
>>
>
> John is always full of miracles.....(c;]

He should work for T-Mobile and/or AT&T since he has good coverage where
the carriers themselves insist there is poor or non-existent coverage.
It's a miracle!

The carriers could save a lot of money by not putting in new sites in
these areas. It's a shame that they're spending so much time designing
new sites, lobbying for approval, then building these sites, since
clearly they're not needed. These new sites cost hundreds of thousands
of dollars before they're up and running, and such wasteful spending has
got to affect the bottom line of the carriers.

Sadly, reality is quite different from what our John believes.

Actually, I think Verizon would argue that the new AT&T site is not
needed as well!

On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 03:48:33 +0000, Fred <[email protected]> wrote:

>Roy <[email protected]> wrote in news:QbWdncBbG-
>[email protected]:
>
>> I believe the power limit on 2.4 Ghz under Part 15 is 1 watt into a
>> omnidirectional antenna and less for directional antennas
>>
>>

>4W ERP....

1 watt transmit power max, no matter what you do with the antenna.

>The FCC labels are on both the box and the device, as required by law. The
>company is in Arizona that's selling them here. Report them to the FCC and
>see if they get ticketed or you get sued.

What is the FCC ID number? What company in Arizona. I've seen a few
counterfeits and borrowed ID numbers.

Most amplifiers designs are unstable and love to oscillate at
unexpected frequencies:
<http://www.fcc.gov/eb/FieldNotices/2003/DOC-296094A1.html>

Incidentally, I don't believe your device can output 2 watts if
powered by USB. Each USB port can belch 5V at 0.5A maximum. That's
2.5 watts per port. Two ports in parallel will deliver 5 watts. The
typical 2.4 Ghz power amplifier is about 10% efficient, thus requiring
20 watts of DC power to power it. That's not going to happen from
anything powered by USB ports.


--
Jeff Liebermann [email protected]
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>>There were 39 hotspots on the list tonight.
>
> I'm not impressed. I've seen hundreds. All that proves is that you
> live in an area that's infested with too many radios. Incidentally,
> I've seen access points that have as many at 10 SSID's running. Look
> for duplicated MAC addresses.
>

Without the Alfa and its antenna, I see 8 hotspots and can only marginally
connect to 2 of them at Red Roof Inn......That's a real difference.

Jeff Liebermann <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Your 2 watt
> transmitter is not legal no matter what antenna is used.
>

Report them:

<http://www.data-alliance.net/-strse-...S036NH-2000mW-
1000mW/Detail.bok>

Send their Arizona company webpage to [email protected] as your civic duty.

FCC, I'm sure, will put a stop to it, immediately, and send your report
to the data-alliance company law firm, as required by law.

If you're so concerned it's all illegal for mere mortals to possess and
use, it's your DUTY to report them!

Let us know how that works out for you. They've been selling these units
for some time. They're not new. FCC approved them for use. Don't
forget to mention that to FCC in your report.

I didn't invent or manufacture the ****ing thing. I simply bought
it....It's not my fault.

Holy **** you all are a brainwashed bunch!