wilkes

Actually Bennett, at VHF frequencies and above (30mhz and higher), where RF is more or less line of sight, there's a great way to send data tremendous distances. Get the antenna as high as possible! Satellites in space send data packets many thousands of miles with transmitter power of 100 watts or less...often much less.

HD radio sends data packets on VHF frequencies (the FM band) with a power that's 1 percent of the analog carrier's power. A 1000 watt station would have an HD carrier power of 100 watts...and due to the great antenna height of the station's tower, would achieve comparable coverage.

At VHF frequencies and higher, antenna height is far more important than power. And "fade" is seldom an issue above the HF bands (1.7-30mhz).

linksys doesnt mess up like belkin and netgear. better service and better product

For security we would not want people outside of our usage area using our wireless. For a long range we have WiMax. 802.11n (N router) has a range of about 300 feet. Some routers like the Belkin Pre-N Wireless Router can reach 1500 feet, but may not work with other wireless N equipment. Mostly because it was made before the 802.11n standard was standard. However with a with a external homemade quarter wave antenna in a can and line of site it can broadcast 40 miles. Out west competitions used to be held to see who can make an antenna that will broadcast the farthest.

Next 802.11 has a set number of channels it can be set for. IF we had to many routers over lapping all of the channels would be used up. We also do not set up wireless channel in the same area as 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 because of the signal overlap we use 1, 4, 7, 11... this eats up all of the channels faster.
http://features.techworld.c...r--or-fud/

802.11n also uses CSMA/CA (Carrier sense multiple access with collision avoidance). With overlapping channels the router will detect a possible collision and refuse to transmit until the channel was clear.

For us 1000 ft range might be useful, but in an apartment building where everyone has wireless it would be a nightmare. If we could get a mile out of a unit then everyone would be having that same nightmare.

OK RG here it goes
Data is not a linear wave length. In with RF you are simply pushing the wave further by upping the power. However fade is a problem.

Data is encapsulated by protocols.
TCP is one
IP is another
look up IP stack for a better idea of how many different protocols there are
if the protocols or the actual data packets are lost during transmission the packet is discarded or dropped . This is the simplest way I can explain it. In-order to send a data packet further you have to use repeaters that rebroadcast the packet the limitations apply to both wired and wireless transmission

hope that helps

My RF (radio frequency) background is in audio broadcasting...radio, not data. So excuse me if I ask...why exactly would a higher power level result in worse signal to noise ratio? In radio the reverse is true! In AM, signal strength is THE most important factor in overcoming noise. With FM stereo that's also true, up to the point that "full quieting" has been reached. In other words...enough signal is present that the noise level in the tuner won't get any lower even if the signal is stronger. It's why in an urban area a 3,000 watt signal doesn't sound any different than a 100,000 watt signal. If full quieting has been achieved, the extra signal is of no benefit.

However...travel fifty miles from the transmitters, and that extra power's benefit becomes obvious. You may still be able to hear the 3,000 watt signal, but it almost certainly will suffer from noise and artifacts that may still be completely absent from the 100,000 watt signal. Were the transmitters sending out digital data rather than audio, undoubtedly the data sent on the more powerful transmitter, all other things (like tower height and antenna location) being equal, the data on the more powerful transmitter WOULD be more robust. That's not just a theory, it's a fact, put into practice with HD (digital) radio. Stations with higher power digital signals DO have lower error rates at a distance, hence greater coverage. Powerful HD Radio signals like WMIT in Black Mountain, probably 100 miles from the antenna on my roof, boom in. Lower powered digital signals in the Asheville, Greenville, and Spartanburg areas are completely "missing in action".


I can't understand why a router would be any different. It seems to me that if the transmitter section of a router produces worse signal to noise ratio at higher power levels, it's a poorly designed device. But again, my background is in radio...audio broadcasting. For the life of me, I can't see why routers would be different. As they say "bits is bits". Ones are ones, and zeroes are zeroes, whether that data represents audio, or a YouTube video of dancing dogs.

but - why is that the best?

best router is wireless n router from linksys

More power doesn't always equal better speed. Slower speeds actually have better ranges. Let me quote:

How does the SNR impact the speed and range of my wireless connection?
SNR, range and speed (data rate) are tightly interdependent. Users often notice that higher data rates do not "travel" as far as lower data rates do - and frequently they think that increasing the power on the router will take the signal further (increase the range).

It is not the power of the router, it is Signal-to-Noise ratio (SNR) that dictates the data speed and the range of the signal. SNR determines which data rates can still be correctly decoded in a wireless connection - as data rates increase from 6 Mbps towards 54 Mbps, more complex modulation and encoding methods are used for transmission and that requires much higher SNR to properly decode the signal back to the data stream on the receiving side.

Using full 54 Mbps data rate requires at least 25 dB of SNR - and getting that much SNR is achievable only if router and client are relatively close together. As the signal travels further away from the transmitter, a path loss occurs (the signal gets attenuated) and SNR is getting lower and lower. Lower data rate transmissions can be decoded from much weaker signals (low SNR) and as a result the signal appears to travel further.

Increasing the power of the transmitter will often affect the listening side of the same device as well, affecting much higher noise levels (and worsening the SNR ratio). It is frequent occurrence with beginners to see their routers tweaked so they generate the highest possible wattage of signal, raising the floor of the noise as well - and keeping the SNR at the same level as if the router wouldn't be tweaked at all.

I'd recommend using encryption, but leaving your router on full power. There's more to power than range. While you're still technically "within range", errors will pop up, which slows down data speeds. The best ways to overcome this are a)-higher location for your router antenna and b)-more power output.

Even if you have an N router, and you certainly should buy one...still most gear that's been around a year or two (or more) maxes out at G speeds. My wife and I both bought laptops last year. MIne has N, hers doesn't. I have two internet radios, both use G (and don't need anything faster...it's plenty fast for uncompressed 1.4mbps cd audio, the fastest bitrate they're ever called on to stream.

My router is several years old, and is still a Wireless G model. Even so, I can easily stream HD programs picked up by the TV tuner in my desktop computer, despite the fact that they peak close to 20mbps.

So, since my router goes faster than anything I'm trying to stream through it, and covers my property, I'm not in a hurry to replace it. It's a Netgear, by the way.

What Flo says is true so I guess I can offer a little more help, and may ease you mind as well

I currently a netgear router.
It has wild cards built in for MAC filtering which is a good feature to have
also once you set up you network turn off the broadcast SSID function.
Set you pc to connect to network even if your not broadcasting
Use a complex Key with numerals letters and vairations
example 7VoK3siAt
So recap
SSID off
Connect on even if network not broadcasting
Mac filter on
complex key + encryption

good luck

N is currently the best for distance out of the box. But you should lower the xmit strength of the router, if it gives you that option, to only cover the area you need covered. How often do you need wifi in the middle of your street?

Yes, security is standardized for wireless - 5 or 6 common standards, and most of them suck horribly, all are crackable, some within seconds, some may take a determined person weeks. I'll just say - dont leave it unprotected, and dont use WEP.

Go with an N with external directional antennas. Also router placement play a big role in its effective coverage area. Normally the higher up the better. Security for wifi is standardized. Knowing how to use it is the key. Security is more a or less a deterrent, hard wired is always best for security and performance.

good luck

Thanks for the reply. Is N the best for distance?

Your order of importance should be:
security
price
distance.

Just sayin. With an N router, you'll get more than enough range to cover your home and yard.

If I buy a wireless router to put in home. What is the best router to buy in considering 3 things:

Distance (the more the better)

price

security (do some manufacturers have better security software)?

Thanks for any info