Highspeed Point to Point Wireless Connection
martin....@gmail.com
connection. I need enough speed to play a dvd on one computer of of the
drive of the other computer. A wired network is not an option due to
physical restrictions. The machines are connected over wi-fi 802.11g,
but this is not fast enough. Any ideas will be greatly appreciated.
Martin
rtho...@iwon.com
Now exactly why is it impossible to use a wired connection, you can
pick up ethernet cable in 100 500 1000 ft bundles. Even if you go with
MIMO based gear, your limited to the speed of your optical drive
ability to stream it to the network. I do have a feeling that MIMO will
not solve your problem.
You might want to try this method:
Rip DVD to harddrive
Use Daemon-tools on client to mount DVD, or DVD image.
Watch enjoy.
This should work in a G network, depending on your system specs, for
example the speed of your harddrive. I used to do this in 802.11b
network and it was watchable not perfect but good enough.
Rthoreau
John Navas
<1156263200....@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>:
Powerline networking:
* Homeplug Turbo (NETGEAR XE103/XE104): typical 10 Mbps real throughout
(equivalent to a good 24 Mbps 802.11g link), but up to double that
if you're lucky
* Homeplug AV: about 2.5x Homeplug Turbo, still vaporware
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
phil-new...@ipal.net
|
| martin....@gmail.com wrote:
|> I need to connect two Windows PCs in my house via a high speed wireless
|> connection. I need enough speed to play a dvd on one computer of of the
|> drive of the other computer. A wired network is not an option due to
|> physical restrictions. The machines are connected over wi-fi 802.11g,
|> but this is not fast enough. Any ideas will be greatly appreciated.
|>
|> Martin
|
| Now exactly why is it impossible to use a wired connection, you can
| pick up ethernet cable in 100 500 1000 ft bundles. Even if you go with
| MIMO based gear, your limited to the speed of your optical drive
| ability to stream it to the network. I do have a feeling that MIMO will
| not solve your problem.
Lots of people prefer not having cables all over the place. It can also
make a hazard, especially for children and the elderly. And wiring it in
the walls is not always an available option.
--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / spamtrap-200...@ipal.net |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|
Jeff Liebermann
>Lots of people prefer not having cables all over the place. It can also
>make a hazard, especially for children and the elderly. And wiring it in
>the walls is not always an available option.
Yep. "Fear of Wiring(tm)" is a common phobia. It's very evident in
the display advertising for computer systems, where the photos rarely
show any wires. There will be a typical office scene, where smiling
lusers surround a desktop computer system, with absolutely no cables
or wiring in sight. Not even a power cord can be seen. Obviously,
the "Fear of Wiring(tm)" phobia is a serious and chronic condition
that apparently can only be alleviated with a conscientiously applied
program of wireless exposure.
I covered the problem in more detail in a previous rant:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.dcom.cabling/msg/61324126e8abf45a
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Bill Kearney
No such animal, at this point anyway. If it ain't fast enough you'll have
to consider other options. Simplest being sneaker net and a second DVD
player in the other PC. Or rip the DVD to the local PC's disk and once
that's complete, pull it over to the other PC for watching.
What are you trying to actually do? There may be other solutions for
dealing with it from an A/V perspective.
Kevin Weaver
Yeah, I know It's not set in stone yet. By the time It Is, It will be
time for new one anyway.
John Navas
<kevinkei...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
<7f%Gg.12397$kO3....@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>:
What's wrong is that such high speed is only possible over a very short
range without much interference. Throw in some distance, interference,
and/or walls, and speed will be much less.
Neill Massello
Is getting a DVD drive for the other computer an option? DVD-ROM drives
now go for less than $25 and DVD burners for less than $40.
Kevin Weaver
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:20:19 GMT, Kevin Weaver
> <kevinkei...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
> <7f%Gg.12397$kO3....@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>:
>
>> Bill Kearney wrote:
>>>> I need to connect two Windows PCs in my house via a high speed wireless
>>>> connection. I need enough speed to play a dvd on one computer of of the
>>>> drive of the other computer. A wired network is not an option due to
>>>> physical restrictions. The machines are connected over wi-fi 802.11g,
>>>> but this is not fast enough. Any ideas will be greatly appreciated.
>>> No such animal, at this point anyway. If it ain't fast enough you'll have
>>> to consider other options. Simplest being sneaker net and a second DVD
>>> player in the other PC. Or rip the DVD to the local PC's disk and once
>>> that's complete, pull it over to the other PC for watching.
>>>
>>> What are you trying to actually do? There may be other solutions for
>>> dealing with it from an A/V perspective.
>>>
>> Whats wrong with 108mbps wireless or the "N" My N router works great.
>
> What's wrong is that such high speed is only possible over a very short
> range without much interference. Throw in some distance, interference,
> and/or walls, and speed will be much less.
>
next door the speed drops to 270mbps. If the speed goes any slower then
200mbps then it's out of range. But way further then my old linksys G or
my netgear 108 mbps.
My house is 1800 sf I can go anywhere and the speed never drop.
Buy It from a place that will allow you to return it if it does not work
out for you. You then have nothing to lose.
John Navas
<kevinkei...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
<Kn2Hg.17044$gY6....@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>:
>John Navas wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:20:19 GMT, Kevin Weaver
>> <kevinkei...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
>> <7f%Gg.12397$kO3....@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>:
>> What's wrong is that such high speed is only possible over a very short
>> range without much interference. Throw in some distance, interference,
>> and/or walls, and speed will be much less.
>>
>I don't see that In my home. The speed will drop with range. But going
>next door the speed drops to 270mbps. If the speed goes any slower then
>200mbps then it's out of range. But way further then my old linksys G or
>my netgear 108 mbps.
You mean 27 Mbps and 20 Mbps? Is that measured throughput under heavy
load, or the raw speed report? (If the former, how did you convert from
bytes to bits?) Many wireless adapters report a high speed when idle,
but are much slower under load.
Kevin Weaver
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:54:18 GMT, Kevin Weaver
> <kevinkei...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
> <Kn2Hg.17044$gY6....@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>:
>
>> John Navas wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:20:19 GMT, Kevin Weaver
>>> <kevinkei...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
>>> <7f%Gg.12397$kO3....@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>:
>
>>> What's wrong is that such high speed is only possible over a very short
>>> range without much interference. Throw in some distance, interference,
>>> and/or walls, and speed will be much less.
>>>
>> I don't see that In my home. The speed will drop with range. But going
>> next door the speed drops to 270mbps. If the speed goes any slower then
>> 200mbps then it's out of range. But way further then my old linksys G or
>> my netgear 108 mbps.
>
> You mean 27 Mbps and 20 Mbps? Is that measured throughput under heavy
> load, or the raw speed report? (If the former, how did you convert from
> bytes to bits?) Many wireless adapters report a high speed when idle,
> but are much slower under load.
>
will show 270mbps and at times will show 200mbps. The range and speed is
much better then the linksys and netgear ones I've had in the past.
For the person asking: If going this route ask if it can be returned if
it does not work for you. If it does, great. If not, nothing lost.
Peter Pan
> <martin....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I need to connect two Windows PCs in my house via a high speed
> wireless connection. I need enough speed to play a dvd on one
> computer of of the drive of the other computer. A wired network is
> not an option due to physical restrictions. The machines are
> connected over wi-fi 802.11g, but this is not fast enough. Any ideas
> will be greatly appreciated.
Why wireless? The netgear XE103 (at
<http://www.netgear.com/Products/BridgesAccessPointsandExtenders/PowerlineWallPluggedExtenders/XE103.aspx?detail=Specifications>)
runs at 85 Mbps, and the HDBX101 at
<http://www.netgear.com/Products/BridgesAccessPointsandExtenders/PowerlineWallPluggedExtenders/HDXB101.aspx>
does up to 200 Mbps (powerline networking)... If you absolutely have to have
wireless, use the high speed powerline stuff as a bridge and throw a wap on
each end and bingo, instant high speed wireless.
FWIW I have and use the XE103's and they work great with a wap/router on
each end (same ssid so I have a large hotspot at my house), the 101's have
only been out for a few months and I haven't used the newer models so can't
say if there will be any probs with them (none so far with the 103's)
phil-new...@ipal.net
| phil-new...@ipal.net hath wroth:
|
|>Lots of people prefer not having cables all over the place. It can also
|>make a hazard, especially for children and the elderly. And wiring it in
|>the walls is not always an available option.
|
| Yep. "Fear of Wiring(tm)" is a common phobia. It's very evident in
| the display advertising for computer systems, where the photos rarely
| show any wires. There will be a typical office scene, where smiling
| lusers surround a desktop computer system, with absolutely no cables
| or wiring in sight. Not even a power cord can be seen. Obviously,
| the "Fear of Wiring(tm)" phobia is a serious and chronic condition
| that apparently can only be alleviated with a conscientiously applied
| program of wireless exposure.
Well, there you go; there's your ad campaign for wireless ubiquity.
Of course some people just think it's ugly to have all the wires around.
| I covered the problem in more detail in a previous rant:
| http://groups.google.com/group/comp.dcom.cabling/msg/61324126e8abf45a
About a year ago I found a big brown spider living deep under the wiring
behind my computer desk. With 4 computers, a SCSI drive tower, 8-port
switch, KVM switch, there are a few wires running around back there on the
floor. At least I have one advantage that the KVM switch uses DB-25's and
special cables that have DB-25 on one end and fan out to dual-PS/2, DB-15,
and a couple plugs for sound, that make the problem not as bad as it could
be. Yet that spider did find a home. No idea how long he/she had been
there.
In some ways, wiring is good to have. I know I can take a computer offline
from the net for sure by just unplugging it. in other ways it is bad. My
mouse cable does sometimes cause some drag.
I didn't have room for a printer in this little computer room. So I put it
in another room. Not wanting to run a wire out to it all over the place, I
simply bought a printer that was wireless and started using it that way.
Keeps things sane. When I'm doing stuff that needs a lot of document
reviewing, I set the printer on the dining room table and use that table to
sit and read away from the CRT screen. At other times it can sit on a
shelf in the laundry room for light duty occaisional printing.
John Navas
<kevinkei...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
<XK2Hg.10777$1f6....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>:
>John Navas wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:54:18 GMT, Kevin Weaver
>> <kevinkei...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
>> <Kn2Hg.17044$gY6....@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>:
>>
>>> John Navas wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:20:19 GMT, Kevin Weaver
>>>> <kevinkei...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
>>>> <7f%Gg.12397$kO3....@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>:
>>
>>>> What's wrong is that such high speed is only possible over a very short
>>>> range without much interference. Throw in some distance, interference,
>>>> and/or walls, and speed will be much less.
>>>>
>>> I don't see that In my home. The speed will drop with range. But going
>>> next door the speed drops to 270mbps. If the speed goes any slower then
>>> 200mbps then it's out of range. But way further then my old linksys G or
>>> my netgear 108 mbps.
>>
>> You mean 27 Mbps and 20 Mbps? Is that measured throughput under heavy
>> load, or the raw speed report? (If the former, how did you convert from
>> bytes to bits?) Many wireless adapters report a high speed when idle,
>> but are much slower under load.
>>
>I'm going by what it reports in the task bar from the netgear icon. It
>will show 270mbps and at times will show 200mbps. The range and speed is
>much better then the linksys and netgear ones I've had in the past.
Numbers on the taskbar can be meaningless, as I explained. What is the
actual throughput under load, and over what distance?
Jeff Liebermann
>About a year ago I found a big brown spider living deep under the wiring
>behind my computer desk. With 4 computers, a SCSI drive tower, 8-port
>switch, KVM switch, there are a few wires running around back there on the
>floor.
Well, that's typical. Programmers always blame the hardware when they
find a bug.
On occassion, finding a bug is benificial, as big bugs get that big by
eating smaller bugs. It's a pity that the programming industry hasn't
recognized the benifits of cultivating large bugs, that tend to
obscure the smaller bugs.
>In some ways, wiring is good to have. I know I can take a computer offline
>from the net for sure by just unplugging it. in other ways it is bad. My
>mouse cable does sometimes cause some drag.
I have several wireless mice but have switched back to wired. The
problem is battery power. The Logitech piece of manure I purchased
for my laptop is turned on/off with the attachment of the USB dongle
in the base of the mouse. This prevents me from leaving the mouse
connected for extended periods causing the battery to drain. It also
tends to fall out in my laptop bag. I think of this as a mechanical
bug. On my desktops, I've had battery life and KVM switch problems. I
would probably consider a wind-up mouse at this point.
Wireless headsets is one area where wireless would really make sense
that I can't get to work reliably. I can get Bluetooth and 802.11 to
coexists but not reliably. The problem is that Bluetooth technology
is excessively complex for the purpose intended. A relatively simple
46/49MHz or 433MHz conventional FM modulated cordless headset would
work much better. Like the wireless mouse, battery life is an issue.
>I didn't have room for a printer in this little computer room. So I put it
>in another room.
I just had the same problem at an auto repair shop. The ancient Sun
diagnostics machine (running Windows 3.1) had a very small Alps dot
matrix printer in a drawer. The owner wanted a laser printer, but
couldn't find one that fit in the drawer. I found an old Okidata 410e
printer that barely fit. Many of the older Okidata laser printers are
very small. I'm sure you could have found one to fit in your computer
room.
>Not wanting to run a wire out to it all over the place, I
>simply bought a printer that was wireless and started using it that way.
Yep. "Fear of Wiring(tm)" in action again. It's so pervasive that
some people will even purchase new hardware just to avoid wires and
cables. If you can't stand the sight of wires, perhaps running them
outside the house (through a convenient window) might be acceptable?
>Keeps things sane. When I'm doing stuff that needs a lot of document
>reviewing, I set the printer on the dining room table and use that table to
>sit and read away from the CRT screen.
CRT screen? As soon as Intel delivers UWB chips the traditional 2
years later than promised, you'll have wireless video. Then, you can
bring your display to your printer instead. Meanwhile, you can always
run VNC or some remote desktop software on a laptop in order to avoid
seeing the CRT cables.
>At other times it can sit on a
>shelf in the laundry room for light duty occaisional printing.
Condensation from the washing machinery will not do the laser printer
much good. However, if you're counterfieting money on your printer,
proximity to the washing machine (necessary to age the currency) is
certainly handy.
John Navas
<je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote in
<m23re25jhbclb8a50...@4ax.com>:
>Wireless headsets is one area where wireless would really make sense
>that I can't get to work reliably. I can get Bluetooth and 802.11 to
>coexists but not reliably. The problem is that Bluetooth technology
>is excessively complex for the purpose intended. A relatively simple
>46/49MHz or 433MHz conventional FM modulated cordless headset would
>work much better. Like the wireless mouse, battery life is an issue.
My Sony Ericsson HBH-30 Bluetooth headset works a treat both with cell
phone and PC. Methinks you need better Bluetooth devices.
>I just had the same problem at an auto repair shop. The ancient Sun
>diagnostics machine (running Windows 3.1) had a very small Alps dot
>matrix printer in a drawer. The owner wanted a laser printer, but
>couldn't find one that fit in the drawer. I found an old Okidata 410e
>printer that barely fit. Many of the older Okidata laser printers are
>very small. I'm sure you could have found one to fit in your computer
>room.
Probably the LED version, not a true laser. LEDs are much more compact.
phil-new...@ipal.net
| I'm going by what it reports in the task bar from the netgear icon. It
| will show 270mbps and at times will show 200mbps. The range and speed is
| much better then the linksys and netgear ones I've had in the past.
But can ypu actually transfer a 4.7GB file in 139 seconds? That's what
"270mbps" implies. I think not. I'm not even sure how you get this value
of 270 in the first place. The bit rate when sending a frame over the
radio is one thing. But there are lots of time cycles in which there is
no transmission taking place.
unmesh....@gmail.com
What throughput are you seeing. Using Ixia Qcheck to measure TCP
throughput and a pair of Airlink101 MPL8511 powerline extenders, I can
get 15Mbps if the two are on the same powerstrip but only 500kbps if
they are on different AC circuits in the house :-(
John Navas
<1156547168.9...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
>Peter Pan wrote:
>> FWIW I have and use the XE103's and they work great with a wap/router on
>> each end (same ssid so I have a large hotspot at my house), the 101's have
>> only been out for a few months and I haven't used the newer models so can't
>> say if there will be any probs with them (none so far with the 103's)
>
>What throughput are you seeing. Using Ixia Qcheck to measure TCP
>throughput and a pair of Airlink101 MPL8511 powerline extenders, I can
>get 15Mbps if the two are on the same powerstrip but only 500kbps if
>they are on different AC circuits in the house :-(
They are probably on different sections of your AC panel. You can get a
bridge that should solve the problem.