[Hidden-tech] WiredWest fiberoptic broadband

Robert Heller heller at deepsoft.com
Sun Apr 18 11:03:51 EDT 2010


At Sun, 18 Apr 2010 10:39:12 -0400 ussailis at shaysnet.com wrote:

> 
> Absorption by leaves is what is reported by several sources.  The issue is
> how this is measured. Typically an experiment is set up where a source
> (transmitter and antenna) sends energy thru the forest, and the energy on
> the other side is measured with a receiver and antenna.
> 
> Unfortunately this measurement does not measure the energy reflected by the
> leaves, which is typically back-scattered. And, by conversation of energy,
> what doesn't go into the forest isn't measured on the other side.
> 
> I made several observations of this and came to the conclusion that at 700
> MHz and 2900 MHz that back-scatter was dominant, which explained the
> multipath that I measured.
> 
> Since my last email, a client found ad for a gadget in the WiFi band that
> claimed to have built-in multipath reduction. It claimed to use
> 'post-priori' processing information.
> 
> There was no accompanying patent number, so I remain a skeptic. 
> 
> Yes, propagation gets more directional as frequency goes up. There is some
> 'bending' around sharp edges, but the sharpness of the edge is inversely
> related to frequency, so for our purposes, as we say "RF don't go thru
> rock."
> 
> BTW, this is the drive to go from the 2.45 GHz band to 700 MHz. The other
> drive ad nothing to do with technology...The FCC netted 19.8 B$ from the
> "sale" of the frequencies that were freed-up from the move to digital TV.
> Guess who eventually pays for that? 
> 
> And the bandwidth of fiber is the bandwidth of light. Astronomically more
> than what can be achieved even with millimeter transmission. The tradeoff
> is between lots of "wiring" vs some wiring plus towers and access points.
> Politically I think fiber wins here.
> 
> Cost-wise? I am not so sure.

Fiber wins cost-wise over the long term.  Wireless is pretty much
doomed to re-implementation every few years due to changing technology.
Fiber is essentually 'ready' for when the move from *electronic*
computers to *quantium* computers happens and as the bandwidth of the
signaling circuity increases.  And fiber wins on a bandwidth level, now
and in the future, hands down.  The only real downside for fiber is it
requires a fixed connection point.  So, WiFi is good for laptops /
handhelds over short ranges (eg in your house, office, cafe, etc.) and
fiber is good for desktops, servers, and (short range) WiFi access
points.  Fiber will also handle voice and CATV and wireless can't. 
Given the current state of the copper landline infrastructure (decrepit
and getting worse) and over-the-air TV (pretty close to non-existent
for many hill towns), the demand for 'land line' voice and some kind of
cost effective TV services will push for fiber above and beyond
broadband Internet access.

> 
> 
> Jim Ussailis
> jim at nationalwireless.com
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Robert Heller             -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software        -- Download the Model Railroad System
http://www.deepsoft.com/  -- Binaries for Linux and MS-Windows
heller at deepsoft.com       -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ModelRailroadSystem/


Google

More information about the Hidden-discuss mailing list