Re: [CGUYS] Wireless vs. wired, just a thought to chew on
On Feb 2, 2010, at 3:54 PM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote: Answering myself here, the iPad is configured for n. Of course it has n. That you would even raise the question shows you don't know Apple. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Wireless vs. wired, just a thought to chew on
No as I am not sure the Ipod Touch even has N yet. I think it maxes out at G. As most portable devices are right now. Stewart At 06:42 PM 2/3/2010, you wrote: On Feb 2, 2010, at 3:54 PM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote: Answering myself here, the iPad is configured for n. Of course it has n. That you would even raise the question shows you don't know Apple. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Wireless vs. wired, just a thought to chew on
So that the government can snoop more easily? Fred Holmes At 09:43 AM 2/2/2010, phartz...@gmail.com wrote: Why would we want to go from megabits to nanobits per second, in a comparative sense, along with lost packets and lots of RFI for everyone, everywhere? I can think of but two reasons at this moment, a potential for convenience and money. Perhaps others can come up with additional reasons. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Wireless vs. wired, just a thought to chew on
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 8:17 PM, Fred Holmes f...@his.com wrote: So that the government can snoop more easily? Actually, quite possibly. The government snoops have been absolutely thrilled about our penchant for cell phones and for exactly that reason. The national security state is being cemented into place to a great degree by the so-called digital revolution. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Wireless vs. wired, just a thought to chew on
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 7:42 PM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote: Of course it has n. That you would even raise the question shows you don't know Apple. Sigh. I already answered this anyway. Your post here is redundant, but it did give you a chance to snark. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
[CGUYS] Wireless vs. wired, just a thought to chew on
For years, computer makers and makers of products that interface with computers such as flash drives and hard drives have worked hard and long to increase the speeds at which their products perform their functions. Consumers have seen data transfer rate speeds greatly increase, and those speed increases have been the reason that many a computer or computer peripheral have been sold. Speed has been a primary motivator in the computing world, and so-called wars have been waged over the issue of speed almost as if that was all that mattered. Consumers have bought into the speed thing, predicating the purchase of all sorts of computer gear on the basis of their speed of operation. Now, computer makers and computer gurus are suggesting that things like FireWire and USB and other wired forms of data transfer should all be retired in favor of wireless. Consumers are being told that the computer world is going totally wireless. But wait! Other than tapping keys on a keyboard, isn't wireless just about the slowest means of data transfer out there? What about this speed thing? Where has that suddenly gone? Slow is the new good. Slower is now seen as progressive, albeit in the opposite direction. Why would we want to go from megabits to nanobits per second, in a comparative sense, along with lost packets and lots of RFI for everyone, everywhere? I can think of but two reasons at this moment, a potential for convenience and money. Perhaps others can come up with additional reasons. Steve -- WARNING: Due to a Presidential Executive Order, the National Security Agency may have read this email without warning, warrant or notice. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Wireless vs. wired, just a thought to chew on
Where are you getting this? I haven't seen anything about this. On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 7:43 AM, phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.comwrote: For years, computer makers and makers of products that interface with computers such as flash drives and hard drives have worked hard and long to increase the speeds at which their products perform their functions. Consumers have seen data transfer rate speeds greatly increase, and those speed increases have been the reason that many a computer or computer peripheral have been sold. Speed has been a primary motivator in the computing world, and so-called wars have been waged over the issue of speed almost as if that was all that mattered. Consumers have bought into the speed thing, predicating the purchase of all sorts of computer gear on the basis of their speed of operation. Now, computer makers and computer gurus are suggesting that things like FireWire and USB and other wired forms of data transfer should all be retired in favor of wireless. Consumers are being told that the computer world is going totally wireless. But wait! Other than tapping keys on a keyboard, isn't wireless just about the slowest means of data transfer out there? What about this speed thing? Where has that suddenly gone? Slow is the new good. Slower is now seen as progressive, albeit in the opposite direction. Why would we want to go from megabits to nanobits per second, in a comparative sense, along with lost packets and lots of RFI for everyone, everywhere? I can think of but two reasons at this moment, a potential for convenience and money. Perhaps others can come up with additional reasons. Steve -- WARNING: Due to a Presidential Executive Order, the National Security Agency may have read this email without warning, warrant or notice. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Wireless vs. wired, just a thought to chew on
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 10:09 AM, mike xha...@gmail.com wrote: Where are you getting this? I haven't seen anything about this. This has been talked about for years. Right here, for a recent example: http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2010/01/18/wifi-direct-wireless-ces.html We are already seeing a number of wireless printers, wireless hard drives, wireless flash memory and so on. The iPad? The Mac Air? Cell phones and a slew of other mobile/portable/desktop computers soon to come? Ask Tom Piwowar. He's already said it. Search on wireless future or something similar for more. Faster wireless delivery is being worked on, but analysts expect a lot of interference problems as too many RF frequencies clash with one another. As an aside, yet related, the iPad is not as yet type accepted by the FCC, meaning that it has not been cleared in terms of not generating unacceptable RF interference, and that is a primary reason it is not yet available for sale. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Wireless vs. wired, just a thought to chew on
I had just never heard anyone saying they wanted to give up their esata HD for a wireless one. Just last weekend I helped a friend run 3 cat 5 cables throughout his house...not sure wired is really going anywhere. I have a hard enough time dealing with my USB2 drives. On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 9:03 AM, phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.comwrote: On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 10:09 AM, mike xha...@gmail.com wrote: Where are you getting this? I haven't seen anything about this. This has been talked about for years. Right here, for a recent example: http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2010/01/18/wifi-direct-wireless-ces.html We are already seeing a number of wireless printers, wireless hard drives, wireless flash memory and so on. The iPad? The Mac Air? Cell phones and a slew of other mobile/portable/desktop computers soon to come? Ask Tom Piwowar. He's already said it. Search on wireless future or something similar for more. Faster wireless delivery is being worked on, but analysts expect a lot of interference problems as too many RF frequencies clash with one another. As an aside, yet related, the iPad is not as yet type accepted by the FCC, meaning that it has not been cleared in terms of not generating unacceptable RF interference, and that is a primary reason it is not yet available for sale. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Wireless vs. wired, just a thought to chew on
Where are you getting this? I haven't seen anything about this. This has been talked about for years. Right here, for a recent example: http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2010/01/18/wifi-direct-wireless-ces.html We are already seeing a number of wireless printers, wireless hard drives, wireless flash memory and so on. The iPad? The Mac Air? Cell phones and a slew of other mobile/portable/desktop computers soon to come? Ask Tom Piwowar. He's already said it. There's an engineering discipline called Appropriate Technology. A local nature center needed bridge for school children to cross over a fast moving stream safely. Engineering students at a local college were asked to design affordable solution. They designed an elaborate expensive suspension bridge. Mother Nature intervened and sent a 60 foot sycamore tree downstream after the Spring thaw. The full cost of the bridge was materials for handrails and steps--volunteers supplied chain saws. That was 15 years ago. Cheap. Works well, still. Few short-sighted engineers needed. I love my 24 iMac. I used the AirPort card when I first got it. That's too slow to keep up with the outside network for streaming and downloads. Since I connected the ethernet cable directly to the modem, I'm much happier with the faster network. I love our wireless printer. It works--doesn't need to be faster. I tried a wireless hard drive and hated it--too slow for data. Sometimes slow is good [voice/text on mobile phones, transfer small files, food]. Sometimes it isn't [downloading large files, streaming video]. Depends on your network and what you're doing. Appropriate technology encourages using the best tool for the tasks. Gigabit WiFi? is it here yet? * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Wireless vs. wired, just a thought to chew on
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:14 AM, mike xha...@gmail.com wrote: I had just never heard anyone saying they wanted to give up their esata HD for a wireless one. Just last weekend I helped a friend run 3 cat 5 cables throughout his house...not sure wired is really going anywhere. I have a hard enough time dealing with my USB2 drives. The other day I was looking through a 2001 edition Discover magazine (remember that mag?) and came across an article where a number of computer experts of the day were chiming in on the future of computing. They were zeroing in on how wireless was going to supplant wired external devices in the future, and those folks were going round and round about what benefits there would be versus the drawbacks. One was saying that he did not want his refrigerator to automatically wirelessly contact the repairman if it was going on the blink, that he would prefer to handle such things himself. Major efforts today to improve on wireless speeds are focusing on moving to the terahertz band, That means going up to the hyper-microwaves, basically where no man has gone before except in medical and security imagery testing. These are frequencies of less than a millimeter in wavelength. These wavelengths cannot penetrate metal, so moves to all plastic devices that are prevalent today gives rise to the viability of this frequency range. This is also line-of-sight propagation of very short range compared to microwave emissions currently employed for most communications use. Safety? Who really knows at this point. These frequencies are at or about the frequencies that lasers operate at and thus there are legitimate thermal concerns that need to be looked at. So, for wireless with speeds that may come close to what we have become used to, the future is still not here by any means. But, if you want hard drives or flash memory to be wireless you can get it right now, albeit at only a fraction of the speeds you have gotten used to. Just the other day I read allusions on this list about how great it would be to wirelessly move photos from a camera to a computer. I would say that at the speeds currently available, only in an emergency or if I was trying to impress someone, and even then I would probably hear, Why is it taking so long? Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Wireless vs. wired, just a thought to chew on
On Feb 2, 2010, at 9:43 AM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote: But wait! Other than tapping keys on a keyboard, isn't wireless just about the slowest means of data transfer out there? What about this speed thing? Where has that suddenly gone? Or maybe you are just not keeping up with technology... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11n-2009 600Mbps wireless * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Wireless vs. wired, just a thought to chew on
N is pretty good. U upgraded my wireless router/access points to N this past year. (not that expensive) and put a N card in my one laptop. I have a mix at home of G and N laptops. So far it seems to work very well. However the direct connect (cable) still seems a it faster for big stuff. Stewart At 01:20 PM 2/2/2010, you wrote: On Feb 2, 2010, at 9:43 AM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote: But wait! Other than tapping keys on a keyboard, isn't wireless just about the slowest means of data transfer out there? What about this speed thing? Where has that suddenly gone? Or maybe you are just not keeping up with technology... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11n-2009 600Mbps wireless * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Wireless vs. wired, just a thought to chew on
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 2:20 PM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote: On Feb 2, 2010, at 9:43 AM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote: But wait! Other than tapping keys on a keyboard, isn't wireless just about the slowest means of data transfer out there? What about this speed thing? Where has that suddenly gone? Or maybe you are just not keeping up with technology... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11n-2009 600Mbps wireless Actually, and I assumed you would understand this, I was speaking of computer technology that is currently in general use. I think that almost all current computer users would have to buy new equipment, even new computers, to be able to avail themselves of what you have brought to attention. I do not believe that even the iPad is so equipped. Please correct me if I am wrong on the above. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Wireless vs. wired, just a thought to chew on
Most potable devices are still using G for their wireless connection. Part of the reason for this, is N took such a long time in coming out, many did not want to install a preN device and then not have it be compatible. Almost all smartphones with built in Wifi also still use G. I had to install an N card into my laptop to get N connectivity. Most laptop makers are putting the wireless cards in places that make them difficult for the average user to swap out. Also many wireless providers (in the open world) are still operating on G. (When I travel that is the biggest group of them, a few still use B but very few offer N.) Stewart At 01:50 PM 2/2/2010, phartz...@gmail.com wrote: Actually, and I assumed you would understand this, I was speaking of computer technology that is currently in general use. I think that almost all current computer users would have to buy new equipment, even new computers, to be able to avail themselves of what you have brought to attention. I do not believe that even the iPad is so equipped. Please correct me if I am wrong on the above. Steve Rev. Stewart A. Marshall mailto:popoz...@earthlink.net Prince of Peace www.princeofpeaceozark.org Ozark, AL SL 82 * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Wireless vs. wired, just a thought to chew on
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 2:50 PM, phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.com wrote: Actually, and I assumed you would understand this, I was speaking of computer technology that is currently in general use. I think that almost all current computer users would have to buy new equipment, even new computers, to be able to avail themselves of what you have brought to attention. I do not believe that even the iPad is so equipped. Please correct me if I am wrong on the above. Answering myself here, the iPad is configured for n. That being said, there still are not a lot of devices currently in use that can interface with the iPad that have n, but that is not the fault of the iPad, nor is it the fault of those devices. 802.11n is relatively new to the scene, but the iPad appears to be ready for it. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
