In my experience, those that chose the lowest end are the least likely to use proper antennas - certified or not. This is either out of rules ignorance or sheer disregard for the rules. I personally do not believe that enabling consumer grade products to use an external antenna is wise. What you would see (and this is not a guess) is many folks also adding other external things...like amps. The first thing an RF novice does in an attempt to "improve performance" is to amp the signal. In actuality, that should be a last resort tactic. Facilitating that environment any more than we already have would be a very bad thing in my opinion. I also know empirically that key FCC officials are loathe to see this. (I have actually heard Dr. Mike Marcus refer to those marketing amps individually and being used illegally with rather, er, colorful, wildly negative, and hyperbolic lanquage.
I also respectfully disagree that users are "forced" to hack into the fixed antenna units. There is a wide variety of systems that enable external antennas - Wi-Fi or otherwise. The user you reference is simply unwilling to pay the small premium required. Also, the makers of the consumer grade equipment do not want users to be able to swap antennas. It eliminates their ability to support the product or to control the user's satisfactory experience. Patrick J. Leary Chief Evangelist, Alvarion, Inc. Executive Committee Member, WCA/LEA [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ph: 760.494.4717 Cell: 770.331.5849 Fax: 509.479.2374 -----Original Message----- From: Julian Bond [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 12:21 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [BAWUG] Re: (FCC issues) There's clearly a debate to be had about what the rules *actually* say (in various countries) and the practical implications. I'd be particularly interested in a debate about what the rules *should* say. Mainly because of the moves to progressively open up bits of spectrum >1Ghz to a similar regulated, unlicensed model. And also because the 802.11a 5Ghz band is still not fully open in many countries round the world. One thing that irritates me about the rules as they are at the moment is that they have seemed to result in almost all the low end consumer grade gear having hardwired antennas with no sockets. This is actually forcing people into hacking them apart and adding their own connectors. ISTM this has more potential for incorrect setup and hence interference than a standard connector and a healthy market for affordable and properly designed antennas. Going all the way back to the device that started this thread, the Cantenna. There's never been any suggestion that it is badly made or that it would cause interference. It may be illegal to sell in the USA, but would the law be keeping a perfectly good product off the market? -- Julian Bond Email&MSM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/ Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/ CV/Resume: http://www.voidstar.com/cv/ M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173 T: +44 (0)192 0412 433 -- general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. This footer also confirms that this email message has been scanned for the presence of computer viruses. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifies and with authority, states them to be the views of Alvarion Inc. Scanning of this message and addition of this footer is performed by SurfControl SuperScout Email Filter software in conjunction with virus detection software. -- general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
