Jim -

If you really want an independent comparison, get me some of these cards.
I test 802.11 h/w in some of the harshest conditions out there (some till 
failure) - I have no loyalties to any card company other than I buy cisco
cards (but not their routers) simply because they test best and work best
in my real world scenario.  I've also been doing this enough years to tell
when a manufacturer makes a "special" card that's definitely going to 
exceed performance.  Different solder in the SEM metallurgy - extra test
pokes from "tweaking" - and the number of scratches left on the pins/fingers
from insertion/extraction - all tell a story of a product which was either 
made with all the rest, or taken off the assembly line to be "enhanced" for 
testing submission.

Everett

> 
> the demarc (really zcomax!) and Senao/Engenius cards are about the same.
> 
> If you want real RX sensitivity, buy something newer than either, like  
> a good quality Atheros card and run it in 11b mode.   Kicks as* on  
> anything Prism2.x-based, and the whole Prism-thang is about to be  
> yesterday's news now that Globespan-Virata purchased the  
> not-yet-rotting corpse of Prism (it was far too expensive for a  
> commodity market.)
> 
> Heck, nearly any new chipset (AMD, Broadcom, etc) with a decent LNA in  
> front of it can come close to the claimed rx sensitivity of zcomax or  
> Senao.
> 
> And yes, PAs run hot when they're throwing down a lot of power, and hot  
> PAs distort the signal and worse.
> 
> The hunch about different receivers is misguided, the baseband for both  
> the Cisco and Prism-2.5 are essentially the same.
> 
> The concern about vendors over-specing the datasheet is well-founded,  
> however.   I saw a vendor the other day claiming 268F from his "outdoor  
> bridge" which was little more than a Ubicom + Senao 200mW combo in a  
> cheap plastic box.   As always, YMMV.  :-)
> 
> Jim
> 
> ob disclaimer:  My wife sells both Intersil and Atheros-based designs  
> manufactured by Senao, and I've gone a few rounds with Tony from Demarc  
> more than once comparing the two designs.
> 
> On Sunday, September 28, 2003, at 3:54 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> > <snip>
> >> roddog wrote:
> >>
> >>> O.K. So you want a bad as* card for wardriving?
> >>> What you need is a Senao/Engenious? card with 2 antenna ports on it.
> >>> These cards have a better sensitivity than just about anything out  
> >>> there
> >>> next to Demark
> >>> and they also have 200mW of power which is the most powerful out  
> >>> there.
> >>
> >
> > Brian Lloyd writes next:
> >
> >> A couple of comments about the Senao:
> >>
> >> As for sensitivity, the Senao card has better *published* receive  
> >> sensitivity specs.  It seems pretty good but I am not sure it beats  
> >> the Cisco for RX sensitivity.
> >>
> >> TX power does indeed seem to be about +23 dbm.
> >>
> > <Brian's notes on antenna connection info deleted below here>
> >
> > I agree with Brian - I've now had a chance to get a couple senao's on  
> > my
> > bench, and while my 2 cards are _not_ a valid statistical sample size  
> > (which
> > I clearly emphasized to the customer who handed them to me), I have  
> > noted
> > that both cards lacked the receive performance of the aironet/cisco 350
> > series cards.  They did both deliver the +23 dBm into 50 ohms (but  
> > most all
> > of my cisco 350's exceed their +20 dBm spec by 1-2 dB).  given all  
> > this - the
> > 1-2 dB of extra xmit power compared to a typical cisco 350 weighed  
> > against the
> > loss in receive (not enough samples to say definitively, but it's alot  
> > more
> > than the benefit of the transmitter) doesn't justify their use in  
> > MARGINAL
> > links as a better alternative.  They still seem to be a great  
> > all-around card
> > for NORMAL links, and CAN be the best bang for the buck in many  
> > situations
> > that don't call for the absolute best money can buy.  I hope they  
> > force cisco
> > to make a 200 mW "360" card!  It's the best part about market  
> > competition!
> >
> > My hunch is that it was simpler and cheaper for senao to make a +23dBm  
> > card
> > with a so-so receiver than a +20dBm card with a great receiver -  
> > besides,
> > marketing will LOVE being able to say "twice as much POWER" - when was  
> > the
> > last time you heard a marketing hype "6 dB better code to noise  
> > ratio!"??
> >
> > As a BIGGER note - (again - keep in mind 2 cards does not a statistical
> > sample make) - placing them inside a calibrated RF anechoic +  
> > temp/humidity
> > chamber resulted in wider variance near the high end of their specified
> > operating temperature (60c).  The performance in the unspecified area
> > above 60c was substantially poorer than a comparable cisco card.  But  
> > why
> > is 60C so important?
> >
> > Once again - if your card is kept at 22 deg C inside your house,  
> > you'll most
> > likely never notice - but if it's outside on a 100 deg F day - inside  
> > a box
> > on a pole in the sun and your link margin drops below zero - it's a  
> > big deal.
> > NOWDAYS, EVEN THE PCMCIA SLOTS IN LAPTOPS CAN GET TO 60C!  I just  
> > stuck a
> > micro-thin type T T/C in between my 2 pcmcia cards on the laptop I'm  
> > using
> > to write this - 23.2 C room temp, 56.8C in between the cards!  (and  
> > this is
> > a PII/350 not some 3.0G PIV rocket laptop that has a 90 watt adapter!)  
> >  Ever
> > pull out the card and notice it's hot to the touch?  Senao's spec  
> > sheet stops
> > at 60C for their high power card.  I'm just ~3C away from that temp on  
> > a 3 yr.
> > old laptop!  When my 2.0 Ghz laptop comes back from repair, I'll  
> > duplicate
> > the "pcmcia slot temp" test on it. That thing is too hot for a "lap"  
> > sometimes.
> > I can't imagine how hot the pcmcia compartment is!
> >
> > Cisco, on the other hand, rates their AIR-PCM35x series to +70C - AND  
> > THEY
> > MAINTAIN THER PERFORMANCE SPEC.  Through the whole temperature range  
> > and
> > a little bit beyond.
> >
> >
> > I'm not getting these numbers out of thin air - read the spec sheets  
> > in person
> > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/wireless/ps4555/ 
> > products_data_sheet09186a0080088828.html
> >
> > http://www.senao.com/service%20&%20support/Spec/NL-2511CD_PLUS_Spec.pdf
> >
> > (funny - senao's older cards were only rated at 50C  -  then 55C, then  
> > 60C )
> >
> > If it seems like this bugs me - it does to a degree - It's not fair for
> > manufacturers to make impressive glossy ad slicks that have numbers  
> > 99.99%
> > of the population can never verify.  Too many people make buying  
> > decisions
> > on bad data - then wonder why things don't work.  I've heard all too  
> > often
> > "but the box said it would go 5 miles!"  I guess it keeps customers  
> > comming
> > though...
> >
> > Everett
> >
> > --
> > general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/>
> > [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> --
> general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/>
> [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 

--
general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/>
[un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Reply via email to