Michael,

This is the first time I have gotten into this subject, and the last.
As I said, I have seen this same thing come up at least a dozen time on
this list.  While I did say how long I have been on this list, my time
in the industry is only about a month longer.  Its always the same
thing, it goes round and round with people getting angry.  

I don't run MT,  I was merely trying to point out the major differences,
imho, between a PC (win32) with a wireless adapter, and MT with a
wireless adapter. 

Do you think those pci card manufacturers have certified the card with a
bigger antenna than it shipped with? I highly doubt it. Once that is
changed, the card would no longer be a certified "module".

I made one comment in this entire thread, which I am already regretting.
I hardly consider that vocal.

My comment was not meant to be sarcastic, I would like to see a ruling
on it one way or another, but I am not going to run around trying to get
it. Its not worth my time, I don't need to start working 70-hour weeks.

this thread > /dev/null,
Ryan

On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 02:20 -0400, Michael Erskine wrote:
> Ryan,
> 
> A few of you are making a lot of noise.
> You seem to want to talk a lot about how MT is not certified and you say 
> "but if it were"...
> Ryan, Why haven't you and those so vocal gone to the FCC with this 
> question already?
> The FCC is but a telephone call away.
> http://www.fcc.gov/
> 
> It never ceases to amaze me how men and women of obvious intelligence 
> will debate ad nasuiem
> about how some government agency will rule on some topic, but never will 
> they find the courage
> to simply call that agency and ask them.  Rather they will wait till 
> someone suggests it and then
> after all the debate and posturing, say, "Yeah, Go ahead! You call them."
> 
> What a joke.
> -m-
> 
> Ryan Langseth wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 01:09 -0400, Michael Erskine wrote:
> >   
> >> Rick;
> >>
> >> I think that your opinion is like mine, both informed and experienced.  
> >> I am perfectly comfortable with my opinion. And I did not get into an 
> >> argument, or even suggest one was somehow a good idea.
> >>
> >> That said, let me also say this.  If I don't have to have my router 
> >> boards certified without radios because they are not intentional 
> >> radiators, then when I add an FCC certified card to them I still don't 
> >> have to have them certified because they are still what they were.
> >>
> >> If you tell me that every PC running a pci wireless card has to be 
> >> certified then I'll go with suggesting that a single board computer, 
> >> which is designed to be a router, should also be certified like all 
> >> those PC's otherwise, Rick, I think that both you and Dawn are incorrect.
> >>     
> >
> > 1) drivers for the wireless card do not allow you to adjust power. 
> > 2) comes with a small rubber ducky ant, not a 15db sector.
> >
> > This discussion has come up on this list at probably least a dozen times
> > since I have joined (less than a year ago). MT is not certified, end of
> > chapter.  Ask MT they will, most likely, tell you the same thing. 
> >
> >   
> >> Like I said, I think your opinion is like mine, both informed and 
> >> experienced.  I don't think you, or I, or Dawn, have the last word in 
> >> this matter and I'd be happy to take the issue up with the FCC to get a 
> >> reading from them.
> >>
> >>     
> >
> > Do this, I would like to read the next chapter, if they can get
> > certified though the PC method, I would take a look at their product.  
> >
> > Ryan
> >
> >
> >   
> 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to