On 6/26/2012 5:39 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
> On 6/26/2012 2:25 PM, Roger (K8RI) wrote:
>> ne problem...the wireless is too slow by far and requires more
>> attention to security. Apparently more than half of personal Wi-fi
>> networks/connections are unsecure.
> Speed is relative to your individual needs.
True and 5 computers with nigh onto 40,000 high res photos,
programming...etc equates to about 6 Terabytes each.
> My wireless network is
> pretty fast. It's a dual band system, and the router supports both bands
> simultaneously.
Likewise. I have the fastest I could get but even at 100 feet signal is
poor. OTOH even with strong signals it's a long way from catching up to
the CAT 6 network.
> Speed will depend on the wireless hardware on each end
> (including the antennas and the path attenuation) and any QRM and/or
> multipath.
True, but even at its best it comes no where near the wired gigabit
network. This is not a problem for uploading photos from point and
shoot or cell phone cameras, but with pro cameras, or one computer
talking to another it can be a real bottleneck. I try to keep two of
the computers backed up to two others as well as a rolling archive.
When storing images as jpgs it's surprising how many get corrupted each
month. NEFs and TIFFs don't seem to have that problem.
Most would not notice the difference but more than one BU at a time
(using switches) still brings things to a crawl.
It's amazing that when I turn the Wi-Fi on how many unsecured networks I
can see on the screen. If I know the people with the network, I explain
how open they are. Often behind that open network are open computers.
FTP mining ground heaven.
73
Roger (K8RI)
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
>
>
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
|