Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (
More info?)
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 23:33:47 -0700, "Alesandra"
<rubyebbyrdNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Cisco 350 is 802.11b. I don't need g today, but I think the system should
>incorporate g. 1200 system looks a bit expensive for a 3 or 4 node home
>system. I just don't know what I'm buying for the extra cost.
Sorry, my brain wasn't in gear. The Cisco 350 and 1200 hardware is
for my commercial customers. It's overkill for a home user, although
used hardware is often available for tolerable prices. The major
advantages of such hardware is that it has remote management
capabilties (SNMP) and a real operating system (IOS).
Also, you may have a potential problem running a mixed 802.11b and
802.11g system. 802.11g slows down somewhat in the presence of
802.11b radios in order to maintain 802.11b compatibility. It's only
a problem if you're doing high speed file copies between your machines
or a local server. Data from the internet via a DSL or Cable modem
will be slower than what 802.11g will run at such speeds, so you won't
see much of an effect. If possible, you may need to upgrade the R40
to 802.11g. However, I would try it with the existing 802.11b adapter
first as it will probably be adequate for the intended purpose.
>"Jeff Liebermann" <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote in message
>news
t30j0ptd4c6c9avd95ero0k7egeu9sskp@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 20:16:28 -0700, "Alesandra"
>> <rubyebbyrdNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Disclaimer: These aren't the best. They're just what I've played
>> with and kinda like. For my customers with money, I tend to buy Cisco
>> 350 and 1200 systems.
>
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS 831-336-2558