With the increasing Wi-Fi congestion in my neighbourhood (all 802.11g it
seems), I've found that it's difficult to connect to my router if I take
my laptop into the garden.  However, after fiddling with a few settings in
the laptop's WiFi driver, I found that reducing the maximum bitrate from
54M down to 11M allowed me to connect and communicate reliably.  Why
should that be?  Does reducing the bitrate actually widen each bit, or
does it just open up gaps in the transmission?

-- 
Dave Farrance

In article , Dave Farrance 
says...
> 
> With the increasing Wi-Fi congestion in my neighbourhood (all 802.11g it
> seems), I've found that it's difficult to connect to my router if I take
> my laptop into the garden.  However, after fiddling with a few settings in
> the laptop's WiFi driver, I found that reducing the maximum bitrate from
> 54M down to 11M allowed me to connect and communicate reliably.  Why
> should that be?  Does reducing the bitrate actually widen each bit, or
> does it just open up gaps in the transmission?

Allows more flexibility in error correction. TBH, it might be worth 
finding another channel - 12 and 13 seem to be unused a lot mainly due 
to the fact that kit set up for US channels can't pick them up.

-- 
Conor
www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't 
looking good either. - Scott Adams

"Conor"  wrote in message 
news:MPG.24c83cf34dcc1d61989793@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article , Dave Farrance
> says...
>>
>> With the increasing Wi-Fi congestion in my neighbourhood (all 802.11g it
>> seems), I've found that it's difficult to connect to my router if I take
>> my laptop into the garden.  However, after fiddling with a few settings 
>> in
>> the laptop's WiFi driver, I found that reducing the maximum bitrate from
>> 54M down to 11M allowed me to connect and communicate reliably.  Why
>> should that be?  Does reducing the bitrate actually widen each bit, or
>> does it just open up gaps in the transmission?
>
> Allows more flexibility in error correction. TBH, it might be worth
> finding another channel - 12 and 13 seem to be unused a lot mainly due
> to the fact that kit set up for US channels can't pick them up.
>
> -- 
> Conor

CH12 & 13 are used in the UK and all equipment available to UK customers
can use those channels.  I'm more amazed you don't seem to know why the
data rate and throughput drops in proportion to the signal strength!
Have a Google and come back to have it all explained to you.
I will give you a clue, bandwidth and modulation.

On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 23:56:10 +0100, "Clive"  wrote:

>
> "Conor"  wrote in message 
>> Allows more flexibility in error correction. TBH, it might be worth
>> finding another channel - 12 and 13 seem to be unused a lot mainly due
>> to the fact that kit set up for US channels can't pick them up.
>>
>> -- 
>> Conor
>
> CH12 & 13 are used in the UK and all equipment available to UK customers
> can use those channels.

That was obviously the key to his point.

> I'm more amazed you don't seem to know why the
> data rate and throughput drops in proportion to the signal strength!
> Have a Google and come back to have it all explained to you.
> I will give you a clue, bandwidth and modulation.

Bandwidth and/or modulation vary with signal strength?  Thanks, I never
knew that.  I had wrongly presumed that the issue was SNR, but you've set
me straight on that one.

Tony

In article , Anthony R. 
Gold says...

> Bandwidth and/or modulation vary with signal strength?  Thanks, I never
> knew that.  I had wrongly presumed that the issue was SNR, but you've set
> me straight on that one.
> 
It's just another pointless post by Clive.


-- 
Conor
www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't 
looking good either. - Scott Adams