Talk:Wireless network/Archives/2012

Random comment on 802.11

802.11 refers to a family of specifications developed by the IEEE for wireless LAN technology. 802.11 specifies an over-the-air interface between a wireless client and a base station or between two wireless clients. The IEEE accepted the specification in 1997. There are several specifications in the 802.11 family:

802.11 -- applies to wireless LANs and provides 1 or 2 Mbps transmission in the 2.4 GHz band using either frequency hopping spread spectrum (FHSS) or direct sequence spread spectrum (DSSS). 802.11a -- an extension to 802.11 that applies to wireless LANs and provides up to 54 Mbps in the 5GHz band. 802.11a uses an orthogonal frequency division multiplexing encoding scheme rather than FHSS or DSSS. 802.11b (also referred to as 802.11 High Rate or Wi-Fi) -- an extension to 802.11 that applies to wireless LANS and provides 11 Mbps transmission (with a fallback to 5.5, 2 and 1 Mbps) in the 2.4 GHz band. 802.11b uses only DSSS. 802.11b was a 1999 ratification to the original 802.11 standard, allowing wireless functionality comparable to Ethernet. 802.11g -- applies to wireless LANs and provides 20+ Mbps in the 2.4 GHz band.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.119.84.49 (talk • contribs) 01:17, 27 June 2006

So, what is the point? see the articles on those subjects. W Nowicki (talk) 22:00, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation - split the article

This article is constantly going back and forth between computer network and phone network, I'm thinking it would be better off as disambiguation between Wireless phone network and Wireless Computer Network. Either that or this article should become more generalized. --Fittysix 18:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Disagree. There are wireless networks that are inbetween these two, for example Bluetooth, GPRS, broadcasting networks, etc. Did I solve the controversy by having the following definition: a telecommunication or computer network that... ? Mange01 22:53, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I would agree that there needs to be some disambiguation somewhere and that the distinction should be made and the correct terminology used wherever the context is not clear. If there is a conflict or misunderstanding possible there should be two separate articles. For example the term "wireless" may be used to refer to many forms of wireless communications and remote control, not just radio. For this reason I made the article at Wireless a separate article from Wireless communication, since wireless remote control and other subjects fall under the general category of "wireless". I beleive that the ambiguation comes from the shortening of the correct terminology to accommodate ease of speech in fields of study where the meaning is clear from the context and that this should not take place in an encyclopedia. When it does the corresponding articles become too long and confusing. --mlewis000 19:23, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

If there are not to be two articles then, as Fittysix stated, the article should become more generalized and the opening paragraph should make it clear in layman's terms that this is a generalized article and should explain any possible confusion or ambiguous usages of the term (See the opening paragraph in Wireless). --mlewis000 19:43, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Revisiting this many years later, the distinction between "phone" networks and "computer" networks is blurry, with the iPad and iPhone and all those devices. So glad to see it kept together. Alas, much of the text is a bit chatty and sourced to random web sites. Generally details should push down into specific articles, and this should be a general overview with many wikilinks to specific ones. More general article is Wireless (Wireless communication now goes there). Phone stuff seems to be in Mobile telephony and Cellular network. Others are more specific, like Wireless LAN etc. now an odd one is Wireless broadband not sure what to do with that one? Merge here or rename Wireless Internet access? So is Wireless local loop I suppose. W Nowicki (talk) 22:20, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Wireless Ethernet

I changed Wireless Ethernet to be redirected to IEEE 802.11 since it refers to the specific protocol and not wireless networks in general.--Antsh 16:46, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

As far back as World War 2?

The 'Uses' section says wireless networks "...have had a significant impact on the world as far back as World War 2.", citing military networks sending information behind enemy lines. However computers barely existed in WW2, and certainly weren't networked, wirelessly or otherwise. I think this passage is referring to noncomputerized military radio communication networks. Maybe someone could replace this with correct information on when the first wireless computer networks were built. --Chetvorno^TALK 05:55, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

There caould also be a confusion with the England - France cross-channel microwave transmissions that Marconi carried out in the 1930s. Francis E Williams (talk) 15:53, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Suggested additions to W-MAN section

If you're going to include WiMAX in this, I would suggest that you could also add in all the mobile telephony technologies (CDMA, GSM etc). The range of WiMAX is largely determined by the spectrum that it utilized and since most of the 'good' spectrum is already taken by the incumbent telco's who are using the GSM, LTE platform. In an urban environment A typical WiMAX installation has similar coverage to a regular cellphone tower.DrBob127 (talk) 02:27, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Please go ahead and do the research, if you need any help with writing it up, place the content here on the talk page, and I`ll be more than happy to help you get it ready for inclusion. Francis E Williams (talk) 15:49, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Locating vandals

"John loves Conor" who lives here [1]

Security issues

At this moment, the article says "Though WEP does block some intruders, the security problems have caused some businesses to continue using wired networks until a more suitable security system can be introduced."

I think the author's intent is that it "caused some businesses to discontinue using (etc)".

I don't claim to understand wireless security, which is why I haven't edited the article (and also why I have a wired network at home, and why my work bans use of wireless in the office). But if someone who does understand it could check this ... TIA. (Some clearer links to appropriate security articles/ HOWTOs would be appreciated too.)

Aidan Karley (talk) 13:21, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Home wireless network

This article is rather skimpy in general. I think information on setting up a home network esp is justified. Businesses can justify hiring personnel to set up and equip a wireless network. Could use some detail on home wireless which may be as simple as connecting a laptop to a printer in the next room without a cable.1archie99 (talk) 18:44, 12 November 2011 (UTC)