Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: jst@ccnext.ucsf.edu (Joe Stong)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Apple Wants Radio Waves For Data Transmission
Message-ID: <16734@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 7 Feb 91 04:16:33 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: TELECOM Digest
Lines: 44
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 97, Message 8 of 10


[Apple computer petitions the FCC for 40 MHz in the area of 1.8 to 1.9
GHz for digital 10MB/s LANs, with a max of about 150 feet.]

A hundred and fifty feet?  What garbage!  Maybe they want to sell a
lot of repeaters, and keep me from doing my connection to the building
across the street!

I certainly wouldn't max the license out at 150 feet, 2000 feet might
be more like it, with provisions for the transmitters using only as
much power as necessary, like cellular systems.  With the frequencies
they're using, it should be easy to put a small directional antenna on
it to boost the ERP.

I'm sure I've seen portable telephones with 2000 foot ranges, even
though a majority are probably less than this.  I'd think this would
give a clue for what a maximum "personal convenience" radio connection
distance would be.

To me, wiring between buildings is MUCH more trouble than wiring
within a building.

I'm pleased that somebody's introducing an FCC petition for commercial
data useage, but this sounds much too restrictive!  If they want to
produce most of the UNITS with a 150 foot range, that's fine with me,
as long as they can legally sell higher power units with somewhat
greater ranges for the circumstances where they're needed.

BTW, someone told me about the NCR WaveLAN product.  I've asked NCR
for literature and pricing.

[As usual, please CC: me in mail if you post about this, I try to
read telecom faithfully, but I miss things ] 


Joe Stong   jst@cca.ucsf.edu


[Moderator's Note: I'd think the risks of having your data snooped on
or deliberatly messed with would be too great at 2000 feet. Some
people would deliberatly park in front of your plant to mess around
with you. 150 feet is more realistic from a security standpoint,
although of course someone could interfere with that also, but not as
easily unless they were inside your premises.