Long-Distance WiFi Device

[W32PAMELA]

Richard,
I don't think you can assume that a Bullet advertised as 1 watt has been put through any special tests to assure it is transmitting at the high end of it's specs. I know I don't.

Ubiquiti's Bullet advertising states they have "...four different models featuring up to 1000mW TX power". They are commonly called a 1 watt device. I list mine as being capable of transmitting at 800mw to 1000mw but I don't have any problem with them being advertised as putting out 1 watt.

[ArmyChief]

Bob,

However, 800mW is a 20% difference than 1000mW. I believe it is all about advertising and marketing. Like you said, you have no problem with them being advertised as 1 watt. However, what if the device (maybe not the Ubiquiti, since I have not D/L the spec sheet, nor even verified the spec sheets validity), is only one watt with a perfectly tuned, matched impedance antenna and also only inthe 802.1 b range, not g or even n. Those are the kind of things "experienced buyers" should be looking at and asking questions. Maybe not the run-of-the-mill boater whos just looking to improve his Wi-Fi...but there are those..like me who always look at the specs and test for the best options.

[hellosailor]

Chief, unless you are buying a very expensive hand tuned radio, the only spec you can rely on is the one that says "up to ##watts output power". There is always variation in components and assembly and radios are usually just "assembled" not tuned or optimized for full output. That's a labor-intensive operation that breaks the economics of the market.

The brand name doesn't matter--you're not going to get an exact rated output power from every radio, unless you pay dearly for the privilege of tuning them. Which in turn is why amateur radio operators and others are allowed and expected to analyze, modify, and tune their own radios for optimum performance. As a WiFi owner? You're not allowed to do that. Unless you're a ham radio operator, in which case, you can legally modify your WiFi equipment (at least here in the US) AND also operate it at higher legal powers than civilian market users.

Considering that the smallest significant difference in output power is generally considered to be 3 decibels, an 800mW radio would be the same as a 1000mW radio. The next step up in measurable useful power is 1600mW--much higher than the 800-1000 difference. (I disagree with the 3db jump, but that's industry standard.)

[ArmyChief]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

Chief, unless you are buying a very expensive hand tuned radio, the only spec you can rely on is the one that says "up to ##watts output power". There is always variation in components and assembly and radios are usually just "assembled" not tuned or optimized for full output. That's a labor-intensive operation that breaks the economics of the market.

HS, hope you don't mind my saying I disagree. We can agree to disagree..yes? <G> I've seen too many published specs to be false. Not only in cheaper non-named brand, but in named brands also. Although some no-name are truely name brand private labels. I agree about variations...gonna happen with mass produced...plus just the inherent variations do to individual components.

Originally Posted by hellosailor

The brand name doesn't matter--you're not going to get an exact rated output power from every radio, unless you pay dearly for the privilege of tuning them. Which in turn is why amateur radio operators and others are allowed and expected to analyze, modify, and tune their own radios for optimum performance. As a WiFi owner? You're not allowed to do that. Unless you're a ham radio operator, in which case, you can legally modify your WiFi equipment (at least here in the US) AND also operate it at higher legal powers than civilian market users.

Agreed..however, i think some are not even thinking of legalities when it comes to Wi-Fi from their Boat/RV. Also, you think the FCC is? I remember as a kid having to take a test and get a FCC license (I still remember my letters and numbers) just to talk on the CB. Not anymore. Truckers use linear amps and CB shops will "tune" your CB for distance. I just don;t see the agencies being strict on this aspect.

Originally Posted by hellosailor

Considering that the smallest significant difference in output power is generally considered to be 3 decibels, an 800mW radio would be the same as a 1000mW radio. The next step up in measurable useful power is 1600mW--much higher than the 800-1000 difference. (I disagree with the 3db jump, but that's industry standard.)

I too disagree with the 3db jump. In my opinion I bet I could prove that as little as a 1 db increase in signal stregnth could increase throughput for Wi-Fi

As always..I enjoy good conversaion

[hellosailor]

Chief, the FCC is another one of those agencies suffering from the blessings of Reagonomics. "If it doesn't make money and no one complains, DON'T FUND IT."

The FCC does in fact issue fines and penalties on a daily basis, and when they are notified of persistent violations they take enforcement actions. Yes, they have imposed major fines against trucking companies where drivers installed CB's and other radios and used them illegally. Heck, a couple of years ago they even went after a Chinese restaurant that was using illegal "cordless phones" from overseas for dispatching drivers--and interfering with legitimate service users.

If your WiFi doesn't bother anyone, they won't waste money chasing you. If on the other hand, the local hospital says "You know, over ISM-band equipment keeps getting knocked off our IT guys said the problem is traffic from the marina...." you can expect some flack. And then there are some countries where radios are policed way more stringently than in the US. Using a US-maximum-legal-power radio, then adding a high gain antenna which makes the effective power output much higher than legal...you know, in some places there are hungry folks who would just love that kind of excuse to confiscate a boat.

"As always..I enjoy good conversation " Mutually, good sir!

[richardhula]

Originally Posted by W32PAMELA

Richard,
I don't think you can assume that a Bullet advertised as 1 watt has been put through any special tests to assure it is transmitting at the high end of it's specs. I know I don't.

Ubiquiti's Bullet advertising states they have "...four different models featuring up to 1000mW TX power". They are commonly called a 1 watt device. I list mine as being capable of transmitting at 800mw to 1000mw but I don't have any problem with them being advertised as putting out 1 watt.

Thanks for info Bob. It was only when I looked closely at the Ubiquiti site that I saw the four different models mentioned & then only for the Bullet not Bullet M that I have. Do the four different Bullet's (assume 2HP) have different names or are they sold with same name & Tx power suffix?

BTW had considerable trouble setting up my Bullet M until I upgraded firmware to latest AirOS v5.2 build 5132 allowing b/g/n modes. With the shipped v 5.02, although I could see AP's there was no select button next to any encrypted ones.

The step by step pdf guide floating around for the NanoStation although very helpful is loosing relevance given its base on much earlier AirOS v 2.21. Is there a more recent guide for setting up Bullet as a Station?

Finally can anyone explain why I need to manually enter MAC address of AP I'm connecting to in "Lock to AP MAC" field on Wireless page of setup before I'm allowed to Change to new AP. It already displays this info in site survey/select window. Surprised this does not fill in automatically.

[gettinthere]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

Chief, the FCC is another one of those agencies suffering from the blessings of Reagonomics. "If it doesn't make money and no one complains, DON'T FUND IT."

The FCC does in fact issue fines and penalties on a daily basis, and when they are notified of persistent violations they take enforcement actions. Yes, they have imposed major fines against trucking companies where drivers installed CB's and other radios and used them illegally. Heck, a couple of years ago they even went after a Chinese restaurant that was using illegal "cordless phones" from overseas for dispatching drivers--and interfering with legitimate service users!

You contradict yourself, seems the fcc is taking action.

lets leave the political diatribes to smaknet

[W32PAMELA]

Richard,

The 4 Bullets referenced in the extracted quote are the Bullet 2, 2HP, 5 & 5HP. The 2 is a 100mw, 2HP is 1000mw, 5 is 200mw & the 5HP was called 1000mw but it isn't available and I'm not sure it ever was. The BM5HP came out and took its place.

Typical of Ubiquiti the firmware is a work in progress on a newly introduced piece of hardware. They get the major bugs out fairly quickly.

Ubiquiti expects the equipment to be used by wisps rather than consumers so they don't provide much in the way of instructions.

The guides in the Wiki are written by users so the only way you'll find a more recent guide is if someone writes one and submits it to the wiki.

The problem with the MAC address is a result of changes Chrome and Safari made to their browsers. I don't know the specifics. As of 2 weeks ago the available beta release of Chrome had fixed the problem but Safari still required the MAC address to be entered before you could do a change and apply. Firefox and IE will work.

[colemj]

Originally Posted by W32PAMELA

The problem with the MAC address is a result of changes Chrome and Safari made to their browsers. I don't know the specifics. As of 2 weeks ago the available beta release of Chrome had fixed the problem but Safari still required the MAC address to be entered before you could do a change and apply. Firefox and IE will work.

Is this a specific hardware/firmware issue? I have a Litestation2 running v3.4 and have never had this problem with Safari.

Mark

[W32PAMELA]

Mark,

The problem occurs in all firmware versions when using Safari 5. I believe everything worked in earlier versions. What version of Safari are you using? I've tested multiple firmware versions on Nanostations, Bullets and the LS2 board. Customers with Mac's have also reported the problem.

[hellosailor]

"You contradict yourself, seems the fcc is taking action."

You didn't read what I wrote. They take no enforcement action UNLESS IT MAKES MONEY FOR THEM. That means, no roving vans, no teams with directional antennas, nobody roaming around at large. That does not mean no enforcement, though, The Chinese restaurant was hit with a 5-figure fine, that's a PROFIT copared to the cost of sending out a few cease-and-desist letters. The typical enforcement action seeks confiscation of all illegal equipment, sometimes confiscation of a licensee's entire station, revocation of license(s), and typically a HEFTY FINE.

When you see an apparent contradiction, is often means you're missing something.

"Fines normally range from $7,500 to $10,000." from
EB - Amateur Radio Service Enforcement Actions

one of many public lists of enforcement actions taken by the FCC, in the form of "just" sending a letter out. Cost of sending a business letter? Used to be $5, probably is $25 by now.

[colemj]

Originally Posted by W32PAMELA

Mark,

The problem occurs in all firmware versions when using Safari 5. I believe everything worked in earlier versions. What version of Safari are you using? I've tested multiple firmware versions on Nanostations, Bullets and the LS2 board. Customers with Mac's have also reported the problem.

Ah, I'm still on Safari v4.x. Guess I won't be updating to v5 soon.

I also can't seem to get my LS2 to update its firmware anymore. I download the firmware and go through the update procedure, but it always comes back telling me it is a bad firmware image or something like that.

Mark

[richardhula]

Originally Posted by W32PAMELA

Richard,

The 4 Bullets referenced in the extracted quote are the Bullet 2, 2HP, 5 & 5HP. The 2 is a 100mw, 2HP is 1000mw, 5 is 200mw & the 5HP was called 1000mw but it isn't available and I'm not sure it ever was. The BM5HP came out and took its place.

Typical of Ubiquiti the firmware is a work in progress on a newly introduced piece of hardware. They get the major bugs out fairly quickly.

Ubiquiti expects the equipment to be used by wisps rather than consumers so they don't provide much in the way of instructions.

The guides in the Wiki are written by users so the only way you'll find a more recent guide is if someone writes one and submits it to the wiki.

The problem with the MAC address is a result of changes Chrome and Safari made to their browsers. I don't know the specifics. As of 2 weeks ago the available beta release of Chrome had fixed the problem but Safari still required the MAC address to be entered before you could do a change and apply. Firefox and IE will work.

Many thanks again Bob - you filled in a lot of blanks for me.

Once I get a little more proficient may try to produce a tutorial on setting up Bullet myself. My gut feeling was to set up Bullet Network as Bridge but followed advice & set to Router with DHCP, allowing my PC LAN adapter to be set back to default DHCP setting.

Interesting to note my default browser is latest Opera 10.62. When I next assemble rig will try IE8 & see if the MAC address entry requirement disappears - I'm sure it will.

[richardhula]

Originally Posted by W32PAMELA

Richard,
The problem with the MAC address is a result of changes Chrome and Safari made to their browsers. I don't know the specifics. As of 2 weeks ago the available beta release of Chrome had fixed the problem but Safari still required the MAC address to be entered before you could do a change and apply. Firefox and IE will work.

Now had chance to use IE8 to view Bullet's setup menu. Sadly it still requires MAC address of selected station to to be entered manually.

Fairly sure now this is not a browser issue, & can only think there was a regression in latest firmware or it hasn't been fully implemented with the Bullet M.

This issue is particularly strange because the security mode (if any) is detected & displayed automatically (before manual entry of MAC address).

[rebel heart]

I'm rocking the Alfa with a 32' usb cable. Works terrific.

Rebel Heart - Sailing, cruising, liveaboard blog and website - Eric's Blog - long range wifi for the*boat