[CUWiN-Dev] Node Specifications ... Re: CU-Wireless-Dev Digest, Vol 11, Issue 13

[Sascha Meinrath]

it probably doesn't make sense to introduce a new variable for the city 
(which is only buying 10 nodes).  but i would definitely like to hear more 
about what folks think about the WRAP.2C boards.  pricing is indeed a good 
bit cheaper than soekris boards -- see:

http://www.pcengines.ch/order1.php?c=4

what do folks think about this option?  also, the WRAP box is also quite 
impressive.  so the big question is, is there a reason why CUWiN's 
software shouldn't work on this?

with this system we're be hovering close to the sub-$200 mark for nodes.

thoughts?

--sascha

On Wed, 16 Mar 2005, Patrick wrote:

> Regarding message: 5 (copied below) ... we think you might want to
> consider using WRAP.2C router boards (instead of SOEKRIS) together with
> the mini-box enclosure kits.
>
> We just got a batch of (10) WRAP.2C boards yesterday (purchased & shipped
> directly from PCEngines in Switzerland). We loaded the same software
> (linux) as we are using on the SOEKRIS 4826-50 boards and ... it works
> great ... no changes needed.
>
> The WRAP boards are a lot less expensive, and, the mini-box kit is about
> the same cost but way better than anything we've found. Check out the
> following review:
> http://socalfreenet.org/wrapbox
>
> You may want to consider different coax cable, too because the LMR400 is
> overly industrial grade in our opinion. As long as the cable run between
> the radio card and the antennas is short, you'll get about the same RF
> performance.
>
> -Patrick

-- 
Sascha Meinrath
President                 *   Project Coordinator   *   Policy Analyst
Acorn Worker Collective  ***  CU Wireless Network  ***  Free Press
www.acorncollective.com   *   www.cuwireless.net    *   www.freepress.net