[CWN-Summit] Re: CWN-Summit Digest, Vol 2, Issue 5

[Stelios Valavanis]

yeah it figures. atheros has a more reasonable modification that involves 
setting the tolerance threshold for lower signal strength. again it's not 
standard and the benefit is incremental but they make it sound impressive.

On Sunday 05 September 2004 04:13 pm, Jack Unger wrote:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2004 04:40:51 -0500
> > From: David Young <dyoung at pobox.com>
> > Subject: [CWN-Summit] Re: does anybody know about D2D wifi?
> > To: cwn-summit at cuwireless.net
> > Message-ID: <20040905094051.GZ12680 at che.ojctech.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> >
> >>Message: 1
> >>Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 19:21:53 -0500
> >>From: Stelios Valavanis <stel at onShore.com>
> >>Subject: [CWN-Summit] does anybody know about D2D wifi?
> >>To: cwn-summit at chambana.net
> >>Message-ID: <200409021921.53203.stel at onShore.com>
> >>Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="us-ascii"
> >>
> >>these guys claim double the distance using their radios. what's the word
> >> on it?
> >>
> >>www.parkervision.com
> >
> > Stelios,
> >
> > Their claims are not outrageous, but they are vague---"up to one mile",
> > oh c'mon!  The whitepaper on D2D that I read was kooky market-ese.
> > I will wait for an independent comparison of their product with a field
> > of competing products before final judgment, but I strongly suspect that
> > D2D is hype.
> >
> > Dave
>
> I second Dave's conclusions. After reading the D2D White Paper, I
> concluded that either:
>
> 1. Parkervision is technically confused,
> or
> 2. Parkervision accepts that trying to confuse their potential customers
> is acceptable, or
> 3. Parkervision's public relations firm has only vague clues about how
> D2D works.
>
> "All of the above" is also a possibility.
>
> jack

-- 
_______________________________________
stel valavanis  http://www.onshore.com/