sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com

Google Groups

Fox's Mercantile <jdangus@att.net>: Oct 13 06:17PM -0500 > free to find out why some of us don't do that. I tire of > your stupidity.   > NT   Bwahahaha, I could have sworn you kill filed me dear. Obviously you lied about that too.   Let's see how you talk your way out of this.     -- "I am a river to my people." Jeff-1.0 WA6FWi http:foxsmercantile.com

Fox's Mercantile <jdangus@att.net>: Oct 13 06:19PM -0500 > The OP is free to find out why some of us don't do that.   The answer is obvious. You're hack. Too lazy to do a job correctly and you find infinite ways to justify your position.   -- "I am a river to my people." Jeff-1.0 WA6FWi http:foxsmercantile.com

Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com>: Oct 13 09:12AM -0700 On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 21:03:20 -0500, Paul in Houston TX >joints. If the plastic tabs that push the micro switches are worn down >then use your soldering iron to add more of the same type of plastic. >It will be an ABS mix. Should take no more than 20 minutes.     Each to his own. Mice are very cheap these days. I wouldn't dream of spending 20 minutes, the cost of new microswitches, soldering iron, and solder to save $20 or so for a new mouse.

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>: Oct 13 11:25PM +0100 In message <qnvvmj$kqe$1@dont-email.me>, Paul in Houston TX >Ken Blake wrote: [] >> Each to his own. Mice are very cheap these days. I wouldn't dream of >> spending 20 minutes, the cost of new microswitches, soldering iron, >> and solder to save $20 or so for a new mouse.   That's assuming the model the OP likes is still available; I think he thought it wasn't, but someone here found them.   >:) I like fixing things. It's sort of a hobby. >Ordering a new one for $12 is not nearly as much fun.   I share that hobby: I'll certainly spend more time than a thing is worth trying to fix it, if I think the fault is something simple: the throwaway philosophy bugs me. I'll admit, I give up a lot sooner now than I used to, though. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf   The motto of the Royal Society is: 'Take nobody's word for it'. Scepticism has value. - Brian Cox, RT 2015/3/14-20

Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com>: Oct 13 09:07AM -0700 On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 20:59:49 -0500, Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca> wrote:     >I should mention also that battery life is really not an issue anymore, >I have a Logitech M510 that goes a year on batteries, My new Logitech >M705 is advertized to go 3 years on a pair of alkaline AA cells.       The mouse I use and like very much is the Anker 2.4G Wireless Vertical Ergonomic Optical Mouse ($19.99 from Amazon). It's my first wireless mouse. I've had it for about four months, and I just had to replace its batteries.   It's very different from the common horizontal mice; it's much more comfortable.

Paul <nospam@needed.invalid>: Oct 13 08:33PM -0400 Rene Lamontagne wrote: > sticking up where the wheel should be? > or is it an actuator for the center button?   > Rene   The IBM mouse above, the microswitches look "normal" sized to me.   The thing in the center, I had to use the mouse cover to guess at the function. It looks like a rubber nubbin, and that would make the thing on the PCB, some sort of 2D strain gauge.   But there's also what looks like a LED next to it, and the LED is not pointed in any specific direction. It could be for illuminating the rubber nubbin, as I don't see any other function it could carry out, considering the angle it is pointed.   This isn't the same item, but it's along the same lines. "Trackpoint mouse"   https://www.microsoft.com/buxtoncollection/detail.aspx?id=121   https://www.microsoft.com/buxtoncollection/detail.aspx?id=120   Paul

Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 13 08:51PM On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 11:33:50 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:   > Half a day? Not me. I'd spend the $20 and just buy a new one.   A lot of people would rather make money than spend time with their kids.   Some of us enjoy fixing things for lots of reasons. o Sometimes, it just fits right - in our hands, for example.   It's not always only about money. o If it's only about money, it's shallow (IMHO).   For example, I enjoy fixing my car - and the cars of my kids - where I change their oil, replace the clutch, do the brakes, overhaul the cooling system, and even select, purchase, mount and balance their tires.   When you do stuff like that - you LEARN a lot. o You learn a lot that others don't learn who are only out for the money.   For example, I enjoy setting up WiFi access points, for free, for my neighbors. I learn a lot when I do that. In fact, while there's an ongoing thread on that very topic, those who know the least seem to have infested that thread the most in the last few hours.   The fact remains, if the OP wants to fix his mouse ... then we should try to help him (if we can). It's not "advice" to say to pay for a new mouse.   Do you think even for a second that the OP doesn't know that? o If the OP was _that_ shallow - he wouldn't have asked the question.

Paul <nospam@needed.invalid>: Oct 13 05:20PM -0400 Rene Lamontagne wrote: >> <https://i.postimg.cc/5tr2SxsL/mouse02.jpg>   > Is that one of the mice that came over on the Ark? Male or Female? :-)   > Rene   That's a one-screw mouse, so it can't be that old.   *******   This article, has a picture of the Hawley mouse.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_mouse   And that was my first mouse. Apparently made around 1975. Steel balls on the outside. A little small for your hand (because it doesn't have a scroll wheel or give a rats ass about ergonomy). And your next problem would be, if you found an old one, the interface is neither USB nor PS/2, and instead, gives "pulses" for +/-X and +/-Y. So you need to whip together some counter circuits to make something a bit better for your OS to use.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:HawleyMarkIImice.jpg   But still, a nice mouse, and not surpassed until the second generation of optical mice meant never ever again having to worry about what the mouse was resting on. Or how dirty the place was...   Paul

Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 13 04:24AM On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 02:19:33 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:   > It _may_ be possible to dismantle and repair the switches themselves, > but I'd not like to try.   Usenet is a community potluck where everyone chips in where they can.   I didn't read all the details in the thread, where my value add is that o I can simply vouch for fixing mice by taking them apart (carefully).   My suggestion to the OP is to take the mouse apart, like I did here: <https://i.postimg.cc/v83WFn2v/mouse01.jpg>   And then clean everything up and look for something broken: <https://i.postimg.cc/5tr2SxsL/mouse02.jpg>   If nothing else, it's useful to see how the thing works inside.

Ralph Mowery <rmowery28146@earthlink.net>: Oct 13 02:28PM -0400 In article <p2j6qed71pl09cs4953iauhhsnsjm1fbgc@4ax.com>, Ken@invalid.news.com says...   > Each to his own. Mice are very cheap these days. I wouldn't dream of > spending 20 minutes, the cost of new microswitches, soldering iron, > and solder to save $20 or so for a new mouse.   I am with you Ken. Some things are just not worth the time and effort. I can see that if someone really likes a particular mouse it is worth it to them to tak half a day repairing a $ 20 item.

Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca>: Oct 13 04:35PM -0500 On 2019-10-13 4:20 p.m., Paul wrote: > again having to worry about what the mouse was resting > on. Or how dirty the place was...   >    Paul The micro switches are quite large compared to now, Is that a Pot sticking up where the wheel should be? or is it an actuator for the center button?   Rene

Patrick <Patrick@invalid.invalid>: Oct 13 08:57AM +0100 On 13/10/2019 08:55, Patrick wrote:   > Two of the screws holding it together are hidden under the 'feet' as > shown here; > http://cordes.blog.fc2.com/blog-entry-299.html   And another screw is hidden under the label !!

geoff <geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org>: Oct 13 08:21PM +1300 On 13/10/2019 5:41 pm, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote: > device, for example), please see JF Mezei thread posted today for details.   > o IOS 13 support for USB devices > <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/kiBd5O6_O1w>   Um, isn't that always in effect whatever any digital camera does anyway ? Or did the Lightning connect thing somehow cripple IOS wrt read/writability of pix from external devices ?   Apple, crippling things ? Naaa - not possible.   geoff

Spamblk <ZapSpam@SpamMeNot.invalid>: Oct 14 01:59AM nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in > why their products are so popular.   > copying photos from an iphone to a computer doesn't need a lightning > cable.   The Linux ifuse (fuse = Filesystem in USErspace) utility mounts an apple Iphone FS running IOS 9 perfectly well. IOS 13 not needed.       ifuse --help   Usage: ifuse MOUNTPOINT [OPTIONS] Mount directories of an iOS device locally using fuse.   -o opt,[opt...] mount options -u, --udid UDID mount specific device by its 40-digit device UDID -h, --help print usage information -V, --version print version -d, --debug enable libimobiledevice communication debugging --documents APPID mount 'Documents' folder of app identified by APPID --container APPID mount sandbox root of an app identified by APPID --root mount root file system (jailbroken device required)   Example:   $ ifuse /media/iPhone --root   This mounts the root filesystem of the first attached device on this computer in the directory /media/iPhone.

Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 13 04:41AM FYI ...   Since, with freeware, you can instantly turn any iOS mobile phone or iPad into a read/write USB stick ... suitable for copying photos taken on that iOS device (or for copying feature-length movies over USB to that iOS device, for example), please see JF Mezei thread posted today for details.   o IOS 13 support for USB devices <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/kiBd5O6_O1w>

Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 15 04:09PM On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 02:28:27 -0700, Johann Beretta wrote: > It doesn't do someone following the post any favors to let > incorrect terms slip by.   Hi Johann Beretta,   Johann, let's be realistic since we must assume "adults" live here. <http://tinyurl.com/alt-home-repair> <http://tinyurl.com/alt-internet-wireless> <http://tinyurl.com/sci-electronics-repair>   Let's take advantage of your skills to FURTHER our capabilities! o What would you suggest for a home computer to extend the wifi range?   Let's assume you only want to go another hundred yards (meters) or so. o Or, maybe, you want the computer to connect to an AP only a mile away   What would you suggest to extend the Wi-Fi range of, oh, a typical desktop or laptop, to a hundred meters (or to a mile, kilometer) further from where it is currently maxing out?   Using your knowledge and intellect, Johann, what can you offer the team, by way of ADDED ADULT TECHNICAL VALUE that furthers their ability to connect to access points that they can't currently connect to, today?   If I'm using "decibels", and if someone on those three ngs doesn't know what they mean, and if they're older than, oh, say, fifth grade, then there is no hope for them anyway.   Seriously. o What are they doing posting their drivel about decibels on those ngs, if they're that ignorant of even the most basic of electronic terms.   They should just shut up if (a) they don't care to have this kind of power at home (b) they're so ignorant that the only thing they can find are typos (c) all they do (endlessly, day in and day out), is troll etc.   If they quibble about a misplaced "i" versus the "m", there's no hope for them to ever add any adult value to any topic on this newsgroup, Johann.   Seriously. o Only a moron would be confused by "decibel" in place of "dBm" or "dBi".   It's like quibbling over "yards" and "meters" when it doesn't matter.   A moron can't possibly add value o And certainly not by playing silly games around "radio" or "decibel".   You do NOT seem to be a moron - so why don't you use your intellect to ADD VALUE to the conversation, so that OTHERS can do what you and I can do.   What can we do, Johann? o We can connect WiFi to access points that are much farther away o With that, we can connect Ethernet to those distant access points o For about the costs as people are paying today o If they just knew how.   Specifically: o If they knew what the potential distances might be (if they need them) o And, if they knew what equipment to buy to get those distances o Where this equipment is not likely to be found in local box stores.   I consider that knowledge good added value. o If you don't consider that knowledge added value, then say so.   But please don't play childish games around typos & common terms.   > It's not quibbling to point out stuff that's patently incorrect.   I repeat that you seem to be the only one here who knows anything, so I just want to ask you to ADD ON-TOPIC ADULT VALUE where you can.   If you find a "real" mistake, then, by all means, state your claim. o I'm not afraid of facts because facts form the basis of my beliefs   However, don't play silly childish games around the use of the word "radio" or "decibel" or "antenna" or "aerial", etc., since everyone KNOWS what we mean when we talk colloquially about this stuff.   If they don't know, then they're simply too ignorant to educate anyway. o I ask those morons to stop wasting our time on childish semantic drivel   Bear in mind I set up WISP, along with my neighbors, for about 100 homes, where, trust me, here in the mountains above Silicon Valley, we're _all_ extremely well educated ... and where the fact is, NOBODY plays silly games around decibels and the like. We don't even say the "negative", since we KNOW that it's always going to be negative for example.   Only here, on Usenet, filled to the brim with poorly educated children, do they incessantly quibble about silly stupid semantic games (including thinkos and typos like accidentally switching the 'i' and 'm', when it doesn't matter in the conversation since only a fool would be confused.   > Microwave transceivers of the type we are discussing have > outputs measured in dBm, not dB.   Stop it Johann.   Just stop.   Playing silly games isn't going to help anyone.   Be an adult.   I can tell you know more than almost anyone who posted to date, Johann. o Don't waste that knowledge on silly childish games Johann.   Try to use your knowledge to further what people here can do, Johann.   There are rarely people on this ng who know anything Johann, where you, and people like Jeff Liebermann for example, can easily add more value than I can.   But you're not going to add value by playing silly semantic games. o It's like arguing that a tire isn't a wheel when someone says o "How can I balance my tires at home?"   It's childish.   But worse - it's a complete waste of your otherwise appreciable skills. o It's like quibbling over yards and meters, when it doesn't matter.   > gives the goddamn baseline reference. 20 db means nothing. 20dbm means a > whole lot. How can someone know how to convert 20 dbm to milliwatts if > nobody gives the milliwatt reference?   See above. o Everyone knows all this.   If, on a rooftop, I ask someone to "help me aim this antenna, will ya?" I don't expect endless quibbling about antennas having a radio attached.   Everyone knows this stuff. o Our goal, Johann, is to help them understand the stuff they don't know.   Which, as I see it for this thread: o The distance that people have reported to connect to WiFi APs o The ability to do that with any computer that has an Ethernet port o Using equipment that costs about as much as what they're paying today o But which is not sold in the typical consumer box stores they frequent   If you think the "added value" of this thread is to explain the difference between a "decibel" and a "dBm", then, by all means, start your lecture.   But don't position that lecture as a "correction", since everyone _knows_ what the distinction is in colloquial speech, Johann. Everyone.   > terms? I'd be highly suspicious of their training and I sure as hell > wouldn't let someone operate on me who kept referring to my tibia as a > cranium or something :)   Aurgh. You insist on adding _negative_ value, when you can simply add positive value by suggesting even _better_ ways to get WiFi distance at home.   This is the datasheet for one of my radios, Johann: <https://dl.ubnt.com/datasheets/rocketm/RocketM_DS.pdf> Do you see the letters "dbi" _anywhere_ in that spec sheet, Johann? o There are lots of "dbm" but no "dbi", Johann.   This is the datasheet for one of my antennas, Johann: <https://dl.ubnt.com/datasheets/rocketdish/rd_ds_web.pdf> Do you see the letters "dbm" _anywhere_ in that spec sheet, Johann? o There are lots of "dbi" but no "dbm", Johann.   Do you think, even for a moment, that I don't know why, Johann? o Let's stop this silly game playing, Johann   If you want to start a lecture on the distinction between a decibel and a dBi and a dBm, then, by all means, start your lecture.   But do not position it as a "correction", since I said, from the start, I'm using colloquial terms - and - I told you - in this post - that we are all very well educated in this stuff Johann - so you should use your appreciable education to further our knowledge.   Using your knowledge and intellect, Johann, what can you offer the team, by way of ADDED ADULT TECHNICAL VALUE that furthers their ability to connect to access points that they can't currently connect to, today?   > You're passing yourself off as some sort of expert, from what I have > read of your posts, but I have serious reservations about taking you > seriously if you don't even know the lingua fraca of the industry.   Jesus Christ, Johann. Stop playing silly games. o It's like quibbling over tires and wheels when it doesn't matter.   I'm asking others how far they connect via WiFi, and we received GOOD answers from those others (one was up to 12 kilometers (7 miles), where, I think you're smart enough to know that double that distance is possible with this equipment we've been discussing (at both ends, of course).   If the equipment is only at one end, then it's drastically limited by the weaker equipment, of course, but long distances are still possible.   One part of this thread's goal is to let the "adults" on this newsgroup realize how far they can connect WiFi at the same costs as they pay now for equipment.   For example, it amazes me that people buy "repeaters" in the local box stores, when, for about the same price, they can buy this Mikrotik or Ubiquiti equipment that gives them from ten times to a hundred times more power (and hence, correspondingly, more distance).   > I've been in this business, professionally, for almost a decade.   Ah. I knew you had more knowledge than anyone yet, who has posted!   Good. I like smart people. I can learn from smart people.   Let's spend our energies on ADVANCING our knowledge, instead of playing silly little semantic games. Shall we?   What would you suggest to the users here, for example, if they needed to extend their WiFi range of their desktop computer, to, oh, let's say, 100 yards (100 meters)?   HINT: Do not quibble that a yard and a meter are not exactly equivalent!   > I'd > barely rate myself as an expert (maybe more of a really skilled > journeyman).   I could INSTANTLY tell, from your post, that you knew more than anyone else who has posted yet, simply based on the astute observations you made.   Let's take advantage of your skills to FURTHER our capabilities! o What would you suggest for a home computer to extend the wifi range?   Let's assume you only want to go another hundred yards (meters) or so. o Or, maybe, you want the computer to connect to an AP only a mile away   What would you suggest to extend the Wi-Fi range of, oh, a typical desktop or laptop, to a hundred meters (or to a mile, kilometer) further from where it is currently maxing out?   > one minor indication they have a basic understanding of what they're > talking about. The information they contribute pads out the rest, but > they start with the basics and get them correct.   Let's take advantage of that adult technical value, if it exists, Johann. o What would they suggest for a home computer to extend the wifi range?   Let's assume we only want to go another hundred yards (meters) or so. o Or, maybe, we want the computer to connect to an AP only a mile away   What would you (or they) suggest to extend the Wi-Fi range of, oh, a typical desktop or laptop PC, to a hundred meters (or to a mile, kilometer) further from where it is currently maxing out?   Silence?   -- When people stop playing childish games, they can focus on adding value.

Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 16 02:59AM On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 16:25:00 -0400, Paul wrote:   > I wonder what the EIRP of that contraption is ?   Hi Paul,   You're generally purposefully helpful, as am I, where both of us like to help people do what we can do (it's why I've written so many tutorials on Usenet, for example), and, where we both learn from others who share their knowledge, in that process.   Hence, I'm happy to answer all your questions (if I can). o I always mirror the implied intent of every post (by strategic design).   You picked out a low power but conveniently small 1-piece contraption. <https://i.postimg.cc/CLBXc080/antenna03.jpg>   I looked but it doesn't actually say on the outside the model, where it's been so long that I've had it that I forgot exactly what it is (and I don't want to log in as I'd have to connect it directly to a laptop, etc.), and there are so many different PowerBeam models anyway ... but it's likely a powerbeam PBE-M5-400 (or similar) where we can look at the specs here: <https://dl.ubnt.com/qsg/PBE-M5-400/PBE-M5-400_EN.html>   Which shows that nice little $100 5GHz unit to be about 26 dBm transmit power plus about 25 dBi antenna gain, for an EIRP of about 51 decibels, which isn't too bad for less than a hundred bucks. <https://www.ispsupplies.com/Ubiquiti-PBE-M5-400>   Bear in mind a "typical" SOHO router for about the same price, is, oh, I don't know, something like 20 decibels if you're lucky (if I'm wrong, it's OK to ream me with facts).   Think about the HUGE difference in power, where each set of 10 decibels is ten times the power, so 51 - 20 is about 30 decibels different, where that's 10 x 10 x 10 is about one thousand times the power of that typical SOHO router ... at about the same price.   BTW, those numbers seem kind of high to me - but I took 'em out of that spec sheet - where I always expect the power to be an order of magnitude or even two orders of magnitude better than your typical SOHO router - but not three orders of magnitude.   > It's a clever scheme from that perspective.   There are lots of similar one-piece models, where this one inside contains: o CPU Atheros MIPS 74 Kc, 560 MHz, 64 MB DDR2, 8 MB flash o Network 1 x 10/100/1000 Ethernet port, 5725 to 5850 MHz, 150+Mbs <https://www.ui.com/airmax/powerbeam/>   > Is that intended for unlicensed or licensed operation ?   Nobody breaks the rules with these things, for a whole bunch of reasons. I could list the reasons, but they're all good reasons, so I won't bother.   You just power them up, and set them up like you do any router today. o Set them up as an access point (e.g., to paint the pool), or, o Set them up as your computer network interface (I do both). <https://i.postimg.cc/6QJqK6Cj/desktop02.jpg>   That's kind of the point of this thread, which is to let people know that this kind of power (many times what they have today for sure) is available to them, if they need it, at about the same price they paid for their existing stuff.   You just have to know what to buy - and where to buy it: <https://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-PBE-M5-400-2-pack-PowerBeam-AirMAX/dp/B00UZ03UUW>   > Seems a bit peppy for unlicensed operation (with a name like PowerBeam).   Actually, that's just marketing. <https://www.ui.com/airmax/powerbeam/>   What's nice about these units is that they're really small, light, easy to install, nothing to connect (it just snaps together), etc.   And, of course, if those specs are right, you get up to a thousand times the power of your typical repeater you buy in the box store, for just about the same price (about $100).   Let me know if you have other questions. o The really powerful stuff on my shelf are the rockets, by the way. <https://i.postimg.cc/XJChDCPr/spare-access-points.jpg>   Note: It's a pleasure to move forward, technically, instead of having to deal with explaining that a decibel is a decibel and that a radio is a radio, and that an antenna is an antenna, etc, since that's just a waste of everyone's time (as only those who can't contribute any adult value whatsoever always seem to be the ones who complain about that silly stuff).   -- The main point is that all this power is available to all of us, at the same cost as what we've been using up until now - where - to get this power - you simply need to know what to buy (the setup is trivial).

Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 16 03:17AM On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 12:38:24 -0700, Johann Beretta wrote:     > Of course it's more powerful than anything anybody has experienced. It's > illegal.   > Are you actually advocating for this?   Hi Johann Beretta,   Now you're back to your silly childish games, where people who play silly childish games do it because they can't add any adult technical value.   BTW, by design, my posts always mirror the implied intent of the poster o Where your implied intent is sinister   And dead wrong. (AFAIK)   For example, what do you think the EIRP is of this device Paul asked about? <https://dl.ubnt.com/qsg/PBE-M5-400/PBE-M5-400_EN.html>   I never mind facts, so if you actually have facts for that wild-assed guess of yours, you're welcome to 'ream me with facts' as I'm fond of saying.   I'm not a bullshitter Johann - so if you believe my facts are wrong, then just show where they are wrong, as it seems, from your own statements, that you may not even understand the basics of the business you 'say' you're in.   There is no way to violate the law if you use the equipment shown.   I repeat: As far as I know, there's no way to violate the law, according to what I've read on the Ubiquiti support site (we could dig it up if you wish to argue - but you have to supply more than just a wild guess on your part as your supporting facts for your sinister accusation).   Johann - are you just trying to play silly games here on Usenet? o Or do you have adult technical value to add to help everyone?   Your choice.   To my knowledge, the Ubiquiti support people say there is no way to violate the law if the unit is used with the equipment it was designed for.   If you are as technical as you 'say' you are, then you already know that the router software is set up "by country", where you are forced to pick the country upon initial setup, where, since the US has the most power anyway (as far as I can tell), you just pick the US if you're in the US.   Anyway, the main point of this entire thread is not for the trolls to have a grand time playing their incessant silly worthless games... but to edify the users here that; a. They can get ten to one hundred (or more) the power of what they have b. To either paint a far off area of the yard (like, oh, say, the pool) c. Or to use as a 'network interface' out your computer Ethernet port d. Where the setup is trivial (it's like setting up any router) e. And, most importantly, where the cost is about the same.   The purpose of this thread is to let people know this, and, to find out, from those adults who exist on this Usenet potluck, what success they've had doing so.   If you have an ADULT technical question, please feel free to ask.   -- If you're merely a worthless troll - please stop playing childish games around silly semenatics which simply prove you own the brain of a child.

Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 16 04:32AM On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 03:06:46 -0000 (UTC), Dan Purgert wrote:   > Usually around 30. But that's because that's the legal limit for point > to multipoint intentional radiators. You can only run your setup at the > EIRP you've stated if it's point-to-point.   Hi Dan Purgert,   Thanks for reminding us the rules are different for... o Point-to-MultiPoint [e.g., 2.4GHz is 36dBm (4watts)] o Point-to-Point [e.g., 2.4GHz could be as high as 158 dB] And... o Frequency (e.g., 5GHz has different rules per frequency band) Based on o Antenna gain (i.e., for Point-to-Point but not for multipoint) As described here: <https://www.air802.com/fcc-rules-and-regulations.html> o And, of course, by country, as shown here: <https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/wireless/wcs/3-2/configuration/guide/wcscfg32/wcscod.pdf>   But, it seems the US is always the best anyway... o Are they?   For example, for fixed Point-to-Point it's 1 watt (+30 dBm) minus 1 dB for each 3 dB of antenna gain greater than 6 dBi <FCC Part 15.247(b) and (c), and Part 15.407(a)>   So it's not just a single number. o But it's my understanding that the radio won't "let" you exceed limits (That understanding is literally from conversing with Ubiquiti support.)   > Usually around 30. But that's because that's the legal limit for point > to multipoint intentional radiators. You can only run your setup at the > EIRP you've stated if it's point-to-point.   BTW, I said I wouldn't respond to trolls in this thread, but your post "seemed" purposefully helpful, where I'm always glad to be reamed by facts (I _love_ facts - and - in fact - I live and breathe by sharing and up taking facts), so I decided to take the risk by responding to what seems like a purposefully helpful post of yours above, in your implied intent).   I just searched since we had covered the fact that routers are atrociously weak (they won't even tell you the power in most cases - you have to go back to the FCC documents in many cases).   The first hit is this one: o Power Levels and Amount of Radiation <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.internet.wireless/Zux5NJVPNnc/0pOjYSFB4SUJ> But that didn't help much but explain what we already quibbled about.   This second hit looked more promising o How to calculate increase of home wireless router range? <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.internet.wireless/xMlrkG1V1L0/WP4Upe_SFxgJ>   Where there was an interesting rule of thumb which can help people here figure out much power they need.   For example, it was stated in that thread: o 3 dB increases the range by 140% And, it was stated in that thread: o 6 dB doubles the range So if you needed double the range, something like o 10 dB will get you a reliable connection   Later on in that thread, these numbers came out for typical routers: <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.internet.wireless/xMlrkG1V1L0/oUpjdhs-tesJ> o "typical models seem to run between 15 dBm and 20 dBm"   That thread said the classic WRT54G router is 28 mWatts (about 14 dBm) <https://www.rapidtables.com/electric/dBm.html>   Where this seemed to be a good rule of thumb for value calculation: a) Power gain = Power2/Power1 = 251/28 milliwatts = 9x power gain b) Range gain = sqrt(Power gain) = sqrt(9) = 3X range gain c) Range = original range * range gain = 100 feet * 3 = 300 feet total <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.internet.wireless/xMlrkG1V1L0/mWibvjPJMdUJ>   If we add the 2 dBi that this post from a very reliable person claims the rubber ducky antenna gives us, we get about 14 dBm + 2 dBi = 16 dB for the classic WRT54G router. <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.internet.wireless/xMlrkG1V1L0/NXq6b6VFkUUJ>   I tried to find a listing on the net of the router specs, but they seem to try to hide some of the most important comparitive information, like dB. <https://www.pcmag.com/roundup/292110/the-best-wireless-routers>   > Sounds like you might be ...   Searching the Google archives, I find this thread about my radio: o How many decibels does this router radio REALLY output? <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.internet.wireless/_tRYKf07H6w/8Ge_sDJwBwAJ>   There they discuss my radio, which turns out to be, for Paul an... o Ubiquiti PowerBeam M2 400, which is only 26 decibels of transmit o into an 18dBi antenna, which is legal for point-to-multipoint   Again, I don't think the router software "can" exceed legal limits, according to what I've seen from Ubiquiti support personnel, but, maybe they can exceed limits - I don't know - I never needed them to since they're powerful enough to paint what I need painted.   > And, of course, make sure you're not running hotter than is legal. > It's quite easy to do that.   While setting these powerful radios up is no more difficult than setting up your much weaker SOHO router at home, I will repeat that it's my understanding that you can't exceed the legal limits - based on what Ubiquiti personal have told me...   But if you can, then all I need are real facts, as I love facts, but I don't do well with guesses since anyone can guess about anything they want.   I still think, from past experience on the net, from somewhere, that a typical SOHO router is pretty damn weak - but I'll look up some to figure out what I can find by way of FCC documents, which usually are the best source for transmit power and antenna gain.   -- Thankfully, this thread begins to share how to improve our WiFi range.

Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 16 05:37AM On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 00:35:22 -0400, Paul wrote:     > It's the responsibility of the user to verify the numbers, as > both licensed and unlicensed equipment are available in the market.   > https://www.engeniustech.com/resources/how-to-install-long-range-point-to-point-wireless-networking-links.pdf   Hi Paul,   Thanks for that powerpoint, where I have no idea how to buy "unlicensed" equipment, nor do I care to even think about unlicensed stuff, since the Ubiquiti stuff kills typical SOHO routers anyway.   The SOHO routers, at about the same price, are a puny 20 dB as far as I can tell, whereas this Ubiquiti stuff, at the same price, is easily ten to a hundred times better gain.   BTW, not the 2 dB coax loss used in the calculation on page 11 (counting the cover page as page 1), where in the threads I previously mentioned, I think it was Jeff Liebermann who said just the pigtail alone is a half decibel loss, where the PowerBeam we're talking about, has no pigtail to deal with.   On page 12, it says the 2.4 GHz & 5GHz omni max EIRP is 36 dBm. Page 12 also says, for directional signals... o For every 3dB of antenna gain beyond 6dBi o Reduce the transmit power by 1dBm   Given we know the $90 PowerBeam M2 400 that Paul asked about o Starts with only 26 decibels of transmit power o into an 18dBi antenna... <https://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-PowerBeam-Wireless-Bridge-PBE-M2-400/dp/B00OJZO9PY>   That's line 5 exactly on Paul's chart on page 12: o Max Power of 26 dBm + 18 dBi = 44 dBm (i.e., 25 Watts) <https://www.streakwave.com/mmSWAVE1/Video/PowerBeam_DS.pdf>   Which tells us that radio Paul asked about is capable of the maximum o But no more (i.e., in this application, you can't be illegal) Which, I assume, is exactly what you'd want ... is it not?   > turned down exactly at the same rate as the antenna > gain goes up, so slapping a dish on it is still a "win" > of some sort.   Hi Paul, Thank you for finding the fact that, as I had thought, the software "turns down the transmit power" based on the antenna gain (and country regulations).   I think anyone who complains, at this stage, about "legal limits" is sort of like someone who quibbles about the spelling of decibels. If that's all they can offer - which is a warning to not exceed legal limits - then that's sort of like warning someone not to step in front of a speeding train ... it's not useful information since everyone already knows it.   What's useful is if we could figure out the EIRP of our typical $100 home routers, where I'm under the impression 20 decibels would be a good one, where the key point is that, for the same $90, we get the most powerful radio you can legally use in the US. <https://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-PowerBeam-Wireless-Bridge-PBE-M2-400/dp/B00OJZO9PY>   BTW, for $140 in toto, you can destroy your router's puny 2 dBi omni with <https://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-Bullet-BM2HP-Antenna-HG2409U-PRO/dp/B06XQ4D9FS> o Bullet M2 HP 26dBm (see Paul's quote above) o 8.5 dBi omni antenna Which makes for about 34 decibels, compared to, at about the same price, a puny SOHO router of, oh, if you're lucky, about 20 decibels (although it would be nice to find facts for what current $140 routers provide today).   IMHO, at those prices, with that power in your hands, and especially given how small (physically) a bullet is (it fits in the palm of your hand), it's a wonder _anyone_ buys a horridly weak router at anything near that price.   -- The beauty of this knowledge is that you can get a far more powerful "router" at the same cost as you paid for your weakling router today.

Fox's Mercantile <jdangus@att.net>: Oct 16 12:44AM -0500 On 10/16/19 12:37 AM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote: [ The usual shit deleted. ]   If you already know all the answers, why do you waste our time asking questions?   -- "I am a river to my people." Jeff-1.0 WA6FWi http:foxsmercantile.com

Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 16 06:04AM On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 21:12:13 -0000 (UTC), Dan Purgert wrote:     >> the connection is not obvious from that angle   > The rocket (radio) plugs into a socket in the antenna. IIRC, the socket > there is covering the upper 2" or so of the radio unit.   The main point is that the radio and antenna are as close together as a tire is to the wheel ... such that these are colloquially equivalent: o Aim the radio o Aim the antenna   Just as these are colloquially equivalent o Balance the wheel o Balance the tires   The problem I have with quibbling is that it gains us nothing, and, worse, the people who quiblle are always the ones who can't add value.   Think about it this way: o You're on a slippery tile roof, aiming the antenna, o And you call down below to the guy on the laptop with the software o "Did we get to 60 decibels yet" And ... the guy incessantly argues with you o That's it's dBi or dBm... or worse ... that it's minus   The time to quibble is when you're sitting in the classroom. o We're trying to get something done here   Already Johann Baretta mentioned he owns a WISP where he picks up signals from San Onofre Visitor Center WiFi from 60 miles away.   That's the kind of range that's possible with this stuff! (Well, not that much for $100 ... but you get the point).   The value here is that anyone on a computer with an Ethernet port can extend their range by huge amounts, for less than a hundred bucks.   Since this equipment isn't sold in the normal consumer stores, they just have to know that it exists, and what to get, where the PowerBeams are hard to beat in terms of price/performance but there are tons of choices depending on what the person wants to do:   a. Do they want to vastly extend the range of their WiFi b. Or do they paint the furthest reaches of their property c. Or do they wish to pick up or throw Internet vast distances   All this is possible - for around $100 - if you know how.   -- That type of technical value is what people should focus on (instead of quibbling over meaningless things of no adult value).

Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 16 06:19AM On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 13:49:26 +1100, Lucifer wrote:   > I won't bother you again. Suffice it to say you are not using words in > the usual way.   Lucifer,   When you're on a rooftop, "aiming an antenna", and you call down to the guy below connected via a laptop to the other end of the POE, asking... o "Did we get to 60 decibels yet"   Do you really think it's helpful if the helper starts quibbling o About the "type" of decibels, or o About the "minus" sign?   Only in the classroom, where the goals are different o Is the type of qubbling you did ... even remotely helpful   Your quibbling (and that of others) was of no value to the group. o It only made _you_ feel good that you found an inaccuracy   It's jsut as if you harangue the tire shops for advertising o "We balance tires" Or o "We balance wheels"   When you probably don't know the slightest thing about any of this stuff. o If you do, your quibbling doesn't prove it.   If you want to ADD VALUE, Lucifer, realize that Usenet is a pot luck. o Your value is what you ADD to the equation   Quibbling about everyone elses' food without bringing any of your own o Is what you did, Lucifer.   Why don't you try to ADD value to this thread, Lucifer? o Tell us how you increase the range of our desktops, for example; o Or, tell us how to throw (or receive) Internet from afar, Lucifer; o Or, tell us how to paint WIFi to the far corners of our property.   Tell us something useful.   Tell us something we don't already know, Lucifer. o Instead of childishly quibbling about colloquial terminology.   -- The value add here is that for about the price of a typicl router, you can get far more powerful equipment that works better, when you need range.

Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen.george@halder.edu>: Oct 13 05:13AM On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 04:22:51 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:     > This is true, but generally the change from Ethernet to radio and back is > seamless to the user (like in WiFi), and nearly never of any importance > to anyone at all.   Thanks Lewis for helping to clarify, for Lucifer, what's possible, since Lucifer, like nospam, seems to brazenly & repeatedly deny what the rest of us know works just fine, even down to denying that decibels are used to indicate power (where Lucifer & nospam appear to be twins in their ability to brazenly deny what everyone else already knows to be facts).   To further illustrate switching from Ethernet to Wi-Fi & vice versa, this picture graphically shows the mechanical components inherent in this common and constant switcheroo between Ethernet & Wi-Fi & back: <https://i.postimg.cc/SK04C6zL/ubiquiti-bullet-M2-hp.jpg>   This home-built $50 WiFi-to-Ethernet-and-Ethernet-to-Wifi setup also works: <https://i.postimg.cc/DfQJq437/mikrotikrouter.jpg>   Using the term "modem" for my "transceiver" so people with cable can better understand, the Internet signal goes from the "modem" inside the house, to the SOHO router next to the "modem", and then out an RJ45 port on the SOHO router to this radio & antenna which is outside the house, which either points back at the house, to "paint" the inaccessible regions of the house or ...   Or ...   You'll notice the antenna is on a loose swivel, which allows me to turn it around to paint the pool, which is a few hundred feet from the house, where painting the pool allows cellphones to connect to this AP, where the pool is too far from the house for cellphones to connect to the SOHO router WiFi connected to the "modem" inside the house.   In quite a different setup, this similar setup allows a desktop, say one that is outside, say, in the barn which is too far from the house, to easily connect back to the WiFi at the house, or, if desired, to a WiFi access point which can be miles away from this stand-alone desktop PC: <https://i.postimg.cc/Gh22Sb2N/desktop.jpg>   And still get great signal strength of around -55dBm of power: <https://i.postimg.cc/DZccY2YD/decibels.jpg>   In fact, there are so many things you can do with these inexpensive radios, that I have them scattered all over, since I have plenty of them to play with to connect anything I want to connect to, if it has Internet and if I know the security setup keys: <https://i.postimg.cc/XJChDCPr/spare-access-points.jpg>   What's nice, also, is you get great graphics out of the signal strength debuggers on Android phones, which allow you to ascertain exactly which access points have the best signal strength in whatever spot you're in: <https://i.postimg.cc/BZrZpDyp/debug-apps.jpg>   Given this all "just works", I'm not sure why Lucifer, who claims to have been a "communications technician", says it doesn't work, so I appreciate that Lewis attempted to clarify that the switcheroo between Ethernet and Wi-Fi and from Wi-Fi to Ethernet ... is so simple ... it just works.   -- I take the time to post pictures becuase I care about my credibility.

Fox's Mercantile <jdangus@att.net>: Oct 13 01:52AM -0500 > Apparently the big cities still have CB traffic. Probably > mostly truckers. But it sure ain't what it was in the 70s.   Thank God.       -- "I am a river to my people." Jeff-1.0 WA6FWi http:foxsmercantile.com

You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to sci.electronics.repair+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.