I have access to wi-fi in my marina.  On the boat I have 2 notebook
computers an a single external antenna connected to one PCMCIA wi-fi
card.  Is it possible to both computers share a single antenna if I
were to buy another PC card and some kind of a Y adapter to split the
antenna?

This will give you longer range. Plug Signal Seeker in USB.  Remove antenna,
set that card to ad-hoc. Share Signal Seeker with that connection.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5758269620

Show quoteHide quote

    Has anyone here (not connected with the vendor) tested these
"Signal Seeker" USB-connected flat panel devices and determined whether
they actually give better performance than cantennas, etc., as claimed?

Who is the Moderator of this group or the big Cheese of this Group. Would
the group settle on a person in the group I could send one for free to
evaluate. That should be the best way to settle it.
Thanks Ed

Show quoteHide quote

    I'm not the moderator (does this group have one?), but I'm the one
who asked, and I'd be glad to take one and test it against the adapters I
have available (internal Belkin F5D7000 with cantenna; USB Netgear WG111)
and report my comparative results--I'd return the Signal Seeker if it does
not work better than each of those, or pay for it and keep it if it does.
If you accept this offer, please e-mail me for mailing address.

Ed Williams <e*@signal-seeker.com> wrote:
Big Cheese, Jeff.
Moderator, Peter Pan.
The group settle on anything?  Not likely.
Best tester?  Jeff or Floyd, but I don't think they work for free for a
commercial endeavor.
Who would test the thing and make it stop looking like you are the only one
who likes it?  Me.

---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA  38.8,-122.5

d***@XReXX2XCom.usenet.us.com wrote:
I'd be happy to evalute a pair of them...  with the
understanding that I keep the pair when the tests are done.

On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:28:08 -0500, "Ed Williams"
<e*@signal-seeker.com> wrote:

That reminds me.  Did you ever get the test results report?  From the
eBay store page:

  Q:  exactly how much of a DB gain does this give you?     
  A:  We are waiting for the report to come back. But I know it
  will keep up with a 14 db panel antenna and a 500 mw amplifier.
  So I am guessing around min 26 to 30 db gain to the computer.

How about the specification sheet?
  Q:  I have a local wireless computer networking business here in
  the boonies 2 hours west of Chicago. But i am interested in your
  device. Where can i get full specs on it, including transmit power,
  ability to operate with linux drivers, etc?     
  A:  We are in the process of putting a specification sheet together.
  I know that it can keep up with a 14db panel antenna plus a 500 mw
  amp. Only have drivers for windows. But will be adding them.

I didn't know antennas required Windoze drivers.

It's not very difficult to do relative gain measurements.  (Absolute
gain is a challenge).  Use a reference antenna, with a known gain, and
compare signal strengths with either a client radio with signal
strength indication, with an external attenuator, or with a spectrum
analyzer.  The only real trick is to not do it on a roadway or across
a rooftop to avoid ground reflections.  Over a canyon or plowed field
works nicely.  Try to get both ends at least 10 ft off the ground.

Once you have a setup that yields reproduceable results, you can
easily measure vertical and horizontal -3dB beamwidth and patterns.
The problem is that the pattern will not look anything like the
computer generated simulations due to construction variations,
reflections, VSWR, measurement errors, and junk pickup.  However, it's
better than nothing.

Measuring VSWR from 2400.0 to 2483.5 is easy with a directional
coupler, sweep generator, RF detector, and oscilloscope.  You can
build a crude but functional directional coupler out of some
semi-rigid coax cables.  The signal source is a problem, but I have
some tricks that might work.  RF detector and scope are common.

I'm not at all interested in becoming part of what I'm guessing is
going to be a legal problem.  I do evaluate products and write copious
and detailed reports with recommendations and analysis.  I charge
quite a bit but less than a professional lab with lots of test
equipment.

In all cases, I sign an NDA (non-disclosure agreement) where all
results and equipment are property of the manufacturer.  I am not
allowed to release any information on what I've found.  That's why I
can't post performance measurements on some wireless devices.  The
numbers belong to my client.  I've also been very lucky in that my
results and testing has been used by the client in an honest manner.
This is not universal as some of my friends and competitors have had
their test results edited, tweaked, or butchered, by the client.

Anyway, it's all academic because I just picked up a design project,
need to fix the house a bit, wanna spend some time away from
computahs, it's tax time, and wanna do a vacation.  For the price of
an antenna, no thanks.

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

But Jeff, you don't understand. It's a USB router, access point, bridge
and client too! And it's extreme range. And he describes it as an
antenna. In all fairness to Ed, I get the feeling he's an honest guy,
just had a pretty good idea about a product in a field he knows nothing
about and dove in head first.

I kicked around some ideas in my head about marketing some devices on
eBay based mostly on the qustions I see over and over in this group
about problems getting more than 10-15 feet range. But I let the ideas
die on the vine, didn't feel like persuing them. Ed is gung ho. Too bad
he's teeter-tottering on the line between spamming the group and merely
participating. And regardless of the circumstances, he always recommends
ad hoc mode, not sure about that advice.

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 21:52:34 -0500, Rôgêr <ab***@your.isp.com> wrote:

I also try to give everyone the benifit of my doubt.  What's
disgusting to me is that methinks the basic product is probably fairly
decent and could be sold on its own merits.  Given a bit of testing
and some accurate data, methinks it might compete well with the
EtherAnt and USB-Ant type of intergrated radio antennas.  However, as
long as it's being marketed in the present manner, and apparently
without any FCC type certification or Wi-Fi Forum certification, I
don't wanna have anything to do with it.

Yep.  I'm a firm believer in integrated radio and antenna
combinations.  It solves lots of problems, especially when dealing
with rooftop connectivity.  I have a phased array design that methinks
is probably overpriced, but offers interference avoidance and
reflection optimization.  Lots of great ideas out there.  However, the
ability to turn it into a marketable product, sperating the customers
from their money, and supporting the prouduct, is beyond my limited
resources and abilities.

I don't have much problem with him offering his antenna as a solution
to peoples problems.  I do have a problem when he doesn't bother to
explain why his antenna offers a solution or what is involved in
implimenting his solution.  It's back to my distain for "one-line"
answers.  They're mostly useless and worthless.

I hadn't noticed much of that.  However, I agree.  Ad-hoc is not the
answer to all problems.  In this case, the original question about
combining antennas isn't answered by either his product or by
switching to ad-hoc.  Incidentally, bridge and mesh modes are
essentially variations of ad-hoc so please don't assume that ad-hoc is
worthless.

Best Home Based Wireless Router
PCMCIA or USB?
Belkin Pre-N Wifi - Speed problem
Linksys WRT54G now a brick....but wireless works...
VLAN & SSID
Restricting wireless networks a laptop can access
802.11a/b/g PCMCIA card with support for 802.11a/b/g
WEP question
will "enhanced" 802.11g devices help interference?
Animated tool for Wi-Fi?