"Torsten Kaiser" <NOSPAMPLEASE@pcdweb.de> schreef in bericht
news:bsnjke$838$00$1@news.t-online.com...
> Hello Sam,
>
> Sam Carleton wrote:
>
> > I want
> > reliability, not cost savings here. Cisco is a bit too much,
> > though:)
>
> No need for that. Amplifying/repeating the signal should work as well.
Found
> an interesting URL to this problem:
>
> http://www.pmg.com/otw_nwsl/98_w_ethernet.htm
>
> What about placing a cheap office hub somewhere half way to repeat the
> signal? Maybe even with a WLAN capability? So your office at one end and
> the living area would be both at abt. 60ft distance. When you place
another
> office hub to uplink the office ressources to your new "backbone" you
> almost have the same infrastructure as before, but no oversized line with
> starving signals.
>
> HTH
> Torsten Kaiser
>

Depends a bit in my view. That's why I am using both cables and Wifi at
home, functioning through several walls. If the connection you want to make
to your daughters room is only to be used for the internet Wifi is ok and
easy to install. No cables involved. Be sure to buy all wifi equipment of 1
branch (Syslink is not bad and btw since about a year owned by Cisco)
otherwise you might experience incompatabillity especially in the WEP
encryption. This functions also very lovely if you have a laptop! Or your
daughter is replacing the furniture in her room:) Btw a Wifi hub is called a
WAP and not a hub, since it has more (special to Wifi) functionality then a
switch/hub. You will need one WAP and can effectivly connect up to 50 users.

On the other hand, if you also want to fe transfer large files or make
backups etc cables just are faster since Wifi runs at about 10 MB (or 50 MB)
whereas cables run at 100MB.

Richard.