Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Re: [MLUG] People Hate 802.11b > Why ?

["Igor Izyumin Jr." <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

> That makes more sense. However my question was how much it might help to
> have full legal access to ALL the spectrum and use a common method for
> communication across all the spectrum. You may be right about how little
> bandwidth you'd actually gain from that extra spectrum. That is more what
> I was interested in.
It's not practical to use digital modes on anything that doesn't need them, 
especially on the lower parts of the spectrum.  When the frequency gets 
lower, the bandwidth also gets lower.  That's why people use SSB (single 
sideband AM) and CW (morse code) instead of packet or something on HF - there 
isn't much room.  Packet is also used, but not as a replacement for regular 
AM modes, since the power is inherently smaller and it takes a lot more 
bandwidth than SSB.
As for the VHF bands - they are used for things like commercial radio 
stations, TV, police/fire/other communications, cordless phones, toy cars, 
etc - it just doesn't make sense to have digital walkie-talkies when ordinary 
ones work just fine.  The UHF bands are also occupied with various 
communications, TV, and other crap.  Once again, there's no need to do 
regular communications stuff over digital.  And 2.4 GHz and higher bands make 
much more sense for that.   Now, switching over TV and radio over to digital 
would make more sense, but then everyone would be very pissed because they 
couldn't use their $5 radio crap radio to listen to them.  Just look at how 
half-assed NTSC is because it was backwards-compatible with black-and-white 
TV - and they probably realized that it would be half-assed when they 
developed it.
-- 
-- Igor
--
To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php

Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/