Interest Product to Extend Wireless Coverage @Home

[krazyman]

AuraGrid Wireless Extention System (http://www.auraone.com/products.htm) is designed to completely eliminated “Dead Spots”. AuraGrid distributes both Cable TV/Internet and 802.11b/g wireless RF signals over standard coaxial cables.


With antenna extended to 3 more rooms without additional power source, not sure if signal strength will still be good.



http://krazyman.homeip.net:88/webpic/auragrid1.jpg

http://krazyman.homeip.net:88/webpic/auragrid2.jpg

http://krazyman.homeip.net:88/webpic/auragrid.jpg

[wherehouse]

you will not be able to use the current coax cable that is within your house. you need to re-run a parallel coax wiring to each point. should be easy enough.

its like adding a splitter to the router antenna and making it "mimo" except that the router may not have support for mimo.

there is also a distance limit that the coax can carry since the radio power source is the router, the splitter has no additional power to boost?

but with powerline ethernet and powerline ethernet+wifi, isn't that a lot more cost effective as you don't need labour and cable?

my 2 cents

[krazyman]

you will not be able to use the current coax cable that is within your house. you need to re-run a parallel coax wiring to each point. should be easy enough.

its like adding a splitter to the router antenna and making it "mimo" except that the router may not have support for mimo.

there is also a distance limit that the coax can carry since the radio power source is the router, the splitter has no additional power to boost?

but with powerline ethernet and powerline ethernet+wifi, isn't that a lot more cost effective as you don't need labour and cable?

my 2 cents

I don't have info on the transmitted power (as mentioned in my post #1) but definitely can use existing coaxial cabling from the info and the diagram shown.

The difference with powerline is you still need another AP to extend wireless coverage. Auragrid uses the existing wireless router.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying it's better or worse, but rather it's different.

[wherehouse]

I don't have info on the transmitted power (as mentioned in my post #1) but definitely can use existing coaxial cabling from the info and the diagram shown.

The difference with powerline is you still need another AP to extend wireless coverage. Auragrid uses the existing wireless router.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying it's better or worse, but rather it's different.

dun misunderstand me... i oso not saying that its not better or worse...

this is 2006-2007 product

but for the rollout cost and effort, its cheaper to buy cheap routers for WDS (electricity cost) or use powerline ethernet with wireless, like the aztech HL105EW

http://www.aztech.com/sg/homeplug_hl105ew.html

existing coax - i meant the existing SCV cabling, not the physical coax cabling that you will run on your own to accomodate the auragrid as I read. but I could be wrong. wonder if this inteferes with the SCV signal if you have a digital STB

hmm

[krazyman]

dun misunderstand me... i oso not saying that its not better or worse...

this is 2006-2007 product

but for the rollout cost and effort, its cheaper to buy cheap routers for WDS (electricity cost) or use powerline ethernet with wireless, like the aztech HL105EW

http://www.aztech.com/sg/homeplug_hl105ew.html

existing coax - i meant the existing SCV cabling, not the physical coax cabling that you will run on your own to accomodate the auragrid as I read. but I could be wrong. wonder if this inteferes with the SCV signal if you have a digital STB

hmm

For discussion:
1 WDS halfed the bandwidth. Not really desirable unless cabling is a problem.
2 Are powerline adapters cheap? I won't think so.
3 SCV provides the 1st point. A splitter is used to split connection to other room. Replace the splitter with the auragrid and existing coaxial cabling system is reused. I don't see why you kept saying must relay coaxial cable? As for scv channels (analog or digital), the signals are RF before the STB, so what's the problem?

[wherehouse]

For discussion:
1 WDS halfed the bandwidth. Not really desirable unless cabling is a problem.
2 Are powerline adapters cheap? I won't think so.
3 SCV provides the 1st point. A splitter is used to split connection to other room. Replace the splitter with the auragrid and existing coaxial cabling system is reused. I don't see why you kept saying must relay coaxial cable? As for scv channels (analog or digital), the signals are RF before the STB, so what's the problem?

hmmm I acknowledge that I could be wrong on all counts!
Dun get upset~

As for #2 , how cheap is this in comparison to aztech's offering? (a prospective MO?)

if the same cables are used to carry 2 sets od RF signal, will it affect the tv transmission quality at the output (be it STB or TV) - that is my curiosity.

[krazyman]

hmmm I acknowledge that I could be wrong on all counts!
Dun get upset~

As for #2 , how cheap is this in comparison to aztech's offering? (a prospective MO?)

if the same cables are used to carry 2 sets od RF signal, will it affect the tv transmission quality at the output (be it STB or TV) - that is my curiosity.

No worry, ain't upset. I just stumbled onto this while looking at possibility of wireless coaxial extension like for TV with there is no SCV point.

As I've said, I too have doubts on how good the wireless signal on this auragrid as it basically extend the router antenna to another room without additional power source.

I not sure on cost and availability either.

The coaxial system we are using carry RFs from 5MHz to 900MHz. ;)

[wherehouse]

No worry, ain't upset. I just stumbled onto this while looking at possibility of wireless coaxial extension like for TV with there is no SCV point.

As I've said, I too have doubts on how good the wireless signal on this auragrid as it basically extend the router antenna to another room without additional power source.

I not sure on cost and availability either.

The coaxial system we are using carry RFs from 5MHz to 900MHz. ;)

thanks for the tip... so no inteference :)

ITshow price for the aztech is S$119 (thanks coldfreeze)
http://www.bootstrike.com/itfairsg/itshow2009/showpic.html?file=aztech+(coldfreeze).jpg&event=IT+Show+2009

as you mentioned that WDS reduces bandwidth per hop, it's the LAN b/w that you refer to rite? sorry leh...

but I read that running a consumer wifi router>cable extension>antenna at approx 15m holds a possible BIG deal with signal attenuation, weakening the signal by a lot if the cable quality is poor...
http://x.net.au/wifi-antenna-cable/

with mimo and dualband router devices, dead spots would be minimzed in the living space and/or workspace.
unless these people want to work from bunkers or the bomb shelter in basement/hdb or toilet for some obscure reason, then LAN is always the most efficient choice imho

[krazyman]

as you mentioned that WDS reduces bandwidth per hop, it's the LAN b/w that you refer to rite? sorry leh...



Bandwidth halfed is the wireless. The AP in WDS has to split the wireless bandwidth to communicated with the Host and its client simultaneously.

[wherehouse]

Bandwidth halfed is the wireless. The AP in WDS has to split the wireless bandwidth to communicated with the Host and its client simultaneously.

yep... i reading now.
i nv have such a requirement in a hdb flat before lol.
usually recommend to run LAN points into rooms and split the cable point instead.

[liangtam]

coax splitters are known to fail after awhile, depending on the makes and qc of the product.

if you place the router in the middle of the house, there probably isnt a need for the extension and antennas. Besides, the use of utp cable is more lasting and thinner, a method where u can add more APs instead, without halving bandwidth.

Oh, PS: krazyman ish lich~ unkle, ish noes stay hdb huans

[wherehouse]

coax splitters are known to fail after awhile, depending on the makes and qc of the product.

if you place the router in the middle of the house, there probably isnt a need for the extension and antennas. Besides, the use of utp cable is more lasting and thinner, a method where u can add more APs instead, without halving bandwidth.

Oh, PS: krazyman ish lich~ unkle, ish noes stay hdb huans

reari!!!! :eek:
lol.

run lan cable to another ap... then another ...