This topic has been marked solved and closed to new posts due to inactivity. We hope you'll join the conversation by posting to an open topic or starting a new one.
Laptop looses 1/3 of wifi signal strength when the laptop moves through a door. Distance to router at that point is 10 feet. Wall is conventional wood-framed. On both sides of the wal there are fully loaded bookshelved, with vertical steel supports.
Sounds about right to me. From what you describe the wifi is going through a wall plus two layers of books plus steel shelving. Remember wifi does not go around corners.
Sounds about right to me. From what you describe the wifi is going through a wall plus two layers of books plus steel shelving. Remember wifi does not go around corners.
And diffraction is not "going round corners" as most people understand it, just a red herring from someone who would rather throw in a cheap jibe than follow the issue.
Back to the point, following your earlier response, we don't know which wifi band the user has on the laptop. If they are on 5 GHz, 2.4 GHz might give better range.
Nor do we know if this signal loss affects their experience. Maybe they have just found a signal meter and want to play with numbers.
> And diffraction is not "going round corners" as most people understand > it, just a red herring from someone who would rather throw in a cheap > jibe than follow the issue.
Thanks for your latest unsubstantiated assessment of what "most people understand". It's every bit as valuable as the equipment inventory which you include in each of your posts. I would not expect "most people" to have a firm grasp on diffraction, but a quick Web search for key words/phrases like, say: diffraction "around corners" might be educational for those who are susceptible to education. (Hint: I'd expect "around corners" to work better than "round corners" in such a search.)
> And diffraction is not "going round corners" as most people understand > it, just a red herring from someone who would rather throw in a cheap > jibe than follow the issue.
Thanks for your latest unsubstantiated assessment of what "most people understand". It's every bit as valuable as the equipment inventory which you include in each of your posts. I would not expect "most people" to have a firm grasp on diffraction, but a quick Web search for key words/phrases like, say: diffraction "around corners" might be educational for those who are susceptible to education. (Hint: I'd expect "around corners" to work better than "round corners" in such a search.)
Simple reason for the inventory. Had ugly experience with both a r8000 and a r8000p firmware wise. Netgear used to be my go to vendor, however with the recent experience of two different products with less the adequate firmware, should not have drops or require reboots to keep running. I want a stable network at my house otherwise it gets ugly. I could not provide that with the above routers either with Netgear firmware or DD-WRT (Kong for the r8000). I am not doing anything fancy. No VPN, no NAS support, just simple router/wireless support.So what would you do keep getting hit over the head with Internet issues or take the simple route of getting a router that will provide a stable network? In my case the solution was a Asus rt-ac86u running RMerlin firmware. Up for 38 days without a drop or anyother issue. Last reboot was a firmware update. I could not get that kind of reliability out of the two Netgear routers that I plan on putting on Ebay. Want one will make a good price make me an offer. So to keep sig honest I list the Asus. 😉
The experience in question is the dropping of the internet connection. As it happens, there is another laptop with a hard-wired connection, so I know that when the laptop user is complaining that its not the internet that's the problem/
I ran a test with 2.4, and the connection dropped from 70% to 65%
But what does that mean? The speed dropped? The signal level fell?
I mistrust simple numbers that don't demonstrate what really matters, the throughput you get between client and source. Even that is a suspect number.
2.4 GHz travels further than 5 GHz. There will be a time when the 5 GHz signal fades away and slows down. The 2.4 GHz signal hangs in there and when the 5 GHz channel is struggling to stay connected, 2.4 GHz soldiers on.
The R7000 supports "smart connect" which is supposed to enable a seamless connection with the wif clients latching on to the best signal.
Then again, a lot depends on that wifi clients. Your router may be delivering the best wifi signal possible, but if your wifi client is an ancient bit of hardware, it will struggle. As the saying goes, "it takes two to wifi".
I am not a troll as such. If you check I have given lots of helpfull info to folks with problems. Even have kudo even for the help I provided. So I am here to help, but I am also going to be honest with my personal experience with a r8000 and r8000p. Want to buy one or both? They are up for sale. Give me an offer.
I would never accuse you of being a troll. You stick to the point and don't try to score points off, or belittle, anyone.
Sadly, this is not true of everyone.
I understand the problems with the R8000 and R8000P. Netgear seems to come up with some wonky devices from time to time. The R7000 is essentially its "flagship" product in the mid-price range, selling better than anything else, and my experience with the R7000P, albeit it with off piste firmware, suggests that it is a step backwards.
The router that gets the most praise at the moment seems to be the R7800, which I certainly prefer over the R7000P.
I agree with your observations on the wifi thing. But I am the school that goes on experience of how things are working rather than measuring signal strengths. Of course, this means that I have to cast aside what I learned in my days as a research physicist, but life is too short to be throwing equations at a router. If it works, fine. I start worrying when things go wrong.
PS Sorry, I am not in the market for yet another router, even if they come with health warnings! Thought about using one as an access point? It could make your wifi go "round" corners.
The router that gets the most praise at the moment seems to be the R7800, which I certainly prefer over the R7000P.
I agree with your observations on the wifi thing. But I am the school that goes on experience of how things are working rather than measuring signal strengths. Of course, this means that I have to cast aside what I learned in my days as a research physicist, but life is too short to be throwing equations at a router. If it works, fine. I start worrying when things go wrong.
Reply
I agree with what you say. I find it interesting that the "best" router for so many is the r7000. I think first ship was 2013? Has hung around a long time and I have one in box. Yes if I were going to get a Netgear router, knowing what I do now, it would have to be the r7800. Even have options for the firmware besides just Netgear. I was aware of it when I got the Asus, but by then I had a bad taste in my mouth for all things Netgear just did not want to take the risk.
Most of the time I just go by bars on device for wireless and its performancee. One thing I dislike about client wireless is the fact they will not roam easily. Hang onto the weaker signal way longer then they should. Have played at times with aggressiveness with mixed results. Seems to depend on chip to some extent. If I wonder about signal I startup Acrylic Wi-F- Home on Windows laptop or for more convenience run Wifi Analyzer on Android tablet for walking around. These help me with choosing a channel as have lots of wireless around me and also dead spots. My house was built in 1951 and is wet plaster with metal lath. Can make it interesting at times getting coverage. Early cordless phones would not work no matter the maker. Finally found a Sony that would work. Now with newer cordless phones no issue and yes I stll have a landline. 😉 Keep thinking of dropping it, but there are lots of stuff that are "tied" to it such as credit cards when you call type of thing.
One thing I dislike about client wireless is the fact they will not roam easily. Hang onto the weaker signal way longer then they should.
I agree, especially as I have two separate internet services in close proximity (work and play) and some roaming devices find it harder to know when to switch than others.
But I have always pout that down to the wifi clients, something that people can forget when they start blaming their routers.
I have to say that while many people dismiss the Orbi as a dumbed down router, it is actually easier to set up and seems to play more nicely with roaming wifi clients. It just doesn't give you as much control over what is going on. But how many people really need that?
