151–160 of 181 posts
This kind of hack was really popular when wifi was first being adopted. These reflectors work best when they are spaced according to the wavelength. Here is a template I remember seeing years ago: http://www.freeantennas.com/projects/template2/
It can work surprisingly well, I made a "dish" with an aluminum foil that was able to connect to a Romanian Wi-Fi hotspot from Bulgaria, according to Google Maps it should be something like 20KM distance. I should note that I had direct view of the town as I had significantly higher altitude. The hotspot was some kind of public service provided by the Romanian town as it's name suggested. The ip WhoIs also confirmed…
Old trick is to use Pringles (or other) can as directional antenna: https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/how-to-make-a-wifi-antenna-out...
If you want to to do this "properly", see http://ham-radio.com/k6sti/wifiyagi.htm When messing with antennas, things like distance needs to be thoroughly calculated. Foil can help in many ways, but it can also make things worse—antenna calculations are tricky.
A bit off topic, but what is this page doing, loading almost 500K in 2 XHR calls for approximately 9K of text... Egads, all the images are inlined data URIs! I was staring at a blank page with a single image for over 10 seconds before the article text loaded. No loading indicator or anything.
There's no reason for this content to use JavaScript at all. I'm going to start holding this up as an example of why browsers shouldn't have JavaScript at all - many developers simply don't understand when not to use it. Educating them one at a time won't fix it.
How else would you add live comments without JS? This page is effectively a big chatroom. You can write at the bottom of the page and the website fetches the new messages async.
Don't tell me you would have a big http refresh every 5 seconds to load in the new chat messages, that's even worst than using JS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's no reason for this content to use JavaScript at all. I'm going to start holding this up as an example of why browsers shouldn't have JavaScript at all - many developers simply don't understand when not to use it. Educating them one at a time won't fix it.
> There's no reason for this content to use JavaScript at all. How else would you add live comments without JS? This page is effectively a big chatroom. You can write at the bottom of the page and the website fetches the new messages async. Don't tell me you would have a big http refresh every 5 seconds to load in the new chat messages, that's even worst than using JS.
Why on Earth does it need to be some kind of live chatroom? Just render them server-side and add live updates as a nice-to-have if JavaScript is enabled.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huh... no kidding. I'm going to have to try that out some day. How was the signal like on the wok with the antenna through the center?
I haven't personally tried sticking an antenna through a wok (just putting one behind the router was enough for my purpose), but rumors say that you can achieve a range of several miles if you do it right.
And Cisco Press do some good books on the basics of WiFi network design.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, some devices can be extremely noisy. If you have a Chromecast or Google Home, for instance, turn Guest Mode off -- it creates a hidden network on the same channel as your AP.
My chromecasts have been acting up really badly recently, I've just gone and disabled guest mode on them all based on this information.
Do not tilt the antenna though. Maximum emission of an dipole is perpendicular to its axis.
On occasion, going against the grain (in case of interference from another transmitter) can help if you can polarize the signal somehow. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipole_antenna Of course you'd have to do the same thing at the receiver.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not needed to do it in both ends. Naturally, improving both antennas is better than doing in only one, but every improvement in sending is completely equivalent in receiving for a system that uses the same antennas for both directions of communication. So, if a new antenna in client side improves signal reception by 3dB, it also improves transmitted power by 3dB. If you used the same antenna on the other side, t…
> It's not needed to do it in both ends. Naturally, improving both antennas is better than doing in only one, but every improvement in sending is completely equivalent in receiving for a system that uses the same antennas for both directions of communication. Does this actually make sense to you? Gain is a factor; it needs to be multiplied by something. Here's the obvious thought-experiment: consider an (ideal) parab…
Have you studied physics and antenna theory?