Re: WiFi Signal Strength
- From: "Woody" <usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 12:33:43 +0100
"Peter Ceresole" <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1imfomc.harkjn1coxt3uN%peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Woody <usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The only bad wifi experience I have is my wifes macbook
I have an oldish TiBook.
You can imagine the problems *that* gives. Its evil Wifi reputation is
well deserved.
I don't need to imagine.
I had a 400 tibook. That group (400/500) was useless at wireless. I don't know about the next group (550/667) as I didn't have one, although apparently they were better. However, I did have the 800 from the following group, which I recall is what you had too (the 667/800) and that was fine. Not as good a range as the iBooks of the day, but perfectly good enough for general use. I never had any problem with it, neither did James (it was his originally).
The tiBooks wifi range reputation is only really related to the first set, and it is deserved, they were awfull.
--
Woody
.
- References:
- WiFi Signal Strength
- From: Mike Edwards
- Re: WiFi Signal Strength
- From: Simon Dobbs
- Re: WiFi Signal Strength
- From: Mike Edwards
- Re: WiFi Signal Strength
- From: T i m
- Re: WiFi Signal Strength
- From: Peter Ceresole
- WiFi Signal Strength
- Prev by Date: Re: Is anyone using Floola?
- Next by Date: Re: WiFi Signal Strength
- Previous by thread: Re: WiFi Signal Strength
- Next by thread: Re: WiFi Signal Strength
- Index(es):