- 1. Re: HPNA (was... Wireless Internet Networks) (score: 1)
- Author: "Steve Hammatt" <GSteve@hammatt.com>
- Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 15:28:06 -0800
- Lots of great information and I'm trying to look at all alternatives. Ethernet would require the re-digging of a trench across the gravel driveway plus installation of 200' of cable. Wireless would r
- /html/shop-talk/2005-01/msg00207.html (11,140 bytes)
- 2. Re: HPNA (was... Wireless Internet Networks) (score: 1)
- Author: "Mark and Susan Miller" <marknsuz@pacbell.net>
- Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 18:28:38 -0800
- I'm all for HPNA, but I'm biased. I was one of the developers of the original 1.0 version way back when. I haven't seen 3.0, but 2.0 works very well and would be perfect for your application. Another
- /html/shop-talk/2005-01/msg00217.html (8,302 bytes)
- 3. Re: HPNA (was... Wireless Internet Networks) (score: 1)
- Author: Patton Dickson <57healey@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 00:08:29 -0600
- I was using HPNA until my router started acting screwy a year ago. Really liked it, and speeds were faster that the real world wireless speeds we get. Patton -- Patton Dickson - Richmond, TX '57 A-H
- /html/shop-talk/2005-01/msg00218.html (7,827 bytes)
- 4. Re: HPNA (was... Wireless Internet Networks) (score: 1)
- Author: nick brearley <nick@landform.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 09:26:16 +0000
- Steve, There might be some mileage here if you've got a powerline connection between house and workshop (note the comment on range): http://www.shopmagenta.com/articles/84786.aspx This example is aim
- /html/shop-talk/2005-01/msg00219.html (7,461 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu