Re: The best Wi-Fi upgrade I made wasn't a new router, it was moving one piece of furniture

On 8/18/26 23:58, rbowman wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2026 22:45:09 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> 
>>     The 400mhz and 900mhz data bands were pretty good,
>>     and a number of devices are still made for them. They'd get through
>>     walls and trees and tropical rainstorms - often a mile+ range. Still,
>>     alas, yer data SPEED isn't gonna be like modern wi-fi. They're more
>>     like 'radio-linked modems'.
> 
> I don't know where they're located but I can pick up the outdoor
> temperature and humidity from a couple of devices on 433 MHz. The Accurite
> has both while the other one only has temp. It's a short packet every 15
> seconds so it's not pushing hard.

   I think I had an Accurite. Never tried to decode
   its signals on a PC however - never had a receiver
   to fit a PC. Anyway, for low speed 'field data' even
   the 400mhz zone is quite adequate and tends to get
   around obstacles pretty well.

> They're not as popular as they were but I have some nfr24l01 boards that
> operate on 2.4GHz. Supposedly you can get 2 Mbps but the 250 Kbps is fine
> for me using the printed antenna rather than the external models.

   Use 2.4 wifi for all my IP cams. More reliable
   but can STILL suffer from 'shadows'. 5ghz is
   much worse.

   As said, NOTHING is "perfect" for all uses.
   Still waiting for 'sub-space radio'  :-)