| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 | 31 |
I hear a lot of jokes about my name. None of them are funny.
My fiancee Gina plans events for World Travel Meetings and Incentives. We live in a loft in San Francisco, and can occasionally be found flying kites at various spots around the city. If you're on Xbox Live, look me up. My gamertag is Willski.
April 29, 2004
Why does no one ever think of the power?
This story over at Boingboing details a project by some folks at Champaign-Urbana who are trying to create cheap Wi-Fi repeaters to build seamless, repeating Wi-Fi networks using old—think 486-class—hardware.
The problem is power. Many old machines suck an astounding amount of power for the puny performance. In many cases, a 66MHz 486 DX2 or original Pentium 60 will draw three or four times as much juice as a standalone Wi-Fi router, before you factor in the moving parts (hard drive and optical drive) and the Wi-Fi card.
Furthermore, I don’t ever recall seeing a bootable CD implentation that worked on a 486-class motherboard.
What I’d much rather see is a modern, cheap kit design that you could buy a lower power embedded CPU/mobo and then add the necessary hardware to it. All you’d need is a 64MB flash card to store the OS, and some sort of motherboard that supports USB or PCMCIA. Total price would probably be under $200, if you picked smart parts.
I think anywhere you have a wireless network, you want to maximize uptime. Depending on 10 year old hardware isn’t a good way to maximize uptime.
///Will | Computing | Email this entryWhat would the flash storage for?
Posted by: Tucker at April 29, 2004 08:42 AM
- Syndicate this site
- Subscribe with Bloglines
- This site looks best with Firefox
- Powered by Movable Type