F5F Stay Refreshed Power Users Networks Powerline offers a more reliable connection compared to WiFi.

Powerline offers a more reliable connection compared to WiFi.

Powerline offers a more reliable connection compared to WiFi.

Pages (2): Previous 1 2
M
MLGGirl54
Senior Member
258
07-06-2016, 04:55 PM
#11
It seems safer to rely on Wi-Fi instead. My home was constructed in 1885.
M
MLGGirl54
07-06-2016, 04:55 PM #11

It seems safer to rely on Wi-Fi instead. My home was constructed in 1885.

C
CrazyBessyCat
Posting Freak
912
07-06-2016, 08:27 PM
#12
Certainly. 1) The length of the wiring is essentially identical across EOP, RF Coax, and Wireless systems. You'll notice terms like QAM and OFDM appearing in all three. By 2014, devices adhering to G.hn standards were expected, and by 2016, these could transmit signals through any type of wire (MIMO). 2) Because the foundation remains RF-based, it remains vulnerable to interference from various sources. Devices on the same circuit will likely produce noise. Older homes (pre-1980s) typically contain fuses in a main panel and may use aluminum wiring. Buildings constructed after 1980 usually employ copper wiring and circuit breakers, with circuits designed for up to 15A often featuring only one outlet—like those in kitchens. Homes wired this manner generally have two separate 120V power buses: the left side of the panel is the first bus, and the right side is the second. Multiple breaker boxes can indicate a split continuation. Only appliances like dryers or ovens will use both circuits at once. Therefore, for EOP to function properly, all connected devices must share the same bus, as they rely on the neutral/ground connection. Source: https://www.theregister.co.uk/Print/2013...generation Which implies that if you plan to use Ethernet over power lines, G.hn equipment is preferable since it operates via neutral/ground. Now consider why EOP doesn’t interfere with neighbors’ networks—it won’t. The main barrier is an absence of a physical link between homes (an air gap). In densely populated urban areas, G.hn might not be ideal for power-line deployment. Opting for existing coax or phone lines could be more suitable. Like WiFi, there are security features, but you won’t be asked for a complex password when connecting a device.
C
CrazyBessyCat
07-06-2016, 08:27 PM #12

Certainly. 1) The length of the wiring is essentially identical across EOP, RF Coax, and Wireless systems. You'll notice terms like QAM and OFDM appearing in all three. By 2014, devices adhering to G.hn standards were expected, and by 2016, these could transmit signals through any type of wire (MIMO). 2) Because the foundation remains RF-based, it remains vulnerable to interference from various sources. Devices on the same circuit will likely produce noise. Older homes (pre-1980s) typically contain fuses in a main panel and may use aluminum wiring. Buildings constructed after 1980 usually employ copper wiring and circuit breakers, with circuits designed for up to 15A often featuring only one outlet—like those in kitchens. Homes wired this manner generally have two separate 120V power buses: the left side of the panel is the first bus, and the right side is the second. Multiple breaker boxes can indicate a split continuation. Only appliances like dryers or ovens will use both circuits at once. Therefore, for EOP to function properly, all connected devices must share the same bus, as they rely on the neutral/ground connection. Source: https://www.theregister.co.uk/Print/2013...generation Which implies that if you plan to use Ethernet over power lines, G.hn equipment is preferable since it operates via neutral/ground. Now consider why EOP doesn’t interfere with neighbors’ networks—it won’t. The main barrier is an absence of a physical link between homes (an air gap). In densely populated urban areas, G.hn might not be ideal for power-line deployment. Opting for existing coax or phone lines could be more suitable. Like WiFi, there are security features, but you won’t be asked for a complex password when connecting a device.

C
Cokkie77
Senior Member
556
07-08-2016, 06:24 PM
#13
I appreciate the progress in WiFi speed thanks to 5 GHz and higher bands. However, I’m still seeking a specialized long-range solution using lower frequencies—though the FCC would need to support it. For homes that are older or larger, achieving reliable speeds (50–100 Mbps for streaming) is important, but consistent performance and easy installation would be a huge advantage. At the very least, maintaining performance just below 2.4 GHz helps extend range while minimizing interference from other devices.
C
Cokkie77
07-08-2016, 06:24 PM #13

I appreciate the progress in WiFi speed thanks to 5 GHz and higher bands. However, I’m still seeking a specialized long-range solution using lower frequencies—though the FCC would need to support it. For homes that are older or larger, achieving reliable speeds (50–100 Mbps for streaming) is important, but consistent performance and easy installation would be a huge advantage. At the very least, maintaining performance just below 2.4 GHz helps extend range while minimizing interference from other devices.

Pages (2): Previous 1 2