"George" <george@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:HI2dnXoKkaW3m0HanZ2dnUVZWhednZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> Frankster wrote:
>>
>> "George" <george@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:t8qdnRcGDviBdUbanZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>>> My buddy lives near a state forest. He uses VZW and there is usable
>>> signal if you stand on one corner of the deck and never move. A tower
>>> permit (for a monopole) was issued for a location about 2 miles from
>>> him. Unfortunately there is a development not far from there where the
>>> smallest "house" is 7,000 square feet and every driveway has multiple
>>> fluffed up trucks parked in it. So even though they cut the forest down
>>> to build their big piggy "houses" they don't think it is appropriate to
>>> have a tower located anywhere near them so they have the permit tied up
>>> in court for over two years.
>>>
>>> My buddy lives in a rustic home that is ~ 1,200 square feet. The
>>> repeaters I have previously seen were better suited for commercial use.
>>>
>>> I was searching and noticed some vendors have packages that would be
>>> much more suitable for a house because the "base" unit does all of the
>>> work and could be placed on a table or counter. It has the amplifiers,
>>> power supply and an antenna. You just need to run a cable to an outside
>>> antenna.
>>>
>>> I was wondering if anyone had experience with them.
>>>
>>> Here is an example:
>>>
>>> http://www.repeaterstore.com/product...dual-band.html
>>
>> From your link: "Approximate coverage are is 2,500 sq ft."
>>
>> The key thing about repeaters is the power of the amplifyer. The more the
>> power, the more sq ft it will accomodates. HOWEVER... often no one really
>> cares that much about "sq ft". What is left unsaid is that the power of
>> the amplifyer directly correlates to the DISTANCE FROM THE INSIDE ANTENNA
>> where your phone will work. That is probably the most important stat.
>> Also, whatever the "stats", cut them at least in half (or worse) to get
>> the real-world spec.
>>
>> Having said that... for only $50 more, you can get one that doubles this
>> "sq ft" spec., and therefore the distance from the antenna inside where
>> it will work.
>>
>> I use this one, for $399.00:
>> http://www.gpsandmarineworld.com/dig...da4000sbr.html
>>
>> It works geate for me.
>>
>> -Frank
>
> I agree with your opinion. This is clearly consumer stuff where you have
> to wade through the marketing hype to figure out what it really does.
>
> I have looked at units similar to your link and noted the spacing
> requirements between the amplifier and antennas and the need for an
> intermediate location for the amp. The nice part about the one I was
> looking at is that it would work really well for my buddy's house.
>
> I see that Wilson has a new similar product and carefully avoids
> describing what coverage might be expected:
>
> http://www.wilsonelectronics.com/801247.php

Oh... also, to clarify... the minimum separation between antennas is also
influenced by factors other than simple distance measurement. For instance,
VERTICAL separation is much better than simple HORIZONTAL separation. Walls
and woodwork between antennas also help. It has everything to do with not
letting the signal beams interfere with each other. The minimum separation
specs given are always more of a guide. But, usually, you need at least that
much (as shown in the specs).

-Frank