I have a sales person that lives in a bad reception area, however
needs some Internet access. There is no cable, DSL, and satellite is
way to expensive and has really bad Terms of Service and a PIA to set
up.
They already have the Verizon UM175 usb modem and the UM150 (Trying
both out). We were thinking of trying one of the many boosters that
we have seen on the market, but don't know which ones are the good
ones or even if any are good. Does anyone have any recommendations on
a booster?
Jordan wrote:
> I have a sales person that lives in a bad reception area, however
> needs some Internet access. There is no cable, DSL, and satellite is
> way to expensive and has really bad Terms of Service and a PIA to set
> up.
>
> They already have the Verizon UM175 usb modem and the UM150 (Trying
> both out). We were thinking of trying one of the many boosters that
> we have seen on the market, but don't know which ones are the good
> ones or even if any are good. Does anyone have any recommendations on
> a booster?
Hard without any details. What is the current performance and why do you
think you need a "booster"?
George wrote:
> Jordan wrote:
>> I have a sales person that lives in a bad reception area, however
>> needs some Internet access. There is no cable, DSL, and satellite is
>> way to expensive and has really bad Terms of Service and a PIA to set
>> up.
>>
>> They already have the Verizon UM175 usb modem and the UM150 (Trying
>> both out). We were thinking of trying one of the many boosters that
>> we have seen on the market, but don't know which ones are the good
>> ones or even if any are good. Does anyone have any recommendations on
>> a booster?
>
> Hard without any details. What is the current performance and why do you
> think you need a "booster"?
What details do you need? I think the first line of the OP's message
supplies the necessary details.
The "booster" he is talking about would have a directional antenna
pointed a the nearest tower and a non directional antenna providing
coverage in a radius of maybe 100 feet. There are such devices but I
have excellent coverage and I never needed one!
On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:56:45 -0400, "Richard B. Gilbert"
<rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote:
>George wrote:
>> Jordan wrote:
>>> I have a sales person that lives in a bad reception area, however
>>> needs some Internet access. There is no cable, DSL, and satellite is
>>> way to expensive and has really bad Terms of Service and a PIA to set
>>> up.
>>>
>>> They already have the Verizon UM175 usb modem and the UM150 (Trying
>>> both out). We were thinking of trying one of the many boosters that
>>> we have seen on the market, but don't know which ones are the good
>>> ones or even if any are good. Does anyone have any recommendations on
>>> a booster?
>>
>> Hard without any details. What is the current performance and why do you
>> think you need a "booster"?
>
>What details do you need? I think the first line of the OP's message
>supplies the necessary details.
>
>The "booster" he is talking about would have a directional antenna
>pointed a the nearest tower and a non directional antenna providing
>coverage in a radius of maybe 100 feet. There are such devices but I
>have excellent coverage and I never needed one!
In general they are large wasters of money. The statistics show 8 out
of every 10 boosters is returned. They not only magnify the desired
signal but all the noise around it too.
"Mr. Smith" <nowhere@atall.net> wrote in message
news:fl25c51qtsapmn62kd0fl3qfcorac1g9rd@4ax.com...
>
> In general they are large wasters of money. The statistics show 8 out
> of every 10 boosters is returned. They not only magnify the desired
> signal but all the noise around it too.
If this were WIFI, you might go for a fancier antenna--directional, higher
gain.
What are the options for doing that for cell service? I'd think you would
have to buy a booster type device in order to have control over the antenna
and its placement?
Bill Sanderson wrote:
> "Mr. Smith" <nowhere@atall.net> wrote in message
> news:fl25c51qtsapmn62kd0fl3qfcorac1g9rd@4ax.com...
>>
>> In general they are large wasters of money. The statistics show 8 out
>> of every 10 boosters is returned. They not only magnify the desired
>> signal but all the noise around it too.
>
> If this were WIFI, you might go for a fancier antenna--directional,
> higher gain.
>
> What are the options for doing that for cell service? I'd think you
> would have to buy a booster type device in order to have control over
> the antenna and its placement?
If I were in the situation described by the OP, and I wanted cell phone
coverage badly enough to spend the money, that's exactly what I would
do! A high gain directional antenna on the roof pointed at the nearest
tower and connected to a cell phone repeater, sometimes referred to as a
"micro tower".
I'd guestimate that this might cost several hundred dollars. If
neighbors share the problem, they might wish to share in the solution
and should share the expenses.
"Mr. Smith" <nowhere@atall.net> wrote in message
news:fl25c51qtsapmn62kd0fl3qfcorac1g9rd@4ax.com...
: On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:56:45 -0400, "Richard B. Gilbert"
: <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote:
:
: >George wrote:
: >> Jordan wrote:
: >>> I have a sales person that lives in a bad reception area, however
: >>> needs some Internet access. There is no cable, DSL, and satellite is
: >>> way to expensive and has really bad Terms of Service and a PIA to set
: >>> up.
: >>>
: >>> They already have the Verizon UM175 usb modem and the UM150 (Trying
: >>> both out). We were thinking of trying one of the many boosters that
: >>> we have seen on the market, but don't know which ones are the good
: >>> ones or even if any are good. Does anyone have any recommendations on
: >>> a booster?
: >>
: >> Hard without any details. What is the current performance and why do
you
: >> think you need a "booster"?
: >
: >What details do you need? I think the first line of the OP's message
: >supplies the necessary details.
: >
: >The "booster" he is talking about would have a directional antenna
: >pointed a the nearest tower and a non directional antenna providing
: >coverage in a radius of maybe 100 feet. There are such devices but I
: >have excellent coverage and I never needed one!
:
: In general they are large wasters of money. The statistics show 8 out
: of every 10 boosters is returned. They not only magnify the desired
: signal but all the noise around it too.
Problems are typically not the equipment but the install. That and folk
tend to skimp on the installation, poor configuration, low quality coax and
cheap antennas.
Jordan wrote:
> I have a sales person that lives in a bad reception area, however
> needs some Internet access. There is no cable, DSL, and satellite is
> way to expensive and has really bad Terms of Service and a PIA to set
> up.
>
> They already have the Verizon UM175 usb modem and the UM150 (Trying
> both out). We were thinking of trying one of the many boosters that
> we have seen on the market, but don't know which ones are the good
> ones or even if any are good. Does anyone have any recommendations on
> a booster?
The boosters get pretty good reviews for voice service. I don't know
anyone who used one for data.
Have you looked into radio wave service for the internet? I live in an
area with prehistoric phone service and no cable. You are right
satellite is very expensive with creepy contracts. The radio wave
programs are less expensive and they don't have the same lag time
problems as satellite.
I am on my second radio wave company. The first was just a little
brick-sized gizmo that plugged into the wall outlet and the USB port of
the computer. Unfortunately it was a small company and they just
couldn't support it. The one I have now is through a local phone co-op
and uses a parabolic dish that is right next to the TV satellite dishes
on the side of the house. The service is excellent and I get speed
equivalent to medium to high DSL for about the same price as VZW's data
plan.
On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 06:14:39 -0700 (PDT), Jordan
<nojunk_allowed@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I have a sales person that lives in a bad reception area, however
>needs some Internet access. There is no cable, DSL, and satellite is
>way to expensive and has really bad Terms of Service and a PIA to set
>up.
>
>They already have the Verizon UM175 usb modem and the UM150 (Trying
>both out). We were thinking of trying one of the many boosters that
>we have seen on the market, but don't know which ones are the good
>ones or even if any are good. Does anyone have any recommendations on
>a booster?
The above model works quite well for me on Verizon Mobile Broadband. I
happen to work in the one and only location within NYC with weak EVDO
coverage. Without the antenna the signal drifts between 0 and 1 bars.
With, I get a consistent 3 bars and pretty good speed.
Be advised I tried several other less expensive models, which were of
no use at all.
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> George wrote:
>> Jordan wrote:
>>> I have a sales person that lives in a bad reception area, however
>>> needs some Internet access. There is no cable, DSL, and satellite is
>>> way to expensive and has really bad Terms of Service and a PIA to set
>>> up.
>>>
>>> They already have the Verizon UM175 usb modem and the UM150 (Trying
>>> both out). We were thinking of trying one of the many boosters that
>>> we have seen on the market, but don't know which ones are the good
>>> ones or even if any are good. Does anyone have any recommendations on
>>> a booster?
>>
>> Hard without any details. What is the current performance and why do
>> you think you need a "booster"?
>
> What details do you need? I think the first line of the OP's message
> supplies the necessary details.
What signal levels they now have. What they might have done to correct
it etc.
>
> The "booster" he is talking about would have a directional antenna
> pointed a the nearest tower and a non directional antenna providing
> coverage in a radius of maybe 100 feet. There are such devices but I
> have excellent coverage and I never needed one!
>
Very familiar with them. The usual issue implementing them is people
just expect to open the box and plug something in. Since multiple
transmitters and receivers are involved it does require a proper
installation.
"Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:RsWdnd8FRcT711_XnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@giganews.com ...
> George wrote:
>> Jordan wrote:
>>> I have a sales person that lives in a bad reception area, however
>>> needs some Internet access. There is no cable, DSL, and satellite is
>>> way to expensive and has really bad Terms of Service and a PIA to set
>>> up.
>>>
>>> They already have the Verizon UM175 usb modem and the UM150 (Trying
>>> both out). We were thinking of trying one of the many boosters that
>>> we have seen on the market, but don't know which ones are the good
>>> ones or even if any are good. Does anyone have any recommendations on
>>> a booster?
>>
>> Hard without any details. What is the current performance and why do you
>> think you need a "booster"?
>
> What details do you need? I think the first line of the OP's message
> supplies the necessary details.
>
> The "booster" he is talking about would have a directional antenna pointed
> a the nearest tower and a non directional antenna providing coverage in a
> radius of maybe 100 feet. There are such devices but I have excellent
> coverage and I never needed one!
>
that's pretty funny, you describe a repeater to a t, but boosters dont do
what you mention
"Agent_C" <Agent-C-hates-spam@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3rt6c5pd7v6aac6la8gi37urgl653lp5v8@4ax.com...
>
> http://tinyurl.com/y8ojtgv
>
> The above model works quite well for me on Verizon Mobile Broadband. I
> happen to work in the one and only location within NYC with weak EVDO
> coverage. Without the antenna the signal drifts between 0 and 1 bars.
> With, I get a consistent 3 bars and pretty good speed.
>
> Be advised I tried several other less expensive models, which were of
> no use at all.
The link reaches a whole page of antennas--you'll need to tell us which one
you are actually using...
"Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote in message
newsemdnZ0_GIzTOl_XnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@giganews.com ...
> Bill Sanderson wrote:
>> "Mr. Smith" <nowhere@atall.net> wrote in message
>> news:fl25c51qtsapmn62kd0fl3qfcorac1g9rd@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> In general they are large wasters of money. The statistics show 8 out
>>> of every 10 boosters is returned. They not only magnify the desired
>>> signal but all the noise around it too.
>>
>> If this were WIFI, you might go for a fancier antenna--directional,
>> higher gain.
>>
>> What are the options for doing that for cell service? I'd think you
>> would have to buy a booster type device in order to have control over the
>> antenna and its placement?
>
> If I were in the situation described by the OP, and I wanted cell phone
> coverage badly enough to spend the money, that's exactly what I would do!
> A high gain directional antenna on the roof pointed at the nearest tower
> and connected to a cell phone repeater, sometimes referred to as a "micro
> tower".
>
> I'd guestimate that this might cost several hundred dollars. If neighbors
> share the problem, they might wish to share in the solution and should
> share the expenses.
funny, there are many commercially available REPEATERS that do exactly that,
but boosters don't... see the subject line, he didn't ask about anything
except a booster
Peter Pan wrote:
> "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:RsWdnd8FRcT711_XnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@giganews.com ...
>> George wrote:
>>> Jordan wrote:
>>>> I have a sales person that lives in a bad reception area, however
>>>> needs some Internet access. There is no cable, DSL, and satellite is
>>>> way to expensive and has really bad Terms of Service and a PIA to set
>>>> up.
>>>>
>>>> They already have the Verizon UM175 usb modem and the UM150 (Trying
>>>> both out). We were thinking of trying one of the many boosters that
>>>> we have seen on the market, but don't know which ones are the good
>>>> ones or even if any are good. Does anyone have any recommendations on
>>>> a booster?
>>>
>>> Hard without any details. What is the current performance and why do
>>> you think you need a "booster"?
>>
>> What details do you need? I think the first line of the OP's message
>> supplies the necessary details.
>>
>> The "booster" he is talking about would have a directional antenna
>> pointed a the nearest tower and a non directional antenna providing
>> coverage in a radius of maybe 100 feet. There are such devices but I
>> have excellent coverage and I never needed one!
>>
>
>
>
> that's pretty funny, you describe a repeater to a t, but boosters dont
> do what you mention
That's pretty funny!! You criticize my reply but do not attempt to
supply a more correct answer!
"Jordan" <nojunk_allowed@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f0ce85c3-2bcf-439b-b640-3d3039c9421a@y21g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>I have a sales person that lives in a bad reception area, however
> needs some Internet access. There is no cable, DSL, and satellite is
> way to expensive and has really bad Terms of Service and a PIA to set
> up.
>
> They already have the Verizon UM175 usb modem and the UM150 (Trying
> both out). We were thinking of trying one of the many boosters that
> we have seen on the market, but don't know which ones are the good
> ones or even if any are good. Does anyone have any recommendations on
> a booster?
forget boosters, consider a REPEATER
boosters usually only amplify/boost in one direction, a repeater is
bidirectional and amplifies both directions (sometimes called/name a BDA =
Bi Directional Amp)
my guess is you want a link to something that has been used in a similar
situation...
check out the repeaters at www.cellantenna.com
"Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:fvydnd0Q7e85u1nXnZ2dnUVZ_vxi4p2d@giganews.com ...
> Peter Pan wrote:
>> "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:RsWdnd8FRcT711_XnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@giganews.com ...
>>> George wrote:
>>>> Jordan wrote:
>>>>> I have a sales person that lives in a bad reception area, however
>>>>> needs some Internet access. There is no cable, DSL, and satellite is
>>>>> way to expensive and has really bad Terms of Service and a PIA to set
>>>>> up.
>>>>>
>>>>> They already have the Verizon UM175 usb modem and the UM150 (Trying
>>>>> both out). We were thinking of trying one of the many boosters that
>>>>> we have seen on the market, but don't know which ones are the good
>>>>> ones or even if any are good. Does anyone have any recommendations on
>>>>> a booster?
>>>>
>>>> Hard without any details. What is the current performance and why do
>>>> you think you need a "booster"?
>>>
>>> What details do you need? I think the first line of the OP's message
>>> supplies the necessary details.
>>>
>>> The "booster" he is talking about would have a directional antenna
>>> pointed a the nearest tower and a non directional antenna providing
>>> coverage in a radius of maybe 100 feet. There are such devices but I
>>> have excellent coverage and I never needed one!
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> that's pretty funny, you describe a repeater to a t, but boosters dont do
>> what you mention
>
> That's pretty funny!! You criticize my reply but do not attempt to
> supply a more correct answer!
Huh? Copied from the next post in this thread....
forget boosters, consider a REPEATER
boosters usually only amplify/boost in one direction, a repeater is
bidirectional and amplifies both directions (sometimes called/name a BDA =
Bi Directional Amp)
my guess is you want a link to something that has been used in a similar
situation...
check out the repeaters at www.cellantenna.com
doesn't a suggestion and a link count as attempting to provide a more
correct answer?
>"Agent_C" <Agent-C-hates-spam@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message
>news:3rt6c5pd7v6aac6la8gi37urgl653lp5v8@4ax.com.. .
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/y8ojtgv
>>
>> The above model works quite well for me on Verizon Mobile Broadband. I
>> happen to work in the one and only location within NYC with weak EVDO
>> coverage. Without the antenna the signal drifts between 0 and 1 bars.
>> With, I get a consistent 3 bars and pretty good speed.
>>
>> Be advised I tried several other less expensive models, which were of
>> no use at all.
>
>The link reaches a whole page of antennas--you'll need to tell us which one
>you are actually using...
"Peter Pan" <pponvistaNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote in message
news:IZednW0mLZn6uFnXnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@earthlink.co m...
: "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote in message
: newsemdnZ0_GIzTOl_XnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@giganews.com ...
: > Bill Sanderson wrote:
: >> "Mr. Smith" <nowhere@atall.net> wrote in message
: >> news:fl25c51qtsapmn62kd0fl3qfcorac1g9rd@4ax.com...
: >>>
: >>> In general they are large wasters of money. The statistics show 8 out
: >>> of every 10 boosters is returned. They not only magnify the desired
: >>> signal but all the noise around it too.
: >>
: >> If this were WIFI, you might go for a fancier antenna--directional,
: >> higher gain.
: >>
: >> What are the options for doing that for cell service? I'd think you
: >> would have to buy a booster type device in order to have control over
the
: >> antenna and its placement?
: >
: > If I were in the situation described by the OP, and I wanted cell phone
: > coverage badly enough to spend the money, that's exactly what I would
do!
: > A high gain directional antenna on the roof pointed at the nearest tower
: > and connected to a cell phone repeater, sometimes referred to as a
"micro
: > tower".
: >
: > I'd guestimate that this might cost several hundred dollars. If
neighbors
: > share the problem, they might wish to share in the solution and should
: > share the expenses.
:
:
:
: funny, there are many commercially available REPEATERS that do exactly
that,
: but boosters don't... see the subject line, he didn't ask about anything
: except a booster
Most users are not technical and fewer are up on the current buzz words. to
most booster and repeater are one and the same.
Booster for poor reception areas 
emdnZ0_GIzTOl_XnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@giganews.com ...
Linear Mode
