Printable View
That's OK I wasn't talking to you.
I guess you didn't read the topic thoroughly. Enjoy your Leap without 5ghz. I did not quote anyone because I did not want to start a personal argument with anyone specific.
If I did not contribute anything you should find no reason to quote my post and reply to me with an even sillier post that whines about someone else's post.
One wouldn't expect 5GHz missing in 2015.
Posted via CB10
Ahahahahaha Bla1ze, love your ASCII emoticon ;)
Back on topic, everyone should seriously calm down! It's 2015, sure, but this phone is a cheap phone.
While it might not have been a 'good call' as Bla1ze put it, it is understandable and not really something to get all upset about :/
Praise be unto our Lord, Squircle | Passport SQW100-1/10.3.1.2708
The leap is meant to be an entry level phone, priced accordingly. If that is all the OP can say about it then overall the phone is great.
5 GHz is notoriously horrible cause it can't go through walls and only works on short distance.
The only advantage is that no one is using it, so less interference
Posted via CB10
Oh man... the place i live has a router which doesn't supply 5Ghz band...!!
Nothing to complain... 2.4Ghz is still mainstream... and will be for a few years...
Posted via my z30/2744
To reiterate what everyone on here has said so far, 5 GHz signals deteriorate quicker over distance. The real advantage I see to using the 5 GHz spectrum over WiFi is for those devices at the closest ranges to the base to connect to 5 GHz so that they may be considerate for others who must connect through 2.4 GHz due to their distance from the base. Basically, the strategy lessens interference for devices in farther distances from the base. The exception is with 802.11ac, which theoretically connects over 5 GHz in a completely different manner--point-to-point directly rather than in proximal ranges, which ultimately lessens deterioration and noise from base to receiver, since the base isn't trying to communicate in equal distances around it.
Think of how triangulation works--you need three or more towers/satellites to approximate a location because simply measuring distance from noise and deterioration of signal coming from one tower would be grossly inaccurate, as it can be anywhere within the edge of the circle equidistant from the tower as the centre point. Even in cellular, lower frequencies mean signals cover longer distances, and pose lesser noise and deterioration. Why do you think the 700 MHz frequency is seen as so lucrative by all the carriers? 700 MHz in whatever block, and/or 800/850 MHz along with a higher frequency such as 1700 MHZ, 1900 MHz and/or 2100 MHz as a combined strategy maximises output and quality of service for all.
I'm not a technical person, I think, so can anyone confirm what I've just said?
Posted via CB10
I also disabled 5GHz on my router, was useless and troublesome in a three floors building.
I hear the router will work better if you put it on the top floor... The waves fall ok but they don't go up very well...
That depends on the router's radiation pattern. Routers usually radiate horizontal. The one's with external antennae have them pointing vertically. That radiates a horizontal pattern. To go through several floors, it is recommended to flip them sideways. On the internal antenna ones, you should lay the router flat, if it is a standing up model. This is not always the case with internal antenna routers. But it is worth a shot.
In general 5GHZ is pretty useless to go through several floors.
Just to clarify, signal attenuation in indoor air would not be a significant factor in the choice between 2.4Ghz(802.11g) and 5Ghz(802.11a).
However if you have walls and/or other building materials in the way, 2.4Ghz will penetrate better.
On the other hand the 2.4Ghz band has more interference in part because it penetrates better.
I use only 5Ghz at home because 2.4Ghz interference caused my Bluetooth headset to make a clicking sound.
If you live in an apartment or condo 5Ghz(802.11a) might be the better choice.
So the problem is we have walls and/or other building materials in the way. they're silly anyway since they serve only to divide what should be united. Now I understand Reagan telling Gorbachev to "tear down these walls." He just wanted Gorbachev to reap the benefits of his 5ghz router. Let's all commit right now to tearing down our walls...
Lol
The new AC standard should help. It uses both 2 and 5 GHz frequencies
Posted via CB10
Ok one last try...
energy - Why do 2.4GHz frequencies offer greater range than 5GHz routers? - Physics Stack Exchange
The attenuation table in the first answer shows that 5Ghz is not much worse at penetrating interior walls and significantly worse at penetrating exterior walls than 2.4Ghz, which in some situations is desirable.
moto g doesnt support 5ghz either as far as i know. nbd on the low end imo. i'm more curious about build quality tbh....dont want to see a bunch of leap users with screen lift problem.
I agree with you. Plus 5G does not have the range. 5G is in its diaper stages still IMO
Posted via CB10
Still a small gap between the horse and the water.
Lol you lost me at "Reagan"
Posted via CB10
So does the 802.11n post-Draft N600 standards.
Posted via CB10
No it does not. This is faux and it's misleading marketing by the industry. You're only getting Wireless A and C or N on 5 Ghz band. AC does not use 2.4 Ghz band.
Really? I thought that was the main advantage of the new standard, that it uses both at the same time
Posted via CB10
Yes really, after testing out 6 different routers from Best buy my research conclude that "simultaneous dual band" doesn't mean it's using both frequency on a single connection.
If a company advertise "Wireless AC1200, Dual Band (up to 300Mbps + 900 Mbps)" it does not mean you're getting a combine speed of 1200Mbps. It means you can choose either wireless N (2.4Ghz) / 300Mbps max or AC (5Ghz) / 900Mbps top speed.
I think this is a good article on the subject Wi-Fi was MEANT to be this way: Antennas and standards, 802.11 style ? The Register
It's 11ac, not Aand C.
And yes, 11ac for 2.4GHz exists, it's just not a priority because the band is so saturated, it won't be practical to use it for many. There's less gain for 2.4GHz than 5Ghz that has much more spectrum that can do 80/160 MHz bandwidths.
At 20MHz, 11ac adds one newer modulation. 40/80/160 add two more modulations that get those peak increase numbers.
For dual band routers, if they have separate 2.4 and 5GHz antennas, it will be operating on both. If they only have one set of antennas, then only 2.4 or 5 GHz will work at a time.
I updated my router to dual band ( Nighthawk R 7000 ) and the 5 GHz blows past the old 2.4 speed wise for my 5 GHz capable devices. I did expect some signal to distance drop off at 5 GHz but surprisingly that improved dramatically as well. Same house. I went with a Nighthawk
R 7000 and am glad I did. I would not make a phone decision based on lack of 5 GHz alone but lack of same will hurt already lackluster Leap sales due to market demands spec wise for new phones. Chen has definitely deemphasized hardware development for more "customer facing" folks, (gotta love that corporate new speak) and I think he will offload or close down hardware production at some point because it makes business sense and Chen has that.