From: "Jeffrey Race" Received: from [192.168.100.201] (HELO mail.2rosenthals.com) by 2rosenthals.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.16) with ESMTP id 2107687 for os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com; Wed, 29 Oct 2008 06:55:16 -0400 Received: from static-71-171-102-26.clppva.fios.verizon.net ([71.171.102.26] helo=mail2.2rosenthals.com) by secmgr-ny.randr with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.43) id 1Kv8hl-0004AP-QH for os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com; Wed, 29 Oct 2008 06:55:16 -0400 Received: from kcout01.prserv.net ([12.154.55.31]:55253) by mail2.2rosenthals.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Kv8cR-0005I2-1X for os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com; Wed, 29 Oct 2008 06:49:43 -0400 Received: from 600xjrnew60gb (ppp-58-10-102-48.revip2.asianet.co.th[58.10.102.48]) by prserv.net (kcout01) with SMTP id <20081029105504201008a2cme> (Authid: usinet.jrace); Wed, 29 Oct 2008 10:55:04 +0000 X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A010208.4908410A.01E6,ss=1,fgs=0 X-Originating-IP: [58.10.102.48] To: "OS/2 Wireless List" Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 17:55:01 +0700 Priority: Normal X-Mailer: PMMail 2000 Standard (2.20.2717) For Windows 2000 (5.0.2195;4) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Cisco 340 vs Linksys WRT54 sensitivity X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Spam-Report: 2.0 DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE RBL: Envelope sender in blackholes.securitysage.com Message-ID: Does anyone have any data comparing the sensitivity of these two devices in the same field strength using the same external antenna? I have tested a location and find it usable but marginal with the Cisco 340 card. If the Linksys device has a better RF front end, I might expect a better connection. Ideas? Jeffrey Race -- This email was Anti Virus checked by Astaro Security Gateway. http://www.astaro.com