Computer Science Canada

Wire vs. Wireless

Author:	War_Caymore [ Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:19 pm ]
Post subject:	Wire vs. Wireless
OK, heres's the sitch, i am going to get internet in my room but in order to do that i will need either a normal router and 100ft of LAN cable OR a wireless router and a wireless internet card for my comptuer. Another suggesting i ahve recieved is to get my own cable modem (we already own one, so i don't know what kind of copmplications this will make) and get a normal router for my room and mabey 5ft of cable. i need your suggestions. Wire: Pros - Secure as hell! - Internet only to my comptuer Cons - 100ft. of cable required. - lack of compadibility to wireless devices (Nintendo DS, exe) Wireless: Pros - Get internet anywhere in the house - Most likely cheaper than 100ft of cable - compadible with wireless devices Cons - Insecure Thank you for your input, if any input is inputed ( ok i'll stop)

Author:	rdrake [ Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:30 pm ]
Post subject:
You must ask yourself a few questions. Do I need to transfer over files regularly? How often do I play LAN games? Do I feel like punching out holes in my walls? Do I know what a crimp tool is? Wireless may mean freedom in mobility and lack of holes punched into the wall, but there are some disadvantages too. You can have security on your wireless network (though md might argue me that ). As for a wired network, I'd just cut my own network cable for a distance that long. It gets too expensive for longer cables. Also, if you're going to have a lot of network traffic, wireless is no good. 802.11g is better, but still not the same as wired. LAN traffic includes things like transferring files and playing games.

Author:

ZeroPaladn [ Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:38 pm ]

Post subject:

You could allways have both. Have your cable internet go from your blue box into a Wireless router, then into your computer. Thus, you have your wire internet for your file transfering, and you have your wireless for them wireless devices (DS, Laptop, PSP, ect.)

Turing:

Wall - - - - - - - - - - -BlueBox - - - - Computer
. | . /
. | . /
. | . /
Wireless router

sory for the turing sytax, but i think this will work. best of both worlds.

Author:	War_Caymore [ Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:39 pm ]
Post subject:
answering questions 1. Yes, i do need to transfer files regularly. Even when i do get the net in my room. 2. LAN games will be a big part in this. i got plenty of games taht don't require cd keys that can play over the net and LAN. bessides, it's great fun! (shotgun my computer!) 3. I would not mind "punching holes" into my wall. mostly because the comp is going to be in my closet so no ugly holes will be noticeable from regular viewing. also, i am a bit of a security freak as well, so hence the reason why i made this topic 4. completely oblivious to what a "crimp" tool is... i was thinking wires because they are much faster than most wireless and i get to hook up my PS2. but, the amount of wire would be the problem. to ge from the computer in my basement, to my room would take 100ft easy. i came up with the idea of moving the computer to a closer location but was turned town to the fact taht it would be too much work on my parents behalf. my uncle came up with the idea of wireless jsut because it would possibly be cheaper depending what i got. but to get wired up speed, i need a strong Wireless Router. which, most likely, would cost more. ZeroPaladn wrote: You could allways have both. Have your cable internet go from your blue box into a Wireless router, then into your computer. Thus, you have your wire internet for your file transfering, and you have your wireless for them wireless devices (DS, Laptop, PSP, ect.) Turing: Wall - - - - - - - - - - -BlueBox - - - - Computer . \| . / . \| . / . \| . / Wireless router not a bad idea but to have both would be costly. considering i'm still making payments on my computer and the fact that i want to get it internet ready asap, that might not be an option. mabey in the future when i have time to screw around.

Author:	md [ Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:39 pm ]
Post subject:
Wireless is not secure without a lot of eork, and even then it's only encrypted. Wired internet (if properly sheiled) cannot be monitored. In practice it's possible to run a VPN with strong enough encryption not to have to worry about it though The other problem with wireless is that getting wireless drivers to work with nix (linux, BSD, minix) or 64bit windows is usually anything but painless and easy. In some cases it's downright impossible because of a lack of drivers. Wired internet on the other hand almost always works. And is fast. But yes, wires are messy and are probamatic to run to places. Two cable modems is actually a possibility, though you may not be able to do with both from rogers; they don't like doing things like that.

Author:	War_Caymore [ Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:44 pm ]
Post subject:
md wrote: Two cable modems is actually a possibility, though you may not be able to do with both from rogers; they don't like doing things like that. thats what i was afraid of. we get our internet from Superior Wireless. so i don't know if they will allow that without any extra charge or if will even be allowed.

Author:	rdrake [ Fri Oct 20, 2006 1:21 pm ]
Post subject:
War_Caymore wrote: 1. Yes, i do need to transfer files regularly. Even when i do get the net in my room. By large files, I mean > 1 GB. Transferring 8 GB files over the LAN isn't so fun. War_Caymore wrote: 2. LAN games will be a big part in this. i got plenty of games taht don't require cd keys that can play over the net and LAN. bessides, it's great fun! (shotgun my computer!) Wireless is not really for you then. War_Caymore wrote: 3. I would not mind "punching holes" into my wall. mostly because the comp is going to be in my closet so no ugly holes will be noticeable from regular viewing. also, i am a bit of a security freak as well, so hence the reason why i made this topic The computer is going to be in your closet? Explain. War_Caymore wrote: 4. completely oblivious to what a "crimp" tool is... Strip the outside wire, put the wires into the connector, and use the following tool to put everything together. Magic, really. War_Caymore wrote: my uncle came up with the idea of wireless jsut because it would possibly be cheaper depending what i got. but to get wired up speed, i need a strong Wireless Router. which, most likely, would cost more. If you want something pretty quick, look into wireless-n. More expensive, but quite fast (as in, up to 300 mbps).

Author:	Silent Avenger [ Fri Oct 20, 2006 3:45 pm ]
Post subject:
Now I'd suggest to do what my school does run, run a wired network and run the wireless of the wired network when you need it. So you could run a LAN cable to your PC and still be able to use your Wi-Fi and wireless items via a hub which is connected to the wired network. Although this does add some extra cost so I'd go with a wired network if I would be playing a lot of LAN games. Of course it's all up to you just think of what you're going to be using the network for the most and pick the type of network that best fits your needs.

Author:	Blade [ Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:16 pm ]
Post subject:
I've yet to see a wireless router that doesn't have a built in 4 port switch. From the wireless routers I've had, I've always been able to disable wireless if I haven't had a need to use it. My family owns two laptops so we use wireless on a regular basis. Security isn't too much of an issue because I don't really live in a largly populated area, although I've setup security on the router to filter out most of the morons that don't know how to bypass it. Most motherboards come built in with a network adapter for wired use, so if you ahve that then all you'll be doing is spending a little more money for a router with wireless capabilities. It may not be a horrible idea to get a wireless router because you may change your mind in the future. I use wireless for gaming and it isn't really too bad. I actually used it at a LAN party one time. In COD2 most of the wired players were getting a ping of about 10, whereas mine was about 15-20. It didn't really affect gameplay too much. However for transferring files, I got fed up with that and got an external hard drive.

Author:	War_Caymore [ Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:53 pm ]
Post subject:
i do not live in a very big community so the worries of someone hacking me isn't all taht big of an issue. right now i'm dling all the drivers for my computer (i punked the internet cord from the home computer, after begging for half an hour). actualy, i got a 1GB flash drive and it already has all the files i'm going to need. so i don't think i am going to be transfering any fiels right now. I think i'm going to go wireles. more input is appreciated though.

Author:	BenLi [ Fri Oct 20, 2006 7:00 pm ]
Post subject:
More things to consider. where is the router going to be placed? In my home setup the router is on the second floor and the computer i use is in the basement. The router, though is one of the better ones out there still has trouble reaching and is unreliable at times. Also, are you doing any console gaming? if so you need a usb adapter, not the card one

Author:	rdrake [ Fri Oct 20, 2006 10:06 pm ]
Post subject:
Depends what kind of router you get for signal strength. Hell, mine's made by Microsoft and still reaches the top floor with a strength of 55% when it's positioned in the storage room in the basement .

Author:	ericfourfour [ Fri Oct 20, 2006 10:13 pm ]
Post subject:
Why would you need a usb adapter for a console? My wireless router has 4 ethernet ports and I just run a line from there to my PS2 (more speed for gaming). My friend has his router in the basement, and a connection in his room upstairs and he has no trouble getting a signal. It's made by linksys if your curious.

Author:	ZeroPaladn [ Sat Oct 21, 2006 3:00 am ]
Post subject:
rdrake wrote: War_Caymore wrote: 3. I would not mind "punching holes" into my wall. mostly because the comp is going to be in my closet so no ugly holes will be noticeable from regular viewing. also, i am a bit of a security freak as well, so hence the reason why i made this topic The computer is going to be in your closet? Explain. I will do it for ya. He has an empty closet in his very small room. so he's sticking it in his closet for a) room, b) for the privacy, and c) cause he can.

Author:	Mazer [ Sat Oct 21, 2006 7:59 am ]
Post subject:
Are you taking into consideration things like ventilation?

Author:	ZeroPaladn [ Sat Oct 21, 2006 10:35 am ]
Post subject:
I hope he is.

Author:	bugzpodder [ Sat Oct 21, 2006 10:05 pm ]
Post subject:
if you chose the right wireless solution, it should be pretty secure. arguably this is more difficult than enabling your mobile phone security

Author:	Silent Avenger [ Sat Oct 21, 2006 11:52 pm ]
Post subject:
ZeroPaladn wrote: I hope he is. I too hope he is because without proper ventilation he'll cook his computer. I'm just wondering, how big is your closet War_Caymore?

Author:	md [ Sat Oct 21, 2006 11:55 pm ]
Post subject:
bugzpodder wrote: if you chose the right wireless solution, it should be pretty secure. arguably this is more difficult than enabling your mobile phone security Cell phones aren't secure, if you have an attena you cna crack the encryption in real time But yes, wireless if you use enough encryption is as secure as a wired connection. However that encryption will cost you CPU power.

Author:	Silent Avenger [ Sun Oct 22, 2006 9:07 am ]
Post subject:
Well I don't think that running encryption will take away much performance from the CPU. It probably won't be noticable plus if he's playing his games most of the work will be done by the GPU which I don't think has anything to do with the encryption. But if someday he plans to upgrade his computer and upgrades to a dual core processor or to the planned quad core processor that will be coming out someday I don't think encryption will be an issue.

Author:	md [ Sun Oct 22, 2006 11:27 am ]
Post subject:
Silent Avenger wrote: Well I don't think that running encryption will take away much performance from the CPU. It probably won't be noticable plus if he's playing his games most of the work will be done by the GPU which I don't think has anything to do with the encryption. But if someday he plans to upgrade his computer and upgrades to a dual core processor or to the planned quad core processor that will be coming out someday I don't think encryption will be an issue. Games are NOT GPU bound most of the time, they are CPU bound. And encryption is a significant overhead, at least at levels approaching a wired level of security. Besides, if your CPU is tied up in running the game then it won' t be spending as much time encrypting packets and your lag will go up. All that more CPU power does is decreases latency for hte same amount of work; and the level of work only ever goes up. I still say wired. Nothing beats wired speeds of 1Gb/s or 10Gb/s Wireless @ 54Mb/s (theoretically, in actuality it's much worse) doesn't even come close to comparing.

Author:	rdrake [ Sun Oct 22, 2006 7:43 pm ]
Post subject:
md wrote: I still say wired. Nothing beats wired speeds of 1Gb/s or 10Gb/s Wireless @ 54Mb/s (theoretically, in actuality it's much worse) doesn't even come close to comparing. Fiber optics in your household? Damn you're good, md .

Author:	md [ Sun Oct 22, 2006 7:44 pm ]
Post subject:
rdrake wrote: md wrote: I still say wired. Nothing beats wired speeds of 1Gb/s or 10Gb/s Wireless @ 54Mb/s (theoretically, in actuality it's much worse) doesn't even come close to comparing. Fiber optics in your household? Damn you're good, md . Don't need fiber; simple CAT6e with the appropriate hardware does it quite well

Author:	Andy [ Sun Oct 22, 2006 8:57 pm ]
Post subject:
Blade wrote: I've yet to see a wireless router that doesn't have a built in 4 port switch. there are actually alot. linksys makes one, dlink does as well. here is an asus one.

Author:	Blade [ Sun Oct 22, 2006 10:24 pm ]
Post subject:
i was basically implying that that most of the wireless routers come integrated with wired switches. i didnt say they didnt exist. on another note, recently 802.11n has been released with a theoretical max transfer speed of 540Mbit/s. but still nothing compared to wired applications. for the average user though, wireless can handle almost everything.

Author:	Andy [ Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:57 am ]
Post subject:
theoretical is garbage. actual thoughput will probaby be around 1/4th that. and then network utilization will probably bring you down to 1/5th.. it might be as fast as 100mbps wired if they're lucky

Author:	Blade [ Mon Oct 23, 2006 11:30 am ]
Post subject:
Andy wrote: theoretical is garbage. actual thoughput will probaby be around 1/4th that. and then network utilization will probably bring you down to 1/5th.. it might be as fast as 100mbps wired if they're lucky what exactly is wrong with that? even if you're right in saying that actual thoughput is 1/4 of 540 (140mbps) where wikipedia says its ~200mbps, how much of an improvement is that from 802.11a/g, where actual thoughput was 25mbps? thats still at minimum 4 times as fast. I say wireless technology is improving nicely for those who like to use this network type.

Author:	War_Caymore [ Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:00 pm ]
Post subject:
would this work? this is the plan that i have going to hook up my computer to the internet and still have a router in my room, but it looks a little farfetched, not to mention the chances of it actualy working are unknown. now, to answer questions - yes, my closet is big, and is well ventalated. not to mention my room is pretty cold, never reaches 20C unless tehres like me and a couple of buddies. i like cudding under my blinkets (too much info eh?). i still think wires are the way to go. they are more secure not to mention much faster than most wireless. besides, the wireless network neets to get through 2 floors and into my closet somehow. it should work but how strong would be the signal?

Author:	Blade [ Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:07 pm ]
Post subject:
yeah, that would work. I've used 2 routers before. You just need to make sure that the second router (not connected to the modem) has DHCP turned off and has a different ip than the one with DHCP (ie: first router 192.168.0.1, second 192.168.0.2) just make sure that the second router is out of the DHCP range of the first. But a cheaper, easier solution would be to buy a switch instead of a second router.

Author:	md [ Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:12 pm ]
Post subject:
You might also consider using a switch instead of a second router; they're cheap and require zero setup. Just makes your life that much easier.

Author:	Blade [ Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:19 am ]
Post subject:
md wrote: You might also consider using a switch instead of a second router; they're cheap and require zero setup. Just makes your life that much easier. Blade wrote: But a cheaper, easier solution would be to buy a switch instead of a second router. edit: In your case, what I would do is basically what you have in that diagram. Although I would definatly use a switch in place of the second router. The first router though, I would buy with wireless support for a couple reasons. The first being, since you have a DS, you can use wireless with that (unless you want to buy the Nintendo wireless adaptor for your DS). The second reason being in case you want to switch to wireless later. You may indeed buy something later on that you wish you had wireless for.

Author:	ZeroPaladn [ Tue Oct 24, 2006 11:56 am ]
Post subject:
He's allready got one of them USB Wireless DS Adapter (man that thing gets f***ing hot after a while). Hmmm... never thought of using a switch.

Author:	War_Caymore [ Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:48 pm ]
Post subject:
Blade wrote: yeah, that would work. I've used 2 routers before. You just need to make sure that the second router (not connected to the modem) has DHCP turned off and has a different ip than the one with DHCP (ie: first router 192.168.0.1, second 192.168.0.2) just make sure that the second router is out of the DHCP range of the first. But a cheaper, easier solution would be to buy a switch instead of a second router. sence i have no clue what a switch is, i'll go ith changing the IP of the second router. sence this thread is full of smart, intelligent people, i would like to know how to do this considering this will be the first router setup i've put in my household. secondly, anyone know where i can get a cheap router in the northern ontario area? anyone who lives in the Soo will know here White river is. i don't get out of town much and need a good place to get it shipped to me.

Author:	ZeroPaladn [ Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:59 pm ]
Post subject:
OFF TOPIC! There is no place like 127.0.0.1 1 out of 10 people understand binary. the other 50% don't understand this. Back on topic... why don't you order the switch off the internet?

Author:	rdrake [ Tue Oct 24, 2006 1:18 pm ]
Post subject:
ZeroPaladn wrote: 1 out of 10 people understand binary. the other 50% don't understand this. There are 10 kinds of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who do not. As for my network setup, I have a wired router plugged into the DSL modem, then a second wireless router plugged into the first. One's on the main floor, another in the basement. Computers on those floors plug into the router on their floor and all goes well.

Author:	ZeroPaladn [ Tue Oct 24, 2006 1:22 pm ]
Post subject:
rdrake wrote: ZeroPaladn wrote: 1 out of 10 people understand binary. the other 50% don't understand this. There are 10 kinds of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who do not. Ah, thats how it is. I couldn't remember that so i made up my own.

Author:	md [ Tue Oct 24, 2006 2:09 pm ]
Post subject:
War_Caymore wrote: sence i have no clue what a switch is, i'll go ith changing the IP of the second router. sence this thread is full of smart, intelligent people, i would like to know how to do this considering this will be the first router setup i've put in my household. A switch is like a router except it's cheaper and it will work much better then a second router unless you know how to setup the second router properly (and I'm betting you don't as it involves more then just changing the IP). Basically all you need to do with a switch is plug one cable from the router to the uplink on the switch, and then hte rest of hte stuff into the switch. That's it.

Author:	bugzpodder [ Wed Oct 25, 2006 7:12 am ]
Post subject:
i've seen $30 reuters nowadays. i guess you can shave an additional $10 for a switch but why bother?

Author:	War_Caymore [ Wed Oct 25, 2006 7:49 am ]
Post subject:
does this switch also have a few usable ports of it's own? cause tahts why i need it. from the pic that andy put up, it looks like it only has one input and one output, and it is completely useless for what i'll be using the second router for.

Author:	md [ Wed Oct 25, 2006 9:04 am ]
Post subject:
War_Caymore wrote: does this switch also have a few usable ports of it's own? cause tahts why i need it. from the pic that andy put up, it looks like it only has one input and one output, and it is completely useless for what i'll be using the second router for. Think of a switch as a router; because routers all have switches build in. So it's a router, without all the setup or hassle. If you have a router and you want to use it as a switch, just plug one one the 4 connections in the back into one of the 4 connections on your other router and should all just work like magic. Yay for switches!

Author:

rdrake [ Wed Oct 25, 2006 9:08 am ]

Post subject:

War_Caymore wrote:

does this switch also have a few usable ports of it's own? cause tahts why i need it. from the pic that andy put up, it looks like it only has one input and one output, and it is completely useless for what i'll be using the second router for.

Both have usable ports... it's just that routers tend to have more features (ie. DHCP, for example). This is why they recommend a switch, it would be easier for one to get a switch rather than configure the second router.

As I recall, I had to do the following steps for each router to get this working (please add on if you can think of more):

For router 1:

DMZ router 2's IP

Pretty simple, eh?

For router 2:

Set WAN IP as router 1
Static IP address
Gateway is router 1

I think that's it for router 2 setup. However, I had to keep the DHCP server running on both routers. Why? Well, I honestly don't know. This is bad though because they run almost as two separate networks. You should try disabling the DHCP server on the second router first, then reboot the computers to check.

This is basically how I did it without an uplink port. If anybody else has done it too, I'd love to hear what you did.

Author:	War_Caymore [ Wed Oct 25, 2006 10:37 am ]
Post subject:
ok, ty for all of your inputs. this is really going to make my little project a sucess. now, to find al the parts i'm going to need... again, thank you all.

You can syndicate this boards posts using the file backend.php or view the topic map using sitemap.php.

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy