8400 to 5200i wifi transplant
yan_benyamin
Posts: 42
in AMX Hardware
I've got this MVP-5200i with a bad signal reception. The other 5200i and 8400 I've got is good. Is there a way I could do a wifi card transplant from the 8400?
0
Comments
So did you get an RMA? Is it going to be fixed?
I can say that the wireless connection is definitely worse than the 8400 (which isn't that good either.)
At our shop here, I put the WAPs as far away from the systems as I can when we burn them in. I can get them about 100 feet away and with a few intervening cinder-block walls. My laptop card gets a 'good' to 'very good' signal strength. MVP-8400s get good to fair (with an occasional 'very good')
Sometimes the 5200s won't connect at all.
Using our RF spec analyzer I can see a pretty consistent 40-60 db signal strenght coming from the WAP at that distance. While that's not great, it's still pretty good.
This doesn't bode well.
What's the ideal testing circumstances? Take an access point outside and have complete open air testing? I wonder what kind of testing we can do and see what is "normal." I'd love to have some benchmarks so we all know what is normal and what isn't. This way when we test the new panel's we can sort out the bad ones - though I don't feel this should be our responsibility, but instead should be QC's.
Not to be cynical but I don't think there is such a thing as 'normal'
The fact that the 2.4Ghz range is the most poorly thought out thing the FCC has ever done, makes it almost impossible to get a grip on the problem.
The basic problem is that there's just too many things going on in that band.
We spend an inordinate amount of time testing and trying to break stuff. However, when we get the systems in the house, we always seem to run into more problems with the 2.4Gig band. It almost always boils down to stuff you just can't do anything about.
And since WIFI is not designed to handle interference, we're left holding the bag.
Now I'm starting to rant and it's Friday and I don't want to rant.
So here's an ascii art picture of a flower.
,.... ,,'' ""-. .--,,' "", ,. ,' .-, ... ` ,' ,' .-" P ``. : .,. ,'".' : , ,--;-, `.," `. ,' : : ' : : ` '-, `. , , : : : t. ', : ` ` ,' : `. : : `"'`. : : : : : :`. `. ,' : : : `. ` : `. `-,...( .,' , ,' : : : `. ' " ,' : `. ,", `. "----' ,' , `", `,. `, .' : : `, "-,.,. ,,' , ` `,. :'---"' ,' t `-....-td ,' "-. "-,,....,-" ,,-,. .. `.. : ,.''"----"",... ,'""' "" `-. . `T-.. ..-`).,,' `. ,"' `" t ,( `"""" ,' ' ' , `"` : --. , ` `. :: ,. : : ,'' .' ( `"), `. -. `. `, .' , , ,'`""- : : ,...t,`,.' ` `,:`,. ' ,' ,",--t ,' ` `. `. , `", ' :, : ,.'' "-- ,' `, : ,' `, `,` t :: : ,.: .' ` -,..---"`'"''. : ,'`,`. :: ,"'`"-,... ,,' `, :`'"' `,t :`.,", ' ,' t ,.-`---,.. : t )' '-`-..... -'' `. ,""""""' : ``. `,", .' `"`-. ' `, :`,..,.,'"""" `-,...-,.,' ", `, ' ", `,. -hrr- : `,.. ,. """-t.``'`-.. ,..., ``-.. `""""' , `""---....'why not ASCII porn?
If only I had nothing to lose . . . LOL!!
If you have the time to surf pr0n, you already have too much time on your hands.
However, if you have enough time on your hands to create ascii pr0n, then you really need something better to do with your life... :P
Anyway - I think I'm starting to realize that the 5200 may be just what it is - a great looking remote, which a killer display with not so great range. Now . . . I think what we have to do in order to sell these and make them work properly and plan accordingly for it. Don't use 1 access point to do the entire house, and then put a 5200 at the far end.
We just put an AP in the bedroom where the 5200 is. Works fine now! What I do think is there should be just a little more information (either given to us or shared when calling tech support) as to what "normal" range is. This way - we're not asking for a replacement when nothing is wrong and it's just typical results. I would imagine that if your panel is 10 feet from the AP and it's reading "poor" - it's got an issue.
What I'm saying - we shouldn't jump the gun and expect AMX to fix whatever issue they might have with this immediately - that's if there is even an issue to begin with. Who knows, maybe there's nothing wrong at all and we're demanding too much!
Nice idea and it'd probably work. I just hope that we'd be able to turn off the WAP in the case where we've got several docking stations in a small area. I like the idea though . . . . that'd be absolutely killer!
One problem I can see with the table-top version is that there'd have to be two wires run to it. We get enough griping about the 1 power wire as it is. Adding a 2nd CAT5 would probably throw the interior desecrators into caniptions.
Paul
With the number of pins in the dock, it would seem to me it would be possible to switch over to a wired connection when docked. And I suggest this as an option, not something built into all docks ... just a different model to add to the tool kit.
Then having a built in WAP wouldn't be a bad idea except for the fact that AMX would be responsible for making the WAP and so far they haven't done such a great job with the panels wi-fi capabilities with real WAPs.
What AP are you using? I have been working with some 5200s lately and other than a hiccup for a few seconds here or there (the wireless network is below par), they have been solid wireless soldiers. They are connected to Cisco APs and I have yet to see anything below 'fair'. They can't receive data like the 8400s can, so you have to be a little more frugal but I am surprised to hear all these complaints about them.
Overall the 5200i's aren't bad but for the price tag and the fact they are useless w/o a connection I think they should be made with the best wi-fi products available. They still don't roam very well and often won't re-associate even when the AP they were associated w/ is out of range. Maybe a better attanae design, hardware, logic, something!
I honestly would prefer to use only wired/fixed in place panels but that's not what the customers want. Take in account the potential for RF interferance from 3rd party products not to mention adding in a Zigbee network since the 2.4ghz spectrum isn't congested enough already.
I once saw a documentory where they were giving away free laptops to kids in Africa. The laptops cost around $100.00 each and were purchased with money collected from donations and I believe they were powered by a hand crank since most villages were w/o electricity. They claimed that these laptops also had a far better wi-fi capabality because of the design, products used and placement of the antennae then a typical laptop. Now these TPs don't come close to the reception and reliability of a standard laptop which makes this $100.00 laptop far superior. Now this doesn't make sense!
Client's house - Cisco Aironet 1100 - 50-60 feet = poor / offline
Client's house - WAP54 - 60 feet line of sight = fair / poor
My house - Linksys WAP54G - 50 feet = fair/poor
Our Shop - Linksys WAP54G - 60 feet = very good
So . . . I'm thinking environment. I don't see how it can be very good at our shop and poor / fair at my house & the client's. I think for us - we're just going to throw in another access point to fix our problem. Definitely need to test the area's signal strength before we install them.
I don't really know where it was supposed to be, but looking at the shape of the pcb, i guess it should've been in the top corner. mine was placed below the scroll wheel, and if yours are too then maybe that's the way they planned it.
After doing some investigating - it is how it's supposed to be. I too thought they got lazy and put a PCB chunk as an antenna where ever they pleased, alas - that is not the case.