# Wireless Network Help!



## Sarn Darkholm (Nov 15, 2008)

I am going to be moving into my BF's house within the next month, and he already has an existing wireless network.  That is all well and good for my laptop, but my desktop has to be wired.  The way the house is laid out we will not be able to run a wired from his modem/router to my computer.  I myself have 3 wireless 4 port routers.  Is there a way I can use one of theose routers as an Access Point, and hard wire into the back of it, and connect to the wireless network?  Please help cause I am at a loss.


----------



## CaptainCool (Nov 15, 2008)

i am a PC nerd but im not too familiar with wireless networks... i prefer cables, they are way more reliable.
but that might just work. you could set up one of your routers as a repeater and put a cable in it i guess. you can set up a repeater by entering the menu of the main router.
but i never tried that! i cant guarantee it^^


----------



## Tobias_Moremost (Nov 15, 2008)

I tried to do the same, it isn't that difficult however you're router has to support it or have enough memory to install an other firmware (which I both couldn't do).
It is called bridging (see for more information: http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Wireless_bridging ), it is just a little different of repeating (repeating adds extra range to the wireless network while bridging connects two wired(/partial wireless) networks).

If you're devices don't support bridging (or another fancy name) you could look if your router is listed in this list and install DD-WRT (BTW if it goes wrong you have a nice brick).


----------



## Roland (Nov 15, 2008)

Is buying a wireless PCI card for your computer too out of the question?


----------



## Pi (Nov 15, 2008)

doing that is going to double-NAT you unless you configure your end to be a bridge instead of an AP. Most don't let you do that by default; see if you can install DD-WRT, which will let you if it works on your platform.

Also, i see above that someone says "if it goes wrong you have a nice brick"; this isn't THAT common of a happening, and I've recovered hardware even without a JTAG cable. Don't worry too much.


----------



## flechmen (Nov 15, 2008)

You might have to use your laptop as a bridge.

You can always get a wireless adapter for your desktop
http://computers.pricegrabber.com/w...dapter/st=query_suggestions/kw_suggest=1/rd=1


----------



## Sarn Darkholm (Nov 15, 2008)

Roland said:


> Is buying a wireless PCI card for your computer too out of the question?



already have one, a Belkin, that was part of a "bad batch" cant afford a new one atm


----------



## flechmen (Nov 15, 2008)

Sarn Darkholm said:


> already have one, a Belkin, that was part of a "bad batch" cant afford a new one atm


You should be able to return it for a good one.


----------



## SnowFox (Nov 15, 2008)

In my experience, anything "belkin" is a bad batch. Maybe I just got unlucky, but I would never recommend it.


----------



## Irreverent (Nov 18, 2008)

Sarn Darkholm said:


> already have one, a Belkin, that was part of a "bad batch" cant afford a new one atm



Wireless USB sticks can be had for $14 or so......


----------



## flechmen (Nov 18, 2008)

Take your laptop, connect it to the wireless network. Take your wired router and plug the laptop into the WAN side. Assuming it's a Windows computer:
Open Control Panel
If in "Category view"
Click "Network and Internet Connections" then "Network Connections"
If in "Classic view"
Click "Network connections"

Select your wireless connection then hold down "Ctrl" and click on the wired connection. Right click and select "bridge connections". It should do some stuff, reconnect to the wireless and the wired router. Plug your desktop into the wired router and you should be good to go. It would work better if you used a switch or a crossover cable though.


----------



## Sarn Darkholm (Nov 21, 2008)

issue has been settled.  Begged my parents enough and they bought me a new Netgear Wireless PCI card.  Works fine now.  Thanks for all the help tho.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 21, 2008)

Get a wifi USB...


----------



## Roland (Nov 21, 2008)

NewfDraggie said:


> Get a wifi USB...



If you can, you might as well grab a PCI card.  That way, you don't use up any USB ports, and it's part of your computer.  There are no complications (once it's all setup) and there's less worry when you're moving your computer around.


----------



## net-cat (Nov 21, 2008)

NewfDraggie said:


> Get a wifi USB...





Roland said:


> If you can, you might as well grab a PCI card.  That way, you don't use up any USB ports, and it's part of your computer.  There are no complications (once it's all setup) and there's less worry when you're moving your computer around.


^ this.

USB sucks for networking, wired or wireless. (I actually have a USB network adapter, chosen for the fact that it does not require special drivers on XP. I use it for getting on the internet long enough to download the _real_ network drivers.)



Sarn Darkholm said:


> issue has been settled.  Begged my parents enough and they bought me a new Netgear Wireless PCI card.  Works fine now.  Thanks for all the help tho.


^ Best possible resolution, short of being able to actually run a wire.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 21, 2008)

Well unless they're doing anything network intensive or gaming wireless might actually be better for them then having wires all over the place.

Glad it worked out. :3


----------



## Eevee (Nov 21, 2008)

As everyone knows, wifi simply refuses to transmit packets it detects are from games.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 21, 2008)

Eevee said:


> As everyone knows, wifi simply refuses to transmit packets it detects are from games.



You're both not a gamer nor know how important it is to not have your enemy jumping across the screen dogging every round, sorry.


----------



## net-cat (Nov 21, 2008)

My wireless experience at the best of times is "can use for anything that doesn't require a constant connection." SSH and IRC can generally deal with dropped connections. Most games, not so much.

(Although there was that time a friend and I were playing Starcraft in two different cars going down the freeway...)


----------



## Eevee (Nov 21, 2008)

NewfDraggie said:


> You're both not a gamer nor know how important it is to not have your enemy jumping across the screen dogging every round, sorry.


On the contrary, I just think you're being rather presumptuous in assuming that a "gamer" (however you define that) necessarily both plays mainly trigger-finger games _and_ obsesses over ping enough to notice any gamebreaking difference with wifi.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 21, 2008)

Eevee said:


> On the contrary, I just think you're being rather presumptuous in assuming that a "gamer" (however you define that) necessarily both plays mainly trigger-finger games _and_ obsesses over ping enough to notice any gamebreaking difference with wifi.



Well then if you don't know what I mean then don't say anything at all assuming you do.
And I don't know a single gamer that will touch wifi gaming, rpgs, rts, sports, fps, etc, etc...


----------



## Pi (Nov 21, 2008)

NewfDraggie said:


> You're both not a gamer _nor_ know



I love trying to read your statements with the words you actually use. They make for tasty logical contradictions.



> Well then if you don't know what I mean then don't say anything at all assuming you do.
> And I don't know a single gamer that will touch wifi gaming, rpgs, rts, sports, fps, etc, etc...



Ugh. Just because you don't know any member of a group doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. You say that all the time and it's pretty fucking stupid.


----------



## Eevee (Nov 21, 2008)

NewfDraggie said:


> And I don't know a single gamer that will touch wifi gaming, rpgs, rts, sports, fps, etc, etc...


Yeah, no true Scotsman uses wifi.


----------



## Roland (Nov 21, 2008)

Eevee said:


> Yeah, no true Scotsman uses wifi.



A true Scotsman would be too drunk to know the difference.


----------



## Sarn Darkholm (Nov 21, 2008)

Roland said:


> A true Scotsman would be too drunk to know the difference.



Too many things to reply to so I am singling you out, no offence 

First of all I am Scottish, and I do not drink, nor do all Scotsmen drink, you have us confused with our close relations...The Irish 

Now this is to those who say gamers don't use wifi.


I use wifi for all my online games which amount to 1,  FFXI Online.  I mostly play single player, because I abhor the so called "communities" multiplayer gaming supports.  Too many little bitches whining for my taste.


----------



## Roland (Nov 21, 2008)

Sarn Darkholm said:


> First of all I am Scottish, and I do not drink, nor do all Scotsmen drink, you have us confused with our close relations...The Irish



I am both by heritage.  Shazaam.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 21, 2008)

I'll stoke the fire a little on the Gaming on WiFi fight...

Meh, WiFi is too unreliable for me when I'm looking to do anything other than browse the internet, IM, check e-mail, etc. When it comes to large chunks of data or things that require a low latency connection, I prefer a nice, old-fashioned wire. Signal degradation is significantly lower, and you typically wouldn't find your connection speed being throttled in order to maintain stability.

YMMV, but WiFi for me has always been very flaky for non-casual applications - Not to the point of being unusable, but to the point where large amounts of traffic bring the connection to its knees and local interference (other networks, cordless phones, microwave ovens, etc) is problematic in some cases. This is exasperated, of course, with poor WiFi hardware... The Siemens Speedstream modems (which look very much like this, with a fixed, non-detachable antenna) that are issued by our DSL provider here tend to be very low signal, very picky, very unstable pieces of trash that literally have pockets of air well within their signal radius that will never connect properly, and indeed this area can sometimes simply be several inches in size. ... And yet people try to game with them. And complain when they don't work. Facepalm.

If for some reason anything other than WiFi is unacceptable, 802.11n or a SpeedBoost'ed 802.11g router is probably the best way to go. They typically have (at least) two antennae or a high-gain antenna, which decreases the likelihood of signal degradation and increases the stability of the connection. Of course, this might not have a huge effect if the router and the client are right next to each other, but in that case, why are you using WiFi?


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 21, 2008)

Pi said:
			
		

> I love trying to read your statements with the words you actually use. They make for tasty logical contradictions.


You cut off half the sentence; it's not going to make sense with missing parts, dipshit.



			
				Pi said:
			
		

> Ugh. Just because you don't know any member of a group doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. You say that all the time and it's pretty fucking stupid.


Well then, show me somebody that prefers a ping of 500+ while gaming, please.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 21, 2008)

Hey Newf, you realize that a lot of WoW players regularly play with pings in excess of 500ms, sometimes up to and over 2000ms, right?  But then, that's WoW, and everyone knows my opinion of WoW...


----------



## Roland (Nov 21, 2008)

Runefox said:


> But then, that's WoW, and everyone knows my opinion of WoW...



Really?

And if people just want faster Internet, use the cable and stop bitching over such a trivial issue.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 21, 2008)

Roland said:


> Really?


Yeah... Lots of threads on Blizzard's forums and others to that extent. I know this because most of the latency reducing "tips" available online happen to be posted there by WoW players desperately attempting to get down below 500ms. 



> And if people just want faster Internet, use the cable and stop bitching over such a trivial issue.


Which would be my point... Like I said, cable is stable.


----------



## Eevee (Nov 21, 2008)

NewfDraggie said:


> Well then, show me somebody that prefers a ping of 500+ while gaming, please.


tradeoffs are not a hard concept to grasp


----------



## Neybulot (Nov 21, 2008)

Runefox said:


> Hey Newf, you realize that a lot of WoW players regularly play with pings in excess of 500ms, sometimes up to and over 2000ms, right?  But then, that's WoW, and everyone knows my opinion of WoW...



Too bad World of Warcraft is a freaking MMORPG. Not something like an FPS or other game that needs faster responses.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 21, 2008)

Neybulot said:


> Too bad World of Warcraft is a freaking MMORPG. Not something like an FPS or other game that needs faster responses.



Yeah, which is where my opinion of WoW comes in; All the same, 500ms (half a second) is a long time, even in WoW if the situation warrants fast reaction (raids). I don't know how those people with 2000ms and higher play. I guess they don't raid or anything.


----------



## Sarn Darkholm (Nov 21, 2008)

Neybulot said:


> Too bad World of Warcraft is a freaking MMORPG. Not something like an FPS or other game that needs faster responses.



But what if someone doesn't like FPS games.  *Gasp*  

I know its hard to believe, but there are people out there who don't like them.  

Anyway this has gotten far off topic.  As I said in an earlier post, I got a new wireless card, a Netgear, works great.  Its connected to a Netgear G+ Router with 17 internal antennas that cover the whole house.  I may have an issue when I move in with my BF, but we will deal with that when I get down there.  In any case the router will be across the hall.

Besides, gaming discussions are better to be kept to the "Three Frags Left" page, not here on the "Bits and Bites" page.


----------



## Irreverent (Nov 22, 2008)

Runefox said:


> This is exasperated, of course, with poor WiFi hardware... The Siemens Speedstream modems (which look very much like this, with a fixed, non-detachable antenna) that are issued by our DSL provider here tend to be very low signal, very picky, very unstable pieces of trash that literally have pockets of air well within their signal radius that will never connect properly



Admittedly, the typical customer prem equipment is rather low end, but what do you want for $30.00-55.00 per month?  No ISP is going to roll out Netscreen SSG 5's or 20's at that price.  Nor train an off-shore help desk to support it.


----------



## indrora (Nov 28, 2008)

*REVIVE LEVEL 3!*

I'm a gamer who uses WiFi for his stuff. Even though I'm 4 feet from the AP.

Either way, you've got a PCI 802.11mumblemumble card As long as you can connect to the AP, you're rocking.

WiFi has four basic speeds: 54mbps, 24mpbs 11mbps and 1mbps
The speed is a logarithmic function to the distance between you and the AP. Any decent gaming client pushes out about 300Kb a second, UDP or TCP. If you're really concerned about strenth of the signal then get an extemely high gain antenna on either the AP (extends the range it transmits) or the adapter (extends the range it can pick up.)

Some Wifi adapters dont let you change the antenna, however many Linksys and such will. Just look at the connector for the antenna. If you can twist off the antenna and reveal a pigtail adapter (they'll look like a Coaxial hookup, only smaller) you're in buisiness. Many computer shops (i'd go for the little ones) have antennas or worst case you ask what kind it is (or google around and learn) and get one off the net. I have a 5.9 dBi antenna for one of my external adapters when i'm in sparse conditions or on a laptop with no wifi (linux of course) and also for that adapter i have a 9.8dBi antenna for use when i put it in AP mode (Realtek chipsets ftw)


----------



## Runefox (Nov 28, 2008)

indrora said:


> *802.11g* has four basic speeds: 54mbps, 24mpbs 11mbps and 1mbps


Fixed that for you.

For reference, 802.11a supports the same rates, 802.11b supports only 11mbps at maximum, all of which are synchronous, meaning upstream and downstream are combined. 802.11n (Draft N) supports all the speeds of 802.11a and 802.11g, plus a maximum speed of 108mbps (asynchronous, meaning upstream and downstream are separated).

... But 802.11n doesn't exist yet.

Anyway, I wouldn't even try a 1mbps or even up to an 11mbps connection for modern games, but WiFi 4 feet from an 802.11g AP is fine for gaming.


----------



## indrora (Nov 29, 2008)

Well i have a Linksys WRE54G in my front room and play DooM and HL2M fine even when the repeater is pulling doubletime My ping jumps a tad but i dont have problems


----------

