inSSIDer - free version
I wish all posts were as constructive as yours sjptd, and welcome to the Forum by the way and to Plusnet, I hope everything runs smoothly.
Also on a constructive note, I agree with Jim about the need to change the link. Metageek have stopped any development of the free version and I can find no links on their websites to the previous free version. Also see for example http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-news/32296-metageek-moves-to-pay-model-for-new-inss... .
According to metageek the new paid for version has minimum system requirements of 4GB RAM and net 3.5
I've also seen some posts on this forum where people have inadvertently been led to the inSSIDer Office software by a search and ended up being confused.
Although this appears to have been written about the free version, most of it will be true for the free version, their link in the full review goes to the paid version
The full review can be found here
Unfortunately there only seems to be a few reliable locations left to download the free versions.
Edit: clarification re: link mentioned is in the full review
Also on a constructive note, I agree with Jim about the need to change the link. Metageek have stopped any development of the free version and I can find no links on their websites to the previous free version. Also see for example http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-news/32296-metageek-moves-to-pay-model-for-new-inss... .
According to metageek the new paid for version has minimum system requirements of 4GB RAM and net 3.5
I've also seen some posts on this forum where people have inadvertently been led to the inSSIDer Office software by a search and ended up being confused.
Although this appears to have been written about the free version, most of it will be true for the free version, their link in the full review goes to the paid version
Quote from: PCMag A Fun, Useful Tool
What’s great about inSSIDer is that you can use it for several real-world purposes for your wireless network. For instance, say you are trying to find the best location to place an access point or router. Position the device and then fire up inSSIDER to see what signal strength the software reports. This is really useful if you are trying to setup a Wi-Fi network in a place with lots of thick walls, glass or mirrors or multiple levels.
You can also use inSSIDer to tweak your wireless channel. In the U.S, there are 11 wi-fi channels. The channels recommended to set access points on are 1, 6, and 11, because they don't overlap. So if you see many wireless networks in your area using channel 11 for example, by using inSSIDer you can change your access point or router to operate on channel 6 to tweak performance.
Yes, it may be lightweight for those who deploy wireless networks professionally. But anyone managing a home or small business wireless network will certainly benefit from the information inSSIDer provides. It earns a 4.5 out of 5 star rating and is easily a PCMag Editors’ Choice for networking utilities.
The full review can be found here
Unfortunately there only seems to be a few reliable locations left to download the free versions.
Edit: clarification re: link mentioned is in the full review
Quote from: ejs Have you considered the possibility that those huge high spikes are faulty readings and should be ignored? Rather than assuming it means what you want it to be to prove the only acceptable stance on these forums that there can't possibly be anything wrong with the 582n, and the problem must be those "rogue" other networks.
Well given the tool has come highly recommended, I rather assumed I could rely on what it reports so I had not considered that specific router signal level reports could be a fault of the measurement tool. However now that you have made the suggestion that these are faulty readings, can you explain why the only appear against specific routers and never in respect of the TG router? For your suggestion to be applicable would imply that the monitor is selectively defective, rather than accepting the probability that these are rouge routers which are screwing with the wifi spectrum. See screen grab - there is only one router in this selection showing "faulty readings" - I guess all of the others must be out of step then?
For what it is worth, I have seen the same behaviour using inSSIDer - some odd APs transmitting massive signals at regular intervals.
I think that equally in the argument there are those who really believe that no one finds the TG582n acceptable - it does for the vast majority of users. If you want different or better there is a big choice out there - go buy something different if that is what you want.
ejs,
Thanks for a plausible explanation.
Looking at the routers involved, they are generally reporting at -90dB or less - when they spike they report -10dB. I suppose that it is possible that they have gone below -100dB and somewhere along the way, the sampling (data query) is taking the 2 most significant digits, thus reporting -10dB.
Whatever aside from the reported spikes, my TG router consistently delivers the highest signal at circa -60dB upstairs. In passing one wonders if these routers perform "better" laid flat or on edge / wall mounted given they have non-adjustable internal aerials.
Thanks for a plausible explanation.
Looking at the routers involved, they are generally reporting at -90dB or less - when they spike they report -10dB. I suppose that it is possible that they have gone below -100dB and somewhere along the way, the sampling (data query) is taking the 2 most significant digits, thus reporting -10dB.
Whatever aside from the reported spikes, my TG router consistently delivers the highest signal at circa -60dB upstairs. In passing one wonders if these routers perform "better" laid flat or on edge / wall mounted given they have non-adjustable internal aerials.
Can't help the sarcasm can we
What you forget is that the majority of people that post with wireless problems don't understand the technical issues involved. Whilst the simple answer is of course to advise someone to try a different channel, that in some cases may work, but may only for a while until another neighbour's wireless suddenly gives a problem, or because they've moved to a different part of the room or the house.
When the problems continue because they've only had the simple answer, they come back even more annoyed and frustrated and blame everything except the real cause of the problem.
The red mist often makes comprehension of the true problem more difficult, as it does the answer.
The whole damn picture (sorry for the pun) is made more complex if the neighbours' wifi's are on Auto and hopping about.
If you have a display where the non-technical person can see a picture of the signals, including their own, and also see how the situation changes as they move from one place to another, it's much easier to get them to understand what, in most cases, is going on.
A lot of people with these problems also have "difficult" buildings which unfortunately makes a satisfactory solution a lot more complex.
It should be relatively easy to deduce if non-wireless interference is a issue, but as to whether whoever responds to another's problem always remembers that possibility and mentions it at an appropriate time, is another matter.
Quote from: ejs Far simpler advice is to just try channel 1, then channel 6, then channel 11, and try them out and find out which of those works best in actual use. No messing about with any extra software at all. Unfortunately it doesn't look as impressive as drawing those diagrams, nor does it provide evidence that will be interpreted to claim all those other networks are the problem.
What you forget is that the majority of people that post with wireless problems don't understand the technical issues involved. Whilst the simple answer is of course to advise someone to try a different channel, that in some cases may work, but may only for a while until another neighbour's wireless suddenly gives a problem, or because they've moved to a different part of the room or the house.
When the problems continue because they've only had the simple answer, they come back even more annoyed and frustrated and blame everything except the real cause of the problem.
The red mist often makes comprehension of the true problem more difficult, as it does the answer.
The whole damn picture (sorry for the pun) is made more complex if the neighbours' wifi's are on Auto and hopping about.
If you have a display where the non-technical person can see a picture of the signals, including their own, and also see how the situation changes as they move from one place to another, it's much easier to get them to understand what, in most cases, is going on.
A lot of people with these problems also have "difficult" buildings which unfortunately makes a satisfactory solution a lot more complex.
It should be relatively easy to deduce if non-wireless interference is a issue, but as to whether whoever responds to another's problem always remembers that possibility and mentions it at an appropriate time, is another matter.