docj

FWIW Gord had previously posted that under the new FCC rules, these amplifiers only provide the boost necessary to get good reception and, as a result, might not appear to give the same kind of amplification we've all become accustomed to with older devices.

I'll be the first to admit that I don't know much about how LTE systems choose cells, etc, but I've been reading what I can find on the topic so I can better understand the behavior of my new Maximum Signal amp. From what I've read it appears that we're oversimplifying the problem if we focus entirely on absolute signal strength, a parameter often labeled RSRP (Reference Signal Received Power ). In selecting what cell to use the phone also evaluates RSRQ (Received Signal Reference Quality) which is a measure of signal to noise and other factors.

At my current site the RSPR is only ~-102dBm but the RSRQ is a rock solid -7dB which is representative of an excellent signal even though the absolute power is only marginal. Using SignalCheck Pro, the SNR ranges between ~17-22dB.

By way of contrast, we were downtown yesterday evening where the RSRP was -82dBm but the RSRQ was in the -10dB range and the SNR was down around 10dB. So the absolute power level of the signal was higher but the overall quality was lower.

If I understand this correctly, then these results would indicate why my Maximum Signal amp does not appear to be amplifying the signal at our site--it doesn't need to! If there's already an excellent RSRQ then, I would assume, there's simply no need to do anything.

If I have understood all of this correctly, it would also explain why SignalCheck often sees a neighboring cell with a higher RSPR than the cell I'm connected to. I assume that the RSRQ of that cell isn't as good so it's ignored even though it's signal is usually stronger.

OTOH if I've completely messed up this explanation of LTE signal parameters then I would welcome being corrected! I freely admit that this is pretty sophisticated stuff and my "training" is limited to what I can read on the internet which always is dangerous.

 

do you recommend have your tanks professionally cleaned? How often would you recommend?

 

 

 

We had our tanks professionally cleaned a couple of years ago when we were experiencing problems getting the gray tank to drain. For those who say this is a waste of money, my suggestion is not to criticize something if you've never tried it. The cleaning by http://AllProWaterFlow.com involves the use of a pressure washer with extremely thin hoses and small nozzles that can be "threaded" into the tanks from the outside drain port. Using this the operator was able to remove large chunks of calcified material that had built up in the tank over its then ~10+ years of use.

The quantity of stuff removed was far greater than could have been removed by any other method IMO. Yes, calcified material will dissolve, slowly, in a strong solution of dishwasher detergent, but these golf ball size lumps would have needed quite a while to dissolve.

I don't think that professional cleaning is needed on a regular basis, but every couple of years it might make sense. Unfortunately, the franchisees for AllPro aren't located throughout the US and I don't know of any other competing services.

Windows defender is already on Windows 8. It is the same engine used for MSE and their enterprise antimalware product Forefront. You don't want to run MSE on 8. Defender takes better advantage of the secure boot and other security improvements on 8.

 

The new Defender is not the same as the old defender. They recycled the name for the new antimalware program.

That's really interesting especially since my new Dell with Windows 8 came with a one-year Kaspersky pre-installed. I guess the anti-malware companies are hanging in there trying to avoid extinction if this new Defender does everything they do and is free. At least with MSE people had to make the conscious choice to download it, so most wouldn't. If it's already embedded in Windows then it will become the default option and the vendors will lose lots of business.

This discussion prompted me to go to the Microsoft site to read the MSE information since I will have to make the same decision in a couple of months. One thing that surprised me is that MSE does not contain a firewall, but, rather, assumes you want to run the standard Windows firewall. In the past I hadn't been all that impressed with the Windows firewall and to my knowledge it only operates against incoming threats and does not monitor outward activity. Therefore, nothing prevents something like a key-logger from sending outbound information, assuming that it got in by some means.

Since quite a few of you are using MSE, what firewall solutions have you implemented?

I've been very pleased with Kaspersky Internet Security for the past several years, but that includes a lot more than just the Anti-Virus package you mention. However, I've been reading all the posts related to Microsoft Security Essentials and I may consider switching when my Kaspersky license expires.