<div class="gmail_quote">On Jan 16, 2008 11:50 AM, Mike Miller <<a href="mailto:mbmiller@taxa.epi.umn.edu">mbmiller@taxa.epi.umn.edu</a>> wrote:<br><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
the US would have to meet FCC requirements even if they were designed for<br>other countries -- so they'd have to partially disable laptops for US<br>sales.</blockquote><div><br>And they might, guess I don't know. If I was sending a laptop to Kenya with the intent of making it talk to others well, I'd crank up the power to whatever is still safe, far exceeding what the FCC would allow.
<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> On the other hand, maybe they are within US FCC limits and most<br>competitors' laptops just aren't close to pushing up against the FCC
<br>limit.</blockquote><div><br>Possible.<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> The XO makers say that the antennae are the key -- most laptops
<br>don't have antennae.<font color="#888888"></font></blockquote><div><br>Yes they do. It's just wrapped around the mobo inside of the chassis instead of sticking out the top. Since FCC rules talk about effective radiated power at a distance, instead of actual output power, you could break the law with either design if you were so inclined. Problem with the former is that it could possibly microwave your hand if it were boosted that high. Then again, maybe that's why they don't.
<br><br>I'd definitely let a laptop manufacturer put a pair of dorky "ears" on my laptop if it boosted the wifi strength that significantly.<br><br>-Brian<br></div></div>