Re: newbie needs advice

[-pull@shoot]

On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 20:34:02 GMT, "John O"
<johno@#no^spam&heathkit.com> wrote:

>> Ok thanks I see that now.
>
>If you were protecting the Louvre, or some such valuable and highly-sought
>thing then wireless might not be the first choice. But you're looking to
>stop punks and thugs, and they wouldn't know modulation from moderation,
>which means wireless densors would be just as secure as anything else.
>
>So although it IS technically possible to hang up a wireless alarm system
>and render it blind, it just doesn't happen in the real world.
>
>-John O

Strange, pro's say in this group that RFI occur and according to you
it never happen, strange.

A lot of strange statements are mentioned by "so called" pro's who
mention:
1. RFI exist and can't be avoided
:  (true);
2. There is a RFI detection in the "modern" wireless alarm
   systems
:  (but its not supported with manufacturer written data).
3. The wireless alarm systems are working fine, no RFI detected
   since 20+ years and 100000+ systems
:  (???);
4. They have no RFI reliability measurement tools except theyre
   on site experience
:  (finger in the wind technique);
5. There is no manufacturer support whatsoever on that RFI subject.
:  !!!
There are a lot of contradictions in what they say..
 Why do pro's not call the manufacturers for RFI written warranted
statements and support about the RFI problem?
 How is it possible too be so Unprofessional.

Wireless alarm systems are no longer installed by "real" professionals
because they know installation can be detected from the outside with a
simple receiver, can be muzzled with RFI, its just unreliable.

Paul