Wi-Fire long-range WiFi adapter hands-on and impressions
By Darren Murph 
posted September 2nd 2009 1:39PM
posted September 2nd 2009 1:39PM
We tested hField's oddly-shaped doohickey on both a Windows-based and OS X-based (10.5) machine, and we're happy to say that setup was a snap on both platforms. Once the drivers are installed and the device is connected via USB, you simply pull up the Wi-Fire control panel, refresh the list of nearby hotspots and select the one that you'd like to connect to. Refreshing the list was always snappy, and the handy signal strength indicators were -- on the whole -- rather conservative. In other words, we had no problem connecting to someone's open signal that showed 24 percent, and we found the connection to be rather strong for the hour or so that we were leeching.
Entering a security password was also a cinch; if the hotspot you selected required one, a pop-up box alerted you that some input was needed. If you were lucky enough to select an option that was open, Wi-Fire simply did the rest itself. Once connected, two new bars showed at the bottom of the Connection Manager. One displayed the real-time signal strength, while the other showed the real-time link quality. We can't say for certain if the Wi-Fire really did help us connect to routers that were 1,000 feet away, but we can say that the amount of hotspots available to sync with increased three to five times on average when compared to using our laptop's built-in WiFi antenna.
_103x88.jpg)
_103x88.jpg)
_103x88.jpg)
_103x88.jpg)
_103x88.jpg)
Better still, the Wi-Fire can be easily repositioned to get a more solid connection, and given that it connects over USB, you can use that 50 foot USB extension cable (and signal repeater) that's currently collecting dust in your attic. The device is remarkably lightweight and perfectly suited for travel, and at least in our experience, it proved to be a real lifesaver when visiting new locations where local internet wasn't available. Regardless of whether you're hoping to leech off of someone else's connection for a tick while you're away or you're looking to increase signal strength within your own home, the Wi-Fire delivers.
At first glance, we figured $59 for a device high on promises (and likely low on results) was outrageous. After spending a week with it, we can definitively say that this thing's worth every penny if you find yourself frequently on the move or in need of a stronger connection from one end of the house to the other. You're practically assured of seeing your available hotspot list grow at least threefold, and once connected, Wi-Fire does a commendable job of maintaining the connection and avoiding dropouts. Our only real beef with the device is the lack of 802.11n support, but unless you're looking to transfer files locally, you won't even notice. Trust us -- this one only looks like a gimmick.
Very cool. How much?
Last paragraph: $59.
Imagine how much better your life would be if you learned to read all the way through. There you'll find your answer!
Ignorance is bliss
Posting first > reading
Apparently.
How much what?
This thing looks like it would be very helpful.
@ blueangel - Do you read at all, or just look at the pretty pictures. It says $59.
Your reprimands are too late. Blueangel finally realized he was a waste of space and killed himself.
He will be missed.
RemDX: I find your comments to be in poor taste. Bad form, sir.
That is all.
Dang, that looks awesome. I'd love to get one, but I'm rarely on the move with my laptop. Oh well.
i love a comment from true tech junkie. you want this product badly, but have absolutely no need for it. @Spedione,... i salute you.
Wrap your laptop/computer with aluminum foil.
Then, you will have a reason to buy one!
Legend has it that this device can actually read your thoughts, which it coincidentally uses against you throughout the day. For example, your hungry and you think of something to eat, this little doozy actually grabs those thoughts and then gets rid of what you really want to eat, making you have to settle for something you wern't really wanting to eat in the first place. A story like this HAS to be true
Legend?
Any chance we could see this compared with some home made WiFi antennas? I've seen stories that claim just as good performance from a home made antenna. (Plus I'm cheap and next to free sounds better than $59 even if it's bigger.)
A cantenna versus this would be a nice little featurette some day in the near future.
waves hand*
this IS the wifi antenna you are looking for
http://www.engadget.com/2005/11/15/how-to-build-a-wifi-biquad-dish-antenna/
That may well be so, but I wouldn't want to walk into a clients office and give them a home made antenna for that random room they didn't bother to get cabled.
you can search on google for a homemade yagi antenna...
There's no homemade version of this. The closest would be a homemade Cantenna, but even that will cost about $10 plus a few hours of your life and you end up with something that's not very portable at all. Not to mention that the homemade Cantenna connects through an antenna N-connector. Most laptops have a built-in wifi antenna with no connector for an external antenna. So, the question you have to answer is, is $49 worth it for portability, USB connection, and commercial build quality?
perfect gift for your broadband neighbor!
uhh isn't this a receiver?
Well, all wifi devices are both transmitters and receivers. The neighbor would have to set it up to provide ad-hoc connections and to route them to the broadband connection.
I really need this!!
Where to buy?
And college students all over the world descend upon it like hungry sharks.
I can only fantasize about having this, seeing as all my college money is currently funneled into ramen and beer.
My girlfriend lives in a neighborhood with ~100 houses, all with wifi, and all VERY close to each other. I'd love to see the readout on the signals received...
OMG!! Teh Googlez finds your answer Pontro!
https://store.hfield.com/Wi_fire_p/hfwfg200.htm#
Hmmm, I am impressed. Almost sounded too good to be true, thanks for the research
Glad to see you did almost nothing to provide an objective comparison. Finding more hotspots is a great sign. But how about some actual speed and latency readings with and without the WiFire?
Simple. Without the WiFire the speed was 0 kbps. With the WiFire the speed was X kbps where X > 0.
Har. Fine, not link speeds. But how about physical range. They say, "Well, we saw moar!" There's no indication they were actually farther away (though likely) nor how much farther. Numbers > No numbers.
Did I miss the part of the review where the before and after results were compared? How strong was the signal strength with the OEM antenna?
I used the first generation, it worked well but the mount was horrible, it was difficult to get to to balance on top of most notebooks and accurately pointing the antenna was impossible because the cord would pull it every time you breathed on it. have they fixed the physical issues yet? if so then I have no doubts this is worth the ~$60
"you can use that 50 foot USB extension cable that's currently collecting dust in your attic."
In practice, the USB specification limits the length of a cable between full speed devices to 5 meters (a little under 16 feet 5 inches). For a low speed device the limit is 3 meters (9 feet 10 inches).
Was just about to post the same. I don't think people understand this. Come to think of it, does Engadget really know anything, or do they just repeat what they hear?
they just repeat what they hear.
Speaking of "repeat what they hear", you can get cables that include built-in repeaters in order to extend the length past the "limit". Of course, they cost a bunch more than just regular cables.
Glad someone pointed this out. Extending USB further than ~16 feet = trouble. I'm never one to support the i-told-you-so geek but come on Engadget, knowing something like that should be required info if we're supposed to take your tech advice seriously.
Maybe they were referring to the 50' CAT5 cable we all have collecting dust in some corner?
why? what happens past that limit? If you have good insulation in the wiring (and good quality wires) shouldn't it not matter how long it is?
Also why is high speed able to be longer than slower speed ones, i thought it would be the other way around.
Technically, Major4Play is wrong on the specifics, as the breakdown is LS/FS = 3m, HS = 5m.
USB 1.1 specifies low-speed (1.5 Mb/s) and full-speed (12 Mb/s) using essentially identical signaling (3.3V) with no termination, and cable lengths up to 3m. With USB 2.0, LS and FS were kept, and HS (480 Mb/s) was added with 0.4V signals on terminated lines, extending the range to 5m for HS only.
I believe the lack of termination is the principle reason for the 3m limit, but I'm not 100% sure on that.
In reality, since the maximum response time in the spec is equivalent to the total time through the maximum permissible daisy-chain of 5 hubs (at worst-permissible delay) with 5m cables throughout, a typical setup with one or two hubs can use significantly longer cables, frequently limited by losses rather than latency. Of course, you're on your own with anything outside the spec, and I seriously doubt a 50 ft. cable of typical construction would work reliably. Plugging multiple cables (of any length) end-to-end is also bad, because of potential interference and reflections at the connectors.
I'll probably pick up 3 of these for clients with troubled coverage. I will also need one for the business to "demo" for clients.
C
Looks like they included linux drivers in the kernel for their older versions. Wonder if it is still plug and play?
I wonder if it supports 64-Bit Windows OS...
64-bit is becoming increasingly standardized. We shouldn't even have to ask this anymore.
You haven't messed around much with Wireless adapters, have you? Most of them don't have 64-Bit driver support, a lot of the ones that do are very old releases.
You haven't messed around with 64bit much have you? I started using vista 64bit just after vista came out, and everything worked fine. No driver mishaps or anything. Now I'm using win7 64bit, with no problems.
Actually I just had a this problem a few weeks ago. I was given an machine with no OS installed from a friend that had upgraded. I decided to give Ubuntu 9.04 a try (my first attempt at Linux) just for fun. I rummaged around and found a old network anywhere a/b/g PCI card wifi adapter to stick in it so i didn't have to run a cable to it. I have a D-Link eXtreme N gigabit router and three of the eXtreme N wireless bridge units in different areas of the house but it was just a temp project on the kitchen table with my son to see Ubuntu in action.
Ubuntu installed very, very easily and fast and detected the wireless card no problem and went right out on to my home network with just a pop-up asking for the password. Played around a bit then put a copy of XP 64 on it and it did not have drivers for the card, so I had to download them on another computer and burn them on a CD-RW. I figured it was just XP 64 was crap this way with driver back when i ran it all the time, so I slapped Vista 64 on it and no joy there either. Then I tried Vista 32, XP Home 32 and no driver support at all in any of them. Installed Ubuntu server addition just to see and it was supported right away same as the desktop Ubuntu.
So, overall I would say that asking if something is actually supported under 64 bit windows is about the smartest thing anyone can ask about any hardware. Personally I have two AMD Phenom II/SLi gaming rigs going atm for my son and myself running Vista 64 but driver support for some pretty new hardware forced me to replace many items if I wanted to go 64 bit.
wow this is nice
I would Be very interested in this product. I hope it works, because this maybe my next purchase. I do outside sales and it is hard to get WiFi in alot of spots. Would like to see updates if anyone uses it.
Oh Nice Find The Wi-Fire has a zd1211rw Chipset this can be used to Crack Wifi WEP & WPA With BackTrack Aircrack-ng tool sit this by a open window and start hacking away.