• CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 months ago

    Are they not equipped to deal with that? You’d think large metal surfaces are pretty common, so it’d be a bigger issue if so.

    • Ephera@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Well, straight metal surfaces are a whole different story from concave metal surfaces.
      The former causes interference in a line in one specific direction, with roughly the width and height of said metal surface.
      Concave metal surfaces on the other hand, can easily blast a whole room, depending on how concave they are.

      And I’m a bit out of my water here, but I believe, modern WiFi does try to

      1. direct its EM-waves towards the recipient, rather than send in all directions.
      2. adjust the strength of its signal, so that it reaches the specific recipient and not that much more beyond that.
      3. resolve multipath issues, so where a recipient can be reached in two or more ways, e.g. directly and through a reflecting metal surface. It can attempt to do so with 1) and 2).

      But yeah, ultimately this can’t be an exact science. Recipients move around. Interferences move around. You still need additional EM-waves to advertise yourself as WiFi to disconnected devices. A reflecting interference may be situated behind a recipient, where you do need to send signals to.

      And of course, no one expects the Spanish Inquisition Google’s house of mirrors, where any misdirected EM-wave will interfere with everything else in the room. That just ramps up any imperfections in WiFi by a lot…