Talk:ISM radio band

message: I miss the 868 MHz band as a possible ISM band? or is that incorporated in the 900 Mhz band? --Alras 14:44, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  868 vs 900 Mhz 

message: The corresponding article in the German Wikipedia, de:ISM-Band, has lots of more info, especially on the different bands, perhaps someone who feels confident enough could merge in some of that?  -- magetoo 07:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  German Wikipedia article 

message: I just added a link to CFR Title 47 Part 15 (Subpart 247), which looks as if it could break soon. The GPO has a page describing how to generate proper CFR links (which would even be independent of the CFR edition). Alas, the link generated according to these instructions didn't work for me. --128.131.214.206 15:46, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links to CFR 

message: Isn't there also an ISM band around 5.2 GHz? -Roger (talk) 18:52, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No.  There is a band from 5.15-5.35 GHz which is authorized in some places (including the United States ) for unlicensed uses of ultra-wideband equipment that you may be thinking of, but it isn't an ISM band.  While unlicensed operations often makes use of the ISM bands because they don't have to worry about causing interference within those bands, they aren't the only frequencies in which unlicensed operation is allowed. Caerwine Caer’s whines 20:58, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  5.2 GHz ISM 

message: Which came first -- the ISM band allocation, or the microwave oven?
Please help us find out at Talk:Electromagnetic compatibility#ISM bands.
--68.0.124.33 (talk) 04:13, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  microwave ovens and the ISM band 

message: perhaps this isn't the place to ask this, but could someone clarify this part of the rules for me? It would seem to me that wireless networking and 2.4Ghz phones are probably used for communication. What do they really mean by prohibiting communication on the ISM band?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Venevus (talk • contribs) 16:26, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "Prohibiting communication" means exactly as it reads, use for telecommunication purposes is not allowed.  The reason that this is seems confusing is because there is a common misconception that wireless networking and cordless phones qualify as ISM equipment.  They do not.  Cordless phones and the like operate under Part 15 rules in the United States, and they operate under similar provisions to Part 15 in other countries.  These unlicensed devices are permitted to operate in ISM bands because of the undesirability of these bands by licensed services, due to the requirement to accept harmful interference from ISM equiment.  –Sparkgap (talk) 06:11, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Part 18 ISM rules prohibit using ISM for communications" 

message: From the article, "In general, communications equipment must accept any interference generated by ISM equipment." Also the FCC label requirements include a statement that "this device must accept any interference that may cause undesired operation."  But what does "accept" mean in this context?  Is the device required to absorb the interference rather than reflecting it?  Is the device not allowed to burst into flames? (Or would bursting into flames simply be "undesired operation"?)  What could the device do that would constitute not accepting the interference?  --Brouhaha (talk) 03:31, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It means you can't complain about any interference you are subject to.  Basically, you are a "secondary" user on the band.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.188.232.92 (talk) 04:52, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That doesn't really answer my question.  The FCC requires the label to say that "this device" (not the user) "must accept any interference".  What would constitute the device rejecting the interference?  --Brouhaha (talk) 08:17, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The FCC's "must accept any interference" labeling requirement is for Part 15 devices, not Part 18 (ISM) devices.  The labeling requirements for ISM devices are different. –Sparkgap (talk) 06:18, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does "must accept" mean? 

message: Seems this piece of information is rejected by some users. So any suggestion where to place it?
There no free bands in North America neither in the ITU regulations. If you have a source for thoses claims, please provide it.
Sparkgap is right, ISM and Licensed free are linked, but not the same. For example, a frs radio is license free in North America but does
not operate in a ISM band.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albator2214 (talk • contribs) 19:16, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I am wondering if a new article, which covers unlicensed radio spectrum use in general, should be made.  Currently, there does not seem to be an article on this notable subject.  Such an article could hold information like the above, and it could list/link the various related articles out there.  My principle objection to the above being added to this article, is that ISM is not a catchall for unlicensed use.  Many ISM bands permit notable unlicensed uses, but not all.  Also, not all frequency ranges where unlicensed users may operate, are available for ISM devices.  There is a relation between the two subjects but not an equivalency.  The closest existing article I see for the general topic is Part 15, but that is an inherently US-centric topic.  –Sparkgap (talk) 03:35, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I also miss an central article on frequency allocation with an international perspective. Jumping between articles seems crap really. Electron9 (talk) 13:19, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean like Frequency allocation? ISM is just one chipped plate in the kitchen cupboard of dishware...--Wtshymanski (talk) 14:31, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That article is only true in name, not in content. A table like the ISM article would be neat covering bands not channels thoe. Electron9 (talk) 22:11, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Free bands not ISM 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on ISM band. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070314063902/http://www.marcus-spectrum.com:80/documents/81413RO.txt to http://www.marcus-spectrum.com/documents/81413RO.txt
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:19, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified