Uncle Frank,
First, just to clarify for those who were kind enough to PM, my
previous statement about the 'set up' gag was in jest, only. I was
indeed only joking, in kind.
Getting back to the business of CDMA and Bluetooth:
This is one of my fuzzy areas I alluded to upstream, so hang in there.
By the time this is thread segment is over, it will likely be me who
walks away with the greatest level of new information.
"Are you aware of the emerging Bluetooth standard for short range
radio links between portable devices ranging from mobile phones to
digital cameras."
From my limited exposure to Bluetooth readings, it appears to me that BT
is (or was, initially) primarily a local wireless link technology intended for
synchronizing and porting streams between premises based devices
(PDAs/PCs/peripherals/etc.). It may have progressed to more
sophisticated levels of utility since my earlier readings, but that's what I
recall. Just so I don't make an ass out of myself entirely, I just checked
my bookmarked references on it, and this seems to be correct, however
dated it may be.
"These devices operate in the 2.4GHz range, which is apparently
unlicensed and designated for industrial-scientific-medical use."
Sorry, call me old-fashioned, but anytime I read ISM I have to step back
and ask a lot of questions of the vendor. Of course, the "situation" may
have a lot to do with it (suburban residential, as opposed to deep inner
city), but previous experiences in this regard have caused problems for
clients in the past when used in wireless LANs. Like I say, if the vendor
can support a good argument per a given situation, then I'll listen.
Otherwise, it's caveat emptor. I don't care how statistically unlikely it is
for this hopping algorithm or that. Once uptake reaches a certain level, it
will get too crowded for comfort.
"Ericcson is already planning to introduce devices (such as 1mw
transceiver) based on Bluetooth, and vlsi is already reportedly offering a
developer's kit. Do you see Bluetooth as a threat to cdma for the
"wireless last mile" we discussed?"
Yes, I've seen another developer's kit by an outfit called the Symbionics
Group [now a Cadence Company (CDN) ], too. I had to cheat a little on
this one, because I read about this recently but couldn't remember their
name. Actually it was Symbionics who was chosen by Ericsson to do the
BT kit:
symbionics.com
Somewhere on their site I recall seeing a rather lengthy description of the
kit's parameters, but couldn't find it this evening.
Up until you raised these points, I had always regarded the two models as
distinctly different from one another, and I didn't (and still don't, fully) see a
large overlap area between them. At least not yet. Bluetooth to me has
always represented an environment that was very much limited bo being
"Locally aware," with specific premises connotations and utilities behind it,
while CDMA has always been one that was more "Globally aware," and
one which assumed the more traditional roles of a telecommunication
transport and signaling technology. Of course, feature integration in
CDMA has been ongoing, but those are the attributes that I generally
regard as characteristic of the technology.
In fact, my perception has been that both CDMA and BT could actually
partake in the same architecture. With CDMA handling the distance
transport requirements and related signaling, routing, etc., and BT
managing the local connections and data transfers, device synchronization,
on-prem.
Certainly, some of this dual platform integration within a larger
architecture will come to pass, when they become deployed over time, for
it would be a world of difficulty in keeping them separate, given the
different products' underlying fabrics that could conceivably be assembled
into a real world system. Or more likely, a loosely assembled assortment
of unrelated (being of multivendor origins and disparate categroy) appliances.
I'll probably look into this more deeply now (thanks, Uncle Frank... I was
looking for something to keep me busy -g-), so don't be surprised if I
come back in a day or two and add to this, or modify it, or even negate
some of what I've stated in some way. In the meantime, I'm eager to hear
what others have to say, and always looking for corrections and comments.
Regards, Frank Coluccio
|
