Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: fyodor_ who wrote (63546)	11/12/2001 10:32:42 PM
From: combjelly	Respond to of 275872

"Which applications are you referring to here? Wireless networking or peripherals?" Both, actually. The problem with BlueTooth is that they got a bit carried away with their profiles for all of the various functions. The problem with complicated in embedded is that only a subset will generally be implemented, and that invites incompatibilities. And that has already been a problem with BlueTooth... "And what the heck is ZigBee? ;-)" Glad you asked. See eet.com The advantage is that, while slower, it also consumes a lot less resources. BlueTooth needs a lot of overhead if you implement it to any degree. The range is also short unless you want 802.11b-like power consumption. And if you can put up with kind of power consumption, why not use 802.11b? Philips is saying a bill of materials of around $15 in another 18 months, and 11b works. Yeah ZigBee has a lower data rate, but it is a useful amount of bandwidth and at 75 meters, more than long enough. The target BOM of $1 is closer to what is needed for mice than the target (and not reached as of yet) cost of $5 for BlueTooth. BlueTooth modules are still in the cost range of 802.11b...