Cell phones, PDAs catch Wi-Fi fever

[Ed Hansberry]

http://news.com.com/2100-1033-895006.html?tag=cd_mh#

This isn't exactly news, at least not to many of our readers. One thing in particular that did catch my eye was this:

"Year-old semiconductor maker IceFyre Semiconductor thinks it has the answer. It claims to have created an 802.11 chipset that uses 75 percent less power than its competitors, said Mark Roberts, IceFyre's chief executive."

802.11b is horrible on battery life and one of the issues that BlueTooth proponents bring up. If Wi-Fi power consumption drops to 25% of its current levels, it would seem to me to make an even stronger case that 802.11 is the future for all but the simplest PAN's, like from a cell phone to a headset. Anything requiring ActiveSync, file sharing, streaming, networking, printing, etc. would be, in my opinion, much easier using a standard TCP/IP connection.

Your thoughts?

[Ed Hansberry]

http://news.com.com/2100-1033-895006.html?tag=cd_mh#

This isn't exactly news, at least not to many of our readers. One thing in particular that did catch my eye was this:

"Year-old semiconductor maker IceFyre Semiconductor thinks it has the answer. It claims to have created an 802.11 chipset that uses 75 percent less power than its competitors, said Mark Roberts, IceFyre's chief executive."

802.11b is horrible on battery life and one of the issues that BlueTooth proponents bring up. If Wi-Fi power consumption drops to 25% of its current levels, it would seem to me to make an even stronger case that 802.11 is the future for all but the simplest PAN's, like from a cell phone to a headset. Anything requiring ActiveSync, file sharing, streaming, networking, printing, etc. would be, in my opinion, much easier using a standard TCP/IP connection.

Your thoughts?

[AZMark]

Would make sense that if you droped the output (so you only had a 30ft range) that your power requirements would also go down.

No?

[Janak Parekh]

Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry

802.11b is horrible on battery life and one of the issues that BlueTooth proponents bring up. If Wi-Fi power consumption drops to 25% of its current levels, it would seem to me to make an even stronger case that 802.11 is the future for all but the simplest PAN's, like from a cell phone to a headset. Anything requiring ActiveSync, file sharing, streaming, networking, printing, etc. would be, in my opinion, much easier using a standard TCP/IP connection.

The other things to consider are cost and size, and security. If they can get the first two down I'd like to see devices with dual 802.11b/Bluetooth. The security model on Bluetooth is much nicer for peer-to-peer, though, than 802.11b, which is fundamentally a bus-like protocol.

I think we could see a model evolve where we have Bluetooth-enabled cell phones and Bluetooth/802.11b dual PDA's, and that makes a lot of sense.

--bdj

[JonnoB]

Although most people accurately spell out the different intentions for BlueTooth vs WiFi, I still see them as ultimately competing.

We all know that Bluetooth is a replacement for wired/IR short range communication that is peer-peer and secure while WiFi is really an IP end-point with greater range, but less secure.

That said, you can already see the transition of devices that share the Bluetooth properties (like a wired phone) becoming an untethered IP SIP/H.323 end-point. I can forsee where IP becomes the transfer medium of all communication. Once secuirty, size, and power are conquered, wireless IP will replace Bluetooth. It may not be WiFi, but wireless IP is the future.

[Janak Parekh]

Originally Posted by JonnoB

We all know that Bluetooth is a replacement for wired/IR short range communication that is peer-peer and secure while WiFi is really an IP end-point with greater range, but less secure.

Not quite... 802.11b is a CSMA/CD bus-based networking protocol/hardware specification. It's not IP, although IP rides on top of it and is used most frequently with it. However, you can run NetBEUI, IPX, whatever you want on top of 802.11b.

Bluetooth doesn't require IP, but IP can ride on top of it just fine as well (the "networking" profile that Bluetooth provides).

So it's possible that low-power 802.11b combined with IP networking (IPv6 with its new security features, for example) will be the de-facto wireless networking and peripheral standard, but to say that "wireless IP" will replace 802.11b and Bluetooth is vague... IP is a software standard, not a hardware standard.

It is accurate to say that the establishment of mobile IP will be crucial. Mobile IP solves the problems of having different IP address with different providers (be them wired or wireless), etc. It allows for true roaming, and with it we can have always-present mobile communicators. However, mobile IP will still rely on Bluetooth, 802.11b, GPRS, CDMA 1x, etc.

--bdj

[Will T Smith]

Bluetooth is NOT a networking product. It's an interconnect, cable replacement technology.

The application profiles of Bluetooth provide a powerful- cross-platform capability that Wi-Fi does not address.

Beyond the power issue, there is also a cost issue. Bluetooth chipsets are designed to be cheap to build. I cannot forsee Wi-Fi being included in watches , headphones and other personal electronics when Wi-Fi chipsets are $30-$40 compared to Bluetooth's $5.

[JonnoB]

Originally Posted by Will T Smith

Bluetooth is NOT a networking product. It's an interconnect, cable replacement technology.

We all understand this to be the intention.

Originally Posted by Will T Smith

The application profiles of Bluetooth provide a powerful- cross-platform capability that Wi-Fi does not address.

WiFi is just one wireless network standard. IP being one protocol that can operate over this NIC interface. There are 'applications' that are being developed on top of IP such as VoIP. Although there aren't as many today, I can forsee that applications on top of IP is the future.

Originally Posted by Will T Smith

Beyond the power issue, there is also a cost issue. Bluetooth chipsets are designed to be cheap to build. I cannot forsee Wi-Fi being included in watches , headphones and other personal electronics when Wi-Fi chipsets are $30-$40 compared to Bluetooth's $5.

With applications on IP, the strength of technology will be speed, cost, power, and range. I see WiFi (or some future derivitive of 802.11xxx) will have lower power, still better range, and cost that make Bluetooth irrelevant. The benefits of Bluetooth will eventually go away and a cable/wire replacement will be in the form of an IP point to point standard that any IP solution can work with.

[angelseye2000]

"It claims to have created an 802.11 chipset that uses 75 percent less power than its competitors"

We have heard these claims before. Socket must have a "less power"-802.11 chipset also. What has happened to it? Why wasn't it world shaking?

2 integrated 802.11 pda's i found aren't big sellers....

Casio IT-700STD Industrial Cassiopeia
http://casio.com/personalpcs/product...ay=21&cid=4672

Sync VOVID pda
http://www.sycrf.co.kr/syctrn/new/en..._product2.html

U.K.-based research firm Canalys predicted that sales of handhelds that don't have built-in Bluetooth capabilities will start to suffer by the end of the year, particularly in Western Europe.
http://www.canalys.com/pr/r2002041.htm

Why is it that people see the 802.11 as an all-in-one technology? There is no technology of such kind. I use 802.11 but i don't like it in my phone, headset, mouse, keyboard etc. I like 802.11 as a networking technology but it doesn't replace Bluetooth and the Bluetooth function.....e.g phone connected to my headset automitacly.....Bluetooth carkit etc.

Bluetooth can perform a number of automatic functions:

• A PC and Palm can be set up so that when they are in proximity, an auto-sync takes place. So instead of putting the Palm in the cradle and hitting the HotSync button, just walk within a few feet of the PC and the two will automatically synchronize.

• One Bluetooth-enabled phone can do three tasks. At home, the phone functions as a portable phone, using a landline. When the user is on the move, it functions as a mobile phone, and when the phone comes within range of another Bluetooth mobile phone, it functions as a walkie-talkie.

• A user can compose e-mail on a Bluetooth-enabled laptop while flying on an airplane and queue up the e-mails to be sent. In her briefcase is a Bluetooth-enabled cell phone, switched off. After she lands, she switches on the cell phone, which connects to the Internet and transmits the mail while she waits for her luggage.

• A field rep has a sales meeting noted in her PalmPilot, and the meeting time changes. Someone calls the rep's cell phone, transmits the new data and the phone routes the new information to the PalmPilot, which beeps to let her know her schedule has changed.

• Products and accounts can be assigned a scanning code. With a swipe of a mobile phone, a sales rep can transmit on-hand inventory status and order information back to the main office.

Little Bluetooth Review:

-No battery-sapping: Low power
-Robust wireless connection method with a small footprint that makes it very well suited for millions of handheld devices
(A Bluetooth chip, designed to communicate in the 10m range, consumes only 1mW of power, compared to an 802.11b chip, which consumes more than 1W. A single Bluetooth chipset is also fairly small, with a size of 8x8mm, compared to the smallest 802.11b at 30x14mm.)
-Chips will be cheap (volume)
-Bluetooth does not need a base radio station because every device can create a local network.
-Another advantage of Bluetooth as a cable replacement technology are the applications (*e.g http://www.bluetags.com ). Retail kiosks, pay phones, and other public access points will support proximity services.
-Bluetooth also holds an advantage concerning voice communication. Here, Bluetooth can be used in a cordless phone within a 10m range, in an office environment or home, without the need for handoffs. Other WLAN technologies need voice-over-IP to support voice communication

Bluetooth: Finally Making An Impact
Home Toys Article
- April 2002 -
by Navin Sabharwal, Allied Business Intelligence
The outlook for Bluetooth technology is once again positive, albeit cautiously so. Bluetooth at its core is an embedded play. The desire to purchase add-on, aftermarket Bluetooth solutions is limited. For Bluetooth to succeed integration cost and power consumption are key determinants.

For all the negative press that Bluetooth technology garnered in 2001 this year is turning out to be a different story. Bluetooth is far from dead and we are seeing the technology begin to make its long-awaited impact.

more
http://www.hometoys.com/htinews/apr0...avin/navin.htm

Ruining Bluetooth and 802.11 Interference
15:00 PM GMT on Apr 09, 2002
[CommVerge]

A few months ago, some technology observers were predicting the demise of the Bluetooth wireless technology before it ever got off the ground. It would be done in, they said, by 802.11b (Wi-Fi) wireless-LAN technology. There wasn't room in the marketplace for both, they said.

They were wrong, because their conclusions were based on a misguided comparison of Bluetooth and 802.11b for application as a LAN. The two serve very different purposes and simply don't compete in the marketplace (see the sidebar, "Different animals").

more
http://www.anywhereyougo.com/bluetoo....po?id=4278075

Wi-Fi And Bluetooth As Complementary, Not Competing, Technologies
http://www.tmcnet.com/tmcnet/articles/030102pc.htm

Comparing High Heels to Sneakers
by Margaret Dilloway of WIDCOMM's Test & Integration Department and author of "Bluetooth for Dummies," coming out in November:

Bluetooth and 802.11b are often depicted as being pitted against each other, as they are interchangeable technologies. This is not true. Nothing exists as a substitution for Bluetooth. Just as a woman may have both high heels and sneakers in her closet for different occasions, so may Bluetooth and 802.11b coexist, as they serve entirely different needs.
http://www.widcomm.com/bluetooth/80211b.asp

The phony conflict: IEEE 802.11 and Bluetooth wireless technology
http://www-106.ibm.com/developerwork...rary/wi-phone/

What i do like is a dual chip developed by companies like Mobilian.

Intersil, Silicon Wave sample combo Bluetooth/WLAN solution
By Patrick Mannion
EE Times
April 19, 2002 (4:25 p.m. EST)

MANHASSET, N.Y. — Intersil Corp. and Silicon Wave Inc. are ready to demonstrate the first radio transceiver circuitry that supports both IEEE 802.11b wireless LANs and Bluetooth communications. The four-piece chip set enables the seemingly simultaneous operation of both networks without mutual interference.

more
http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20020419S0055

Microsoft Demonstrates Blue802(TM) Technology From Intersil And Silicon Wave During WinHEC 2002
World's First Dual-Mode Bluetooth(TM) And 802.11b Wireless Technology Solution Delivers Simultaneous Operation Of Both Technologies In One Device
IRVINE, CA and SAN DIEGO, CA--(INTERNET WIRE)--Apr 22, 2002 -- Intersil Corporation (NASDAQ:ISIL - news), the world's leading supplier of silicon for Wireless Local Area Networks, and Silicon Wave, Inc., a world leading supplier of silicon for Wireless Personal Area Networks, today announced their new Blue802™ technology that Microsoft officials demonstrated at WinHEC 2002 last week.
http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/020422/040942.html

Toshiba's e740 Series has been Bluetooth Qualified.

Pocket PC e740 Series Toshiba Corporation Digital Media Network Company
TOSHIBA PDA based on Pocket PC.
http://qualweb.opengroup.org/Templat...Products&Detai ls=Yes&ProductID=723

Cutting the cord (HP pda's)
http://www.infosync.no/show.php?id=1754

Interesting to see how the Fujitsu PPC LOOX PDA with integrated Bluetooth will be compared to Compaqs 3870 Bluetooth PDA.

p.s Is it true that you don't like Bluetooth Ed?

[angelseye2000]

I thought i read it somewhere.....are you the same Ed who stated "I have come to the conclusion (again) bluetooth sucks." on the pdabuzz website?

I have a Bluetooth Phone and a Bluetooth Headset and they work just great. "bluetooth sucks"??????

[Ed Hansberry]

Originally Posted by angelseye2000

I thought i read it somewhere.....are you the same Ed who stated "I have come to the conclusion (again) bluetooth sucks." on the pdabuzz website?

Yup. And you are the same angelseye2000 on the Motley Fool that posts 3ft long posts filled with links and quotes?