Difference in range and power consumption between WIFI and BlueTooth

[hdsalinas]

I have a WIFI set at home. I mainly use to browse the internet from anywhere AROUND the house. But the way it drains my ipaqs battery makes WIFI less attractive and practical. I need to have a power plug nearby to use it for any reasonable period of time.

If would switch from WIFI to Bluetooth, would I get a reasonable range and more battery life and still have access to network drives, internet and activesync?

Thanks in advance

Hector David Salinas
San Pedro Sula, Honduras

[Pony99CA]

I have a WIFI set at home. I mainly use to browse the internet from anywhere AROUND the house. But the way it drains my ipaqs battery makes WIFI less attractive and practical. I need to have a power plug nearby to use it for any reasonable period of time.

If would switch from WIFI to Bluetooth, would I get a reasonable range and more battery life and still have access to network drives, internet and activesync?

One reason Bluetooth is easier on the battery is because its range is less (at least, for most consumer Bluetooth gear). You'll have about 1/10th the range. Bluetooth is also much slower than WiFi.

Instead of switching technology, have you looked into improving battery life? You didn't say what gear you're using, other than an iPAQ, so it's hard to make a good recommendation. Do you have a CF or PC Card WiFi card? Does your sleeve have a battery or not?

I use my iPAQ 3870 with a dual PC Card sleeve and a PC Card WiFi card. I can get two to four hours of surfing out of that, I think. If your sleeve doesn't have a battery, consider getting one that does.

Steve

[hdsalinas]

Well I have and older ipaq 3650 and a dlink 650 CF (the huge one) and with the regular CF jacket. My ipaq's battery is reaching the end of its lifetime but it never gave me that great of a battery life when it was new.

I am planning on getting both a Dell axim and a CF wifi card to replace my ipaq. I thought about getting a powered CF jacket but I have promised myself not to buy anything propietary.

I think I will just stay with my WIFI setup

Hector David Salinas
San Pedro Sula, Honduras

[Jorgen]

While Bluetooth is slower than Wi-fi, it is still faster than the Internet :)

However, you would not be able to connect to the Internet at public Wi-fi hotspots.

It sounds like your iPaq's battery is the problem. Wi-Fi uses a lot of power but I still get a reasonable amount of connection time out of my d-link 660w on a hp-568.

Jorgen

[Pony99CA]

While Bluetooth is slower than Wi-fi, it is still faster than the Internet :)

I'm not sure what that means. If you mean Bluetooth is faster than most people's connection, that may be true. However, many people with broadband get 1.5 Mbps, which is faster than Bluetooth.

I have a 768 kbps DSL connection (and typically get over 600 kbps according to DSL Reports (http://www.dslreports.com/speedtests)), which is faster than the actual Bluetooth throughput some people have claimed of 115 kbps (if implemented over a serial protocol, I guess).

Steve

[FredMurphy]

I seem to remember the DLink 650 CF was a bit of a power hog compared to other (newer) CF WiFi cards. That and a dodgy iPAQ battery would be a poor combination. If you're switching to a Dell soon, why not wait and see if that has better battery life with you current card.

If you decide to change you CF card I can say that my Jornada 568 and Socket combination last a fair while, as does my friend's Loox and DLink 660.

[hdsalinas]

Yes, both the ipaq battery and the DLink card are at fault here. Now that I see it, I can´t think of a worst combination (concerning power drain).

However, you would not be able to connect to the Internet at public Wi-fi hotspots

i am not much concerned about that since here in Honduras there are no public hot spots. wifi is mostly implemented in business and factories.

Anyways, I might go ahead and order the dell CF card. It seems to be as small as the socket card but half the price. Has anyone seen or used this card?

I am going to give my Ipaq to my girlfriend, (she likes it :D ) and probably get a Dell. But I think I will wait to hear more about the new Pocket PC OS.

thanks,

Hector David Salinas
Honduras

[vincentsiaw]

i sill prefer bluetooth for my personal networking, but i also use wi-fi.
if you considering to change pockect pc, then maybe you can consider buying the new ipaq 5450, as with it you have choice between bluetooth and wi-fi :wink:

[Janak Parekh]

I have a 768 kbps DSL connection (and typically get over 600 kbps according to DSL Reports (http://www.dslreports.com/speedtests)), which is faster than the actual Bluetooth throughput some people have claimed of 115 kbps (if implemented over a serial protocol, I guess).
Well, that's only the broken iPaq 3870 BT implementation. Most newer units don't suffer from this problem.

--janak

[hdsalinas]

i would love to have a new ipaq! For me $700 for a handheld is just too much. :roll:

I thought about getting a Toshiba e740, right know they can be had for $350 at ebay. I just dont like the screen very much.

Hector David Salinas
Honduras

[daS]

Well if the only thing you want to do with it is a LAN connection, then Wi-Fi is the better option. (I'm sure some of you are shocked 8O to see that coming from me. :wink: )

However, Bluetooth is both much more battery friendly and can do more than Wi-Fi.

Also, current public hotspots are almost exclusively Wi-Fi, but newer APs are appearing that allow a hotspot to provide both Wi-Fi and Bluetooth. That certainly is not very useful for today's needs, but it does make the future of Bluetooth that much brighter.

Warning: Shameless plug to follow! :wink:

Of course, we have other Bluetooth news on our site (www.BluetoothNews.com).