07-24-2002, 08:20 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Bluetooth vs. WiFi: Why it's NOT a death match
http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/stories/story/0,10738,2868374,00.html
This article is from May, but I think it's a good resource for those of you who are confused about the differences between WiFi and Bluetooth. They are not competing technologies, but with the rise of Bluetooth access points, there's a lot of confusion about what each technology is good at. Give this article a read to find out.
"Does the world really need two wireless networking technologies? Bluetooth and WiFi (aka 802.11b) have both been much in the news lately. Of the two, WiFi got the fastest start. But Bluetooth is gaining traction in the marketplace; Microsoft, for example, has announced that it will build native Bluetooth support into a future version of Windows XP.
Yesterday I wrote about a new Bluetooth printing kit, which lets me print from a laptop to my Epson inkjet without wires. Yet I already have a WiFi network, which I can use for printer sharing and other connected applications. The only limitation of that network: The PC that's connected to the printer has to be turned on before I can print from another device.
Which raises a passel of questions: Why should I pay for Bluetooth printing when I already have WiFi? Are the two technologies complementary or competitive? To go back to my original question, do we really need two different kinds of wireless networking that--on the surface, at least--seem to do many of the same things?"
|
| |
|
|
|
07-24-2002, 08:26 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
I am not confused about their purpose. I do think that any overlap should be handled by WiFi though. Bluetooth should be relegated to portable PANs - like a headset to a cell phone. Stationary objects with power supplies and non-stationary objects with an ounce of intelligence, like a Pocket PC, should be on the WAN with an IP number.
Of course, Bluetooth should work too, but that is another thread. :twisted:
|
| |
|
|
|
07-24-2002, 08:41 PM
|
|
Sage
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 713
|
|
Question
If you have a printer that's BlueTooth enabled, and a PC that's BlueTooth enabled, and a PDA that's BlueTooth enabled, and both the PDA and the PC start a print job who controls the communication? Does a BlueTooth printer have additional hardware to handle two (or three, or four) devices competing at once?
I understand how WiFi works in this scenario because it is just an ethernet replacement, there just aren't any cables. With BlueTooth there has to be something else here besides simple "cable replacement" doesn't it?
---
Bwana Jim
|
| |
|
|
|
07-24-2002, 08:42 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 27
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry
Of course, Bluetooth should work too, but that is another thread. :twisted:
|
Ive actuly been waiting for you to comment...... I just got the HP 995c.. My second blue tooth device... I admit setting up the printer wasn't intutive.... But onece I read the dirrections.. It setup fine... It works....
|
| |
|
|
|
07-24-2002, 08:51 PM
|
|
Oracle
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 974
|
|
Thanks Jason
for the article - goos overall comparrison. I'd favor the BT if only the speed could increase to over 1MG/s. I'm OK with the limited range as I would be looking to use something like this in a "closed" environment - like as a home network or PAN outside of the home. For these limited purposes, BT does well.
Otherwise, WiFi will continue to dominate and hopefully the alphabet soup game on standards will resolve itself soon too... (refering to the 802.11b,c,d etc...)
|
| |
|
|
|
07-24-2002, 09:05 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 18
|
|
I see the two areas merging to something else. WiFi was developed to replace Ethernet cables and bluetooth to replace serial cables. Now they are expanding to each other's speciality. It would be cool if my phone was a GPRS Router instead of modem, but I don't know how many people would want to setup their phone as a router/gateway possibly with NAT.
My house is wired, I have WLAN, and several bluetooth devices. Thankfully, I don't have to choose what technology to use. Would I like them to merge?
Yes: New technology is always fun.
No: I am happy with my current configuration and new hardware is expensive
If I had to choose one, I would easily choose bluetooth. Why would I give-up WiFi? As I mentioned, my house is wired. It is a small inconvience to move to a nearby RJ-45 jack. I am not as mobile with my laptop as I am with my PDA so wires are not that inconvient. Since I have a laptop it is not a big sacrifice to give-up surfing on the PDA while at home. (My PCMCIA ehternet card is not supported by PPC). Since I am a mobile PDA user and there is no WiFi solution to connect my PDA to my phone, I find the lose of cable between my Phone and PDA to be the biggest advantage. It is also nice to work on my PDA while connected to my PC without the interfering cable.
I prefer not to choose.
/ mike
|
| |
|
|
|
07-24-2002, 09:05 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 27
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bargle
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry
Of course, Bluetooth should work too, but that is another thread. :twisted:
|
Ive actuly been waiting for you to comment...... I just got the HP 995c.. My second blue tooth device... I admit setting up the printer wasn't intutive.... But onece I read the dirrections.. It setup fine... It works.... |
Corse This is the thoughts of the admins only apparenty... becase I feel he has fibbed, I was censored.... Why? Becase he claims "Bluetooth should work". And it dose.... I didn't call him names. I simply said that was a lie. Guess Its back to useing the site for news and not opnions.
|
| |
|
|
|
07-24-2002, 09:08 PM
|
|
Mystic
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,768
|
|
WiFi
It is because WiFi -can- be point to point that potentially makes BT irrelevant. There is nearly 100% overlap of WiFi over BT if someone makes each device IP capable with WiFi. BT however has yet to illustrate what it can do that WiFi cannot... I know there are implementations of BT (ie remote headset) that WiFi does not do, but WiFi is still capable of it if someone makes one.
Can WiFi be made to consume less power? Yes and it probably will.
Can WiFi be made to support packetized cabling type technology? Yes and it is already happening with things like SIP.
Will BT be enhanced to allow for more flexible roaming? Maybe
Will BT increase in speed to eliminate need for all cables? Probably not. USB2.0 and 1394 already make BT incapable of replacing important cables. WiFi however with Mira is making cable replacement for video over IP. The proof of concept is there.
There are still good uses for both, but as time evolves, I think although unintentional, WiFi will tramble on BT.
__________________
Jonathan (JonnoB)
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." -Edmund Burke
|
| |
|
|
|
07-24-2002, 09:34 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 37
|
|
printing from a wifi network, the pc doesn't have to be on.
Hi,
I don't know who said that the server pc need to be "on" on the network to be able to print from a wireless pc on the network. That is a flas statement as my own wifi network, i use a wireless gateway with three port, a wan port (dsl) and a printer server port (all for 99$) and it let's me connect to this printer without having the server printer on. I have trhree laptops wirelessly hook to my network and they all can print just fine without any server to be on. By the way i bought trhee pmcia wireless card (802b), 1 usb (802b) and a wireless gateway all for about $330 including shipping at pctek online. Good deal for linking 1 wire server pc and 4 wireless pc on a network !!!! 
So to summarize NO bluetooth won't get wide spread acceptance because wifi is so far ahjead of it. It might be used for extended ir port (wireless keyboard or mouse or printer in worst case but that it's.
|
| |
|
|
|
07-24-2002, 09:52 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bargle
Corse This is the thoughts of the admins only apparenty... becase I feel he has fibbed, I was censored.... Why? Becase he claims "Bluetooth should work". And it dose.... I didn't call him names. I simply said that was a lie. Guess Its back to useing the site for news and not opnions.
|
Oh please, it's not like I chopped off your hand or anything here! :roll:
You originally said "It setup fine... It works....Dispite your lies... " I only edited out the "lies" part and left everything else intact. Did I change the point you were trying to make? Not about Bluetooth.
As I explained in my private message, saying that someone is lying is flaming them. Flaming is not a nice thing to do, and it's against the policies we have on the site. You can feel free to dispute Ed's claims about Bluetooth, since it obviously works for you, and that's great. Express your opinion about Bluetooth all you want! But personal attacks are simply not permitted in any way on this site. Period. If that's not acceptable to you, you should find another discussion board more to your liking.
If you really think this is censorship, go read a history book and see what REAL censorship is like.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
