802.11, Bluetooth and Hiperlan2 - Network

This is a discussion on 802.11, Bluetooth and Hiperlan2 - Network ; Hi, Just a quick question regarding 802.11 (and various amendments), Bluetooth and Hiperlan2. I'm doing an essay at university on Wireless Networks, and was wondering if you could tell me if my basic conclusions are correct? My conclusions are that: ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: 802.11, Bluetooth and Hiperlan2

  1. 802.11, Bluetooth and Hiperlan2

    Hi,

    Just a quick question regarding 802.11 (and various amendments), Bluetooth
    and Hiperlan2. I'm doing an essay at university on Wireless Networks, and
    was wondering if you could tell me if my basic conclusions are correct?

    My conclusions are that:

    802.11 is the only viable option for wireless LANs at the moment due to
    industry backing.

    Bluetooth is really only useful for Wireless Personal Area Networks,
    connecting mobile phones, PCs, PDAs and peripherals.

    Hiperlan2, while having some nice features that 802.11 doesn't have, hasn't
    received much industry backing, and as a result is not a realistic
    competitor to 802.11. Companies don't want to have to train/employ staff in
    802.11 and Hiperlan2 - would be too expensive etc.

    Obviously this is not the full extent of my conclusions- it's my three main
    points condensed into three sentences. Am I on the right lines with these?
    Any help or opinions greatly appreciated.

    Many thanks

    Matt



  2. Re: 802.11, Bluetooth and Hiperlan2

    "mp" wrote in
    news:br7pcp$n3t$1@hercules.btinternet.com:

    > Bluetooth is really only useful for Wireless Personal Area
    > Networks, connecting mobile phones, PCs, PDAs and peripherals.


    BT was considered a personal wireless standard (10m around you) from
    the begginign while 802.11 a community and small wisp option (100m
    and 5km respectivelly).



    Pozdrawiam.
    --
    RusH //
    http://kiti.pulse.pdi.net/qv30/ <-- heckme
    Pent-up passive-aggressive dork alert! Whoop! Whoop!
    Whoop! Whoop! Boy, you're really lighting up this alarm here!

  3. Re: 802.11, Bluetooth and Hiperlan2

    Matthew

    email me off NG and I will send you a PDF that should give you everything
    you need to know

    Remove Nickers

    MarkNICKERS756hayward@btopenworNICKERSld.com


    "mp" wrote in message
    news:br7pcp$n3t$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
    > Hi,
    >
    > Just a quick question regarding 802.11 (and various amendments), Bluetooth
    > and Hiperlan2. I'm doing an essay at university on Wireless Networks, and
    > was wondering if you could tell me if my basic conclusions are correct?
    >
    > My conclusions are that:
    >
    > 802.11 is the only viable option for wireless LANs at the moment due to
    > industry backing.
    >
    > Bluetooth is really only useful for Wireless Personal Area Networks,
    > connecting mobile phones, PCs, PDAs and peripherals.
    >
    > Hiperlan2, while having some nice features that 802.11 doesn't have,

    hasn't
    > received much industry backing, and as a result is not a realistic
    > competitor to 802.11. Companies don't want to have to train/employ staff

    in
    > 802.11 and Hiperlan2 - would be too expensive etc.
    >
    > Obviously this is not the full extent of my conclusions- it's my three

    main
    > points condensed into three sentences. Am I on the right lines with these?
    > Any help or opinions greatly appreciated.
    >
    > Many thanks
    >
    > Matt
    >
    >




  4. Re: 802.11, Bluetooth and Hiperlan2

    Actually, there are two BT standards. The 10 meter for personal peripherals,
    as you stated and also, a 100 m for . The
    problem with Bluetooth is the slow speed compared to 802.11.

    http://catalog.belkin.com/IWCatProdu...duct_Id=126336

    100m version

    http://catalog.belkin.com/IWCatProdu...duct_Id=134431

    10 m version

    watch the wraps obviously. I have the 10m version and I gotta tell you,
    Bluetooth is the best thing since the USB port without a doubt.

    "RusH" wrote in message
    news:Xns944E2742BBE86RusHcomputersystems@193.110.1 22.80...
    > "mp" wrote in
    > news:br7pcp$n3t$1@hercules.btinternet.com:
    >
    > > Bluetooth is really only useful for Wireless Personal Area
    > > Networks, connecting mobile phones, PCs, PDAs and peripherals.

    >
    > BT was considered a personal wireless standard (10m around you) from
    > the begginign while 802.11 a community and small wisp option (100m
    > and 5km respectivelly).
    >
    >
    >
    > Pozdrawiam.
    > --
    > RusH //
    > http://kiti.pulse.pdi.net/qv30/ <-- heckme
    > Pent-up passive-aggressive dork alert! Whoop! Whoop!
    > Whoop! Whoop! Boy, you're really lighting up this alarm here!




  5. Re: 802.11, Bluetooth and Hiperlan2

    "Demus" wrote in
    news:9B8Cb.25161$8y1.112292@attbi_s52:

    > Actually, there are two BT standards. The 10 meter for personal
    > peripherals, as you stated and also, a 100 m for > use of choice here>. The problem with Bluetooth is the slow
    > speed compared to 802.11.


    standard is a standard, you are speaking about classes :
    class 1 device 1-3m (I dont remember)
    class 2 device 10m
    class 3 device 100m 16dbi -82db sensitivity

    and still class 3 devices are underpowered and lack the range - 100m
    is only on the paper, actually you can archieve 20-40m in the wild


  6. Re: 802.11, Bluetooth and Hiperlan2

    Actually there are only 2 classes, 1- 100m and 2 -10m.

    "RusH" wrote in message
    news:Xns945180A473ABRusHcomputersystems@193.110.12 2.80...
    > "Demus" wrote in
    > news:9B8Cb.25161$8y1.112292@attbi_s52:
    >
    > > Actually, there are two BT standards. The 10 meter for personal
    > > peripherals, as you stated and also, a 100 m for > > use of choice here>. The problem with Bluetooth is the slow
    > > speed compared to 802.11.

    >
    > standard is a standard, you are speaking about classes :
    > class 1 device 1-3m (I dont remember)
    > class 2 device 10m
    > class 3 device 100m 16dbi -82db sensitivity
    >
    > and still class 3 devices are underpowered and lack the range - 100m
    > is only on the paper, actually you can archieve 20-40m in the wild
    >




  7. Re: 802.11, Bluetooth and Hiperlan2

    "Demus" wrote in
    news:vYZCb.388620$275.1244022@attbi_s53:

    > "RusH" wrote in message
    > news:Xns945180A473ABRusHcomputersystems@193.110.12 2.80...
    >> "Demus" wrote in
    >> news:9B8Cb.25161$8y1.112292@attbi_s52:
    >>
    >> > Actually, there are two BT standards. The 10 meter for
    >> > personal peripherals, as you stated and also, a 100 m for
    >> > . The problem with Bluetooth
    >> > is the slow speed compared to 802.11.

    >>
    >> standard is a standard, you are speaking about classes :
    >> class 1 device 1-3m (I dont remember)
    >> class 2 device 10m
    >> class 3 device 100m 16dbi -82db sensitivity
    >>
    >> and still class 3 devices are underpowered and lack the range -
    >> 100m is only on the paper, actually you can archieve 20-40m in
    >> the wild


    > Actually there are only 2 classes, 1- 100m and 2 -10m.


    mm wrong, there are 3 classes. I seem to wrote it backward class 1
    is the strongest one where class 3 is the weakest. Heres the snipped
    from one of BT chip pdfs:

    "Bluetooth® output power is categorized as either Class 1, 2 or 3
    according to the level of the maximum output power: +20 dBm (100mW),
    +4 dBm (2.5mW), and 0 dBm (1mW). The range is approximately 100
    meters with Class 1, the highest output, and approximately 10 m with
    Class 2."

+ Reply to Thread