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

"mp" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:br7pcp$n3t$(E-Mail Removed):

> 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!

Matthew

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

Remove Nickers

(E-Mail Removed)


"mp" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:br7pcp$n3t$(E-Mail Removed)...
> 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
>
>

Actually, there are two BT standards. The 10 meter for personal peripherals,
as you stated and also, a 100 m for <insert your use of choice here>. 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" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Xns944E2742BBE86RusHcomputersystems@193.110.1 22.80...
> "mp" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
> news:br7pcp$n3t$(E-Mail Removed):
>
> > 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!

"Demus" <(E-Mail Removed)> 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 <insert your
> 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

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

"RusH" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Xns945180A473ABRusHcomputersystems@193.110.12 2.80...
> "Demus" <(E-Mail Removed)> 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 <insert your
> > 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
>

"Demus" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:vYZCb.388620$275.1244022@attbi_s53:

> "RusH" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:Xns945180A473ABRusHcomputersystems@193.110.12 2.80...
>> "Demus" <(E-Mail Removed)> 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
>> > <insert your 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

> 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."