I just purchased the HP Laserjet 3330 All-In-One and the Brother 9200DX label printer. Will there ever be a $49 Bluetooth adapter that plugs into their USB ports to allow wireless printing?
I dunno about HP, but <a href="http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/ProductQuickSpec.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0614757775.1 018889796@@@@&BV_EngineID=hadcdkhllddmbfdmcfjgckid nf.0&oid=16489220" target="_blank">Epson has come out with a Bluetooth adapter</a> that fits a few of its printers (my new C80 included). It doesn't connect to USB, however, but to the serial port. But at $130 it costs nearly as much as my printer.
I hate to be pessimistic, but bluetooth is basically dead already. The tradeoff behind bluetooth (adding $25-$45 in manufacturing costs - batteries and bluetooth chips - in exchange for getting rid of a short cable) are economically and functionally unattractive enough that most manufacturers haven't even made bluetooth products available to consumers.
I'm certain Apple plans to somewhat turn this around with pro mice and keyboards, but don't expect 3rd parties or the PC world to jump on this bandwagon.
There is appetite for high speed wireless networking, but not for low speed wireless peripheralling at great expense.
I hate to be pessimistic, but bluetooth is basically dead already. The tradeoff behind bluetooth (adding $25-$45 in manufacturing costs - batteries and bluetooth chips - in exchange for getting rid of a short cable) are economically and functionally unattractive enough that most manufacturers haven't even made bluetooth products available to consumers.
I'm certain Apple plans to somewhat turn this around with pro mice and keyboards, but don't expect 3rd parties or the PC world to jump on this bandwagon.
There is appetite for high speed wireless networking, but not for low speed wireless peripheralling at great expense.
<hr></blockquote>
Well, I like being optimistic. I have a rat's nest of wires behind my desk: three computers, two network printers, routers & hubs, Airport Base Station, DSL, ISDN, scanners, drives; heck, spiders are afraid to go back there.
A little bit of wireless help would be welcome for me. I just have to promise my girlfriend to shield the bedroom against EMI.
What is the purpose of a wireless printer? I simply do not understand the need for one.
When I got my HP deskjet, I plugged it into my Powermac using a USB cord. That was the last time I ever had to plug it in, or unplug it--I have not had to deal with that cord a single time besides plugging in the printer. And even a wireless printer will still need a power cord, so it's not like I can carry the printer around my pad and print to any location I feel like (not sure what the point of this would be, but hey, wireless technology lets one do things like this!).
I may move in the future, and I suppose moving the computer might be a tad easier if I didn't have to unplug the USB printer cord and then plug it back in after moving, but is this worth $50 to me? No.
Wireless keyboard and mouse make sense, as long as batteries don't have to be replaced constantly, but wireless peripherals that remain in a fixed position don't need to be wireless.
<strong>What is the purpose of a wireless printer? I simply do not understand the need for one.</strong><hr></blockquote>
In my workplace, neither the many computers in use nor the printers are anchored / stationary. Everything from computers to desks to file cabinets are mobile / on wheels.
Bluetooth isn't a good office printer solution by any means. At best it's a nice convenience (but not a neccessary one) for laptop users. An 802.11b network printer on the other hand could be quite usefull in an office or even a home with a few computers scattered throughout.
<strong>Bluetooth isn't a good office printer solution by any means. At best it's a nice convenience (but not a neccessary one) for laptop users. An 802.11b network printer on the other hand could be quite usefull in an office or even a home with a few computers scattered throughout.</strong><hr></blockquote>
In an office of say 25 people Bluetooth should be cheaper. With adapters at $50 retail and printer adapters at around $100, thats a lot less than 802.11b cards at $99 and basestations at $300.
But for big offices with 100+ people bluetooth isn't as good unless workgroups have a printer each because of the range.
Ideally you'd use both, but until Apple add support for several 802.11 variants that's tricky.
Every user in that office is going to have to walk up to the printer to print unless all 25 users are within 30 feet of that printer. It won't work. Nevermind that an airport network is bound to get cheaper, even at the current price it is a better solution and a more cost effective one for an office network. You get airport for a combined internet and local network. Might as well have the printer on the same network than have to put up with the very limited range and slow speed of bluetooth. Can you imagine 25 users all tugging at that whole Mbit of bandwidth? No, NO and NO! Bluetooth is best suited as apple has described it -- for wireless personal, ie single user, peripheral connectivity (the lower the bandwidth and power usage the better) Mice, keyboards, PDA's, cellphones: Ok, unneccessary, but OK. Anything resembling a network with more than 2 or 3 computers in the same small room? Uh-un. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
I'd use it. I have a laptop and I like to work on it in different areas of my house. I could print to my printer without having to be tied to it by the cord. Having said that, it's not like the really long cor I have is so much worse of a system. How far away would I be able to get? Could I print from outside?
<strong>Every user in that office is going to have to walk up to the printer to print unless all 25 users are within 30 feet of that printer. It won't work. Nevermind that an airport network is bound to get cheaper, even at the current price it is a better solution and a more cost effective one for an office network. Can you imagine 25 users all tugging at that whole Mbit of bandwidth? No, NO and NO! Bluetooth is best suited as apple has described it -- for wireless personal, ie single user, peripheral connectivity (the lower the bandwidth and power usage the better) </strong><hr></blockquote>
I know that the 802.11 a-b-g is the better solution. The idea of something so compact and inexpensive as that D-Link Bluetooth module is alluring.
Comments
I'm certain Apple plans to somewhat turn this around with pro mice and keyboards, but don't expect 3rd parties or the PC world to jump on this bandwagon.
There is appetite for high speed wireless networking, but not for low speed wireless peripheralling at great expense.
[ 04-15-2002: Message edited by: vr6 ]</p>
I hate to be pessimistic, but bluetooth is basically dead already. The tradeoff behind bluetooth (adding $25-$45 in manufacturing costs - batteries and bluetooth chips - in exchange for getting rid of a short cable) are economically and functionally unattractive enough that most manufacturers haven't even made bluetooth products available to consumers.
I'm certain Apple plans to somewhat turn this around with pro mice and keyboards, but don't expect 3rd parties or the PC world to jump on this bandwagon.
There is appetite for high speed wireless networking, but not for low speed wireless peripheralling at great expense.
<hr></blockquote>
Well, I like being optimistic. I have a rat's nest of wires behind my desk: three computers, two network printers, routers & hubs, Airport Base Station, DSL, ISDN, scanners, drives; heck, spiders are afraid to go back there.
A little bit of wireless help would be welcome for me. I just have to promise my girlfriend to shield the bedroom against EMI.
When I got my HP deskjet, I plugged it into my Powermac using a USB cord. That was the last time I ever had to plug it in, or unplug it--I have not had to deal with that cord a single time besides plugging in the printer. And even a wireless printer will still need a power cord, so it's not like I can carry the printer around my pad and print to any location I feel like (not sure what the point of this would be, but hey, wireless technology lets one do things like this!).
I may move in the future, and I suppose moving the computer might be a tad easier if I didn't have to unplug the USB printer cord and then plug it back in after moving, but is this worth $50 to me? No.
Wireless keyboard and mouse make sense, as long as batteries don't have to be replaced constantly, but wireless peripherals that remain in a fixed position don't need to be wireless.
<strong>What is the purpose of a wireless printer? I simply do not understand the need for one.</strong><hr></blockquote>
In my workplace, neither the many computers in use nor the printers are anchored / stationary. Everything from computers to desks to file cabinets are mobile / on wheels.
how much was your printer cable?
Are you ever going to buy another one?
hmm.. how can we get people to spend more money... let's change it to bluetooth!!
Bluetooth Dead.. yeah right, more like device makers dream come true!
<strong>Bluetooth isn't a good office printer solution by any means. At best it's a nice convenience (but not a neccessary one) for laptop users. An 802.11b network printer on the other hand could be quite usefull in an office or even a home with a few computers scattered throughout.</strong><hr></blockquote>
In an office of say 25 people Bluetooth should be cheaper. With adapters at $50 retail and printer adapters at around $100, thats a lot less than 802.11b cards at $99 and basestations at $300.
But for big offices with 100+ people bluetooth isn't as good unless workgroups have a printer each because of the range.
Ideally you'd use both, but until Apple add support for several 802.11 variants that's tricky.
If you have a laptop and are going to use 802.11 for internet, you'd be better off with an 802.11 printer aswell.
<strong>Every user in that office is going to have to walk up to the printer to print unless all 25 users are within 30 feet of that printer. It won't work. Nevermind that an airport network is bound to get cheaper, even at the current price it is a better solution and a more cost effective one for an office network. Can you imagine 25 users all tugging at that whole Mbit of bandwidth? No, NO and NO! Bluetooth is best suited as apple has described it -- for wireless personal, ie single user, peripheral connectivity (the lower the bandwidth and power usage the better) </strong><hr></blockquote>
I know that the 802.11 a-b-g is the better solution. The idea of something so compact and inexpensive as that D-Link Bluetooth module is alluring.