Here's Why Apple's in bed w/Intel HOT WIRELESS chips...

Jump to First Reply
Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
... that use LESS power !!!



http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index....77;fp;2;fpid;1



"Intel builds all-in-one wireless radio package"



"The device currently supports 802.11a/b/g, but it should have enough bandwidth to also support the forthcoming 802.11n standard, High said. Intel believes the integrated design will help customers build cheaper and more power efficient devices, he said."



"By eliminating as many discrete chips as possible, Intel was able to reduce the power consumption of the package and lower the cost of building wireless networking technology into a notebook, mobile phone, or personal digital assistant, Intel researchers said in a paper outlining their accomplishment.



The current design is only a prototype, and additional testing and validation is needed before Intel will start producing the chip in large volumes, High said. Given that wireless communication chips also require government approval before they can be sold, Intel is probably at least two years away from selling these chips, he said.



Intel's ultimate goal is to build a communications chip that can connect to any type of network, be it a Wi-Fi LAN, a wide-area network based on the WiMax technology it is heavily promoting, or personal-area networks like Bluetooth or UWB (ultrawideband), High said.



By 2007, the company expects to build an integrated chip with separate radios for the various networks, and hopes to eventually build chips with "cognitive" or software-defined radios that can connect to multiple types of networks on their own."

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 8
    Wrong forum. Moving to General Discussion.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 2 of 8
    danmacmandanmacman Posts: 773member
    Considering how quickly Apple jumped on the 802.11_ bandwagon, I would suspect WiMax would be no different. Although there are certain things beyond Apple's control in this regard, merely supporting the standard would seemingly help move the technology along.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 3 of 8
    macchinemacchine Posts: 295member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by DanMacMan

    Considering how quickly Apple jumped on the 802.11_ bandwagon, I would suspect WiMax would be no different. Although there are certain things beyond Apple's control in this regard, merely supporting the standard would seemingly help move the technology along.



    If WiMax is ultrawideband the power usage should drop to about 1/10 but I guess the chips are too new there does not seem to be much tech data on them yet.



    Although the article makes it sound like the current chips are very wasteful of energy.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 4 of 8
    wmfwmf Posts: 1,164member
    Reality check: Atheros has had single-chip a/b/g for months. Every vendor claims that their chips are "low power"; what matters is which is lower power than the other, which you don't know unless you have numbers.



    WiMax is not based on UWB.



    You can't cheat physics; if you want some sort of wireless WAN with miles of range it's going to use much more power than a wireless LAN with hundreds of feet of range.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 5 of 8
    pyr3pyr3 Posts: 946member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by wmf



    WiMax is not based on UWB.





    Yea. WiMax is microwave, and doesn't need line-of-sight.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 6 of 8
    skatmanskatman Posts: 609member
    Quote:

    Yea. WiMax is microwave, and doesn't need line-of-sight.



    Depending on the type of antenna used. Ever seen those big "dishes" on top of buildings? Those are microwave as well and they do need line-of-sight allignment.

    Wifi is also microwave, cell-phones are also microwave.

    The higher the frequency, the more line-of-sight it requires. If you want higher bandwidth (more info. transfered), you have to go to higher frequency and use more power. No way around it.

    If you want to have miles of range at broadband type speed, and have bandwidth for everyone, you have to transmit at a frequency of several GHz. At that frequency, line-of-sight is important. (bandwidth slice for each user is going to me in MHz range)

    The biggest problem with WiMax, once it hits mainstream (if it does), is the cell size. Each cell will be huge and the potential number of users per cell will be huge. They have problems with current GPRS cells as it is. The current cell size (distance between cell-phone towers) is limited by cell's ability to carry enough users, not the signal propagation distance.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 7 of 8
    pyr3pyr3 Posts: 946member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by skatman

    Depending on the type of antenna used. Ever seen those big "dishes" on top of buildings? Those are microwave as well and they do need line-of-sight allignment.

    Wifi is also microwave, cell-phones are also microwave.

    The higher the frequency, the more line-of-sight it requires. If you want higher bandwidth (more info. transfered), you have to go to higher frequency and use more power. No way around it.

    If you want to have miles of range at broadband type speed, and have bandwidth for everyone, you have to transmit at a frequency of several GHz. At that frequency, line-of-sight is important. (bandwidth slice for each user is going to me in MHz range)

    The biggest problem with WiMax, once it hits mainstream (if it does), is the cell size. Each cell will be huge and the potential number of users per cell will be huge. They have problems with current GPRS cells as it is. The current cell size (distance between cell-phone towers) is limited by cell's ability to carry enough users, not the signal propagation distance.




    Sorry, I wasn't implying that "microwave == no line-of-sight". WiMax is supposed to be independent of line-of-sight issues. I've heard that there is a 30 mile range with up to 1 megabit up and down. Though I recall hearing something about the 30 mile range being rather exaggerated. Personally, I'm also interested in 3G as well as the 4G that DoCoMo mentioned recently.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 8 of 8
    wmfwmf Posts: 1,164member
    Yes, 30 mile range is exaggerated; it would require line-of-sight and would still result in low cell capacity. Real WiMax deployments will be more like 3 mile range (heck, it's only a factor of 10 difference).
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.