see, i think this is the challenging area here. really really dodgy pseudo-code style:
if (you want these two features)
{
/wireless audio streaming to your home stereo from your ipod
/wireless headphones (i do get annoyed by the headphone cords and all that jazz) to hear music from your ipod
}
and
if (you throw in)
{
/wireless streaming of video to your tv from your ipod
}
and
if (you think)
{
/the above three features are very compelling
}
then
{
a one-size-fits-all wireless technology may not offer everything
}
although
{
in this case 802.11g is the frontrunner IMHO since it has the max headroom for all the above. since wifi has been around for a while, 802.11g headphones may not be as technically challenging now as it was even 6 months ago
assumming it doesn't give you brain tumors, a 802.11g headphone would also allow some great wireless headphone action from your wifi pc/desktop/mac/laptop/handheld/etc.......
Gosh after all that chatter in the "nanos not doing well thread" affecting the appl share price etc, how about seeing this thread as trying to have a positive effect on the csr share price (providing they list)
Do you know what the cause of the interference usually is?
Maybe these companies know. Whenever I ask they get dodgy. Sometimes all it takes is someone walking near the receiver. I know that certain medical equipment used to cause interference with radio/tv signals. Hopefully it's better shielded now. Microwave ovens can cause problems despite the shielding. So can many fluorescent lights and dimmers.
I'm discussing the potential to stream music to say Airport Express via an iPod
in the future. Another possibility is using Bluetooth 2.0.
One argument is using Airport would be a waste of bandwidth. I'm now saying
the probability is that people who would want to stream music from their iPod probaly have an Airport Network already plus in the Uk Wireless networks are very much on the way up due to the cost and "Wireless Factor"
Blue Tooth is fine but the range is not so great. Possibly better for headsets but I've heard quite a few people complain about a sudden loss of connection can anyone confirm this?
The biggest problem is the battery issue. after analysing this It struck me the likes of Sony have supperior battery life in their products. Maybe Apple could source elsewhere?
How much of a pain is the pairing Blue Tooth devices? Surly pair once thenyou don't have to do it again. Like the Apple wirless keyboard etc ?
But 'g' is Apple standard anyway. And the range is better than blue tooth.
Also would WiFi data rate not be quicker than Blue Tooth..
There are higher power consumer Bluetooth systems. I've managed to scroll my computer with a mouse that's penetrating through three metal walls.
Quote:
One argument is using Airport would be a waste of bandwidth.
But it's not. Plenty of bandwidth should be available for other devices, it's not as if streaming is a continuous stream, they really are short pulses, packets of data where other devices can interleave packets as well in between those audio packets. It would be more of a waste if you forced the network down to 5Mbps to not "waste" bandwidth, then fewer devices can share the AP.
I also think the bandwidth will not be wasted. So lets see what Apple has installed for us. I read on www.macuser.co.uk that Apple was recruiting an engineer on wireless technonlogies for its iPod division in fact they probably have that person in place.
Exciting times ahead and tempting it is to buy a Nano I will wait until iPods have wirless technology built in.
I also think the bandwidth will not be wasted. So lets see what Apple has installed for us. I read on www.macuser.co.uk that Apple was recruiting an engineer on wireless technonlogies for its iPod division in fact they probably have that person in place.
Exciting times ahead and tempting it is to buy a Nano I will wait until iPods have wirless technology built in.
Not at all. I just picked the example of 802.11g having enough bandwidth for video streaming in case anyone still doubted it was insufficient for audio streaming. Moving on ...
Talking about using Blue Tooth as a medium for transfering music. Steve Jobs at Paris Expo 2005 said the following
Jobs on Bluetooth, radio iPods
Jobs also confronted demands from some quarters that Apple should deliver a Bluetooth- or radio-enabled iPod.
While many see adding a radio to an iPod as a useful extra feature, Apple?s feedback is less vociferous than the noise generated by the company?s critics, Jobs confirmed.
?We don?t get a lot of customers asking for it?, he said.
Apple?s senior vice president of worldwide product marketing Phil Schiller pointed out that iPods now offer radio on demand: ?Thanks to podcasting you can listen to radio shows whenever you want to?, he said.
Jobs also warned of the challenge of offering extra features just for the sake of it, saying: ?We are very careful about what features we add because we can?t take them away?.
The Bluetooth equation remains unsolved, it seems.
Calling it a ?technology in search of a problem?, Jobs said: ?The easiest way to get music onto an iPod nano is to dock it (connect it directly to a computer)?, he said.
It?s about file sizes and the limited speed of Bluetooth technology.
?Frankly music is very big?, he said, ?we tend to forget how big it is?, he added.
?With Bluetooth, songe take a while to download. And if you have Bluetooth headphones you have to charge them as well as the iPod. People don? want to do that. Also the sound isn?t good enough,? he claimed.
The sound is fine over Bluetooth. The part about transfer speeds is right though. But that's different because transfer speeds have to be much faster than speeds for listening. I'd love to transfer an hour's worth of something in a minute, but I sure wouldn't want to listen to it at that speed.
He's also right about removing features once adding them. We used to have to think about that when we designed equipment.
Comments
if (you want these two features)
{
/wireless audio streaming to your home stereo from your ipod
/wireless headphones (i do get annoyed by the headphone cords and all that jazz) to hear music from your ipod
}
and
if (you throw in)
{
/wireless streaming of video to your tv from your ipod
}
and
if (you think)
{
/the above three features are very compelling
}
then
{
a one-size-fits-all wireless technology may not offer everything
}
although
{
in this case 802.11g is the frontrunner IMHO since it has the max headroom for all the above. since wifi has been around for a while, 802.11g headphones may not be as technically challenging now as it was even 6 months ago
}
starts gossipy rumor --> appleinsider owns csr share
Originally posted by MacGregor
Do you know what the cause of the interference usually is?
Maybe these companies know. Whenever I ask they get dodgy. Sometimes all it takes is someone walking near the receiver. I know that certain medical equipment used to cause interference with radio/tv signals. Hopefully it's better shielded now. Microwave ovens can cause problems despite the shielding. So can many fluorescent lights and dimmers.
in the future. Another possibility is using Bluetooth 2.0.
One argument is using Airport would be a waste of bandwidth. I'm now saying
the probability is that people who would want to stream music from their iPod probaly have an Airport Network already plus in the Uk Wireless networks are very much on the way up due to the cost and "Wireless Factor"
Blue Tooth is fine but the range is not so great. Possibly better for headsets but I've heard quite a few people complain about a sudden loss of connection can anyone confirm this?
The biggest problem is the battery issue. after analysing this It struck me the likes of Sony have supperior battery life in their products. Maybe Apple could source elsewhere?
How much of a pain is the pairing Blue Tooth devices? Surly pair once thenyou don't have to do it again. Like the Apple wirless keyboard etc ?
Originally posted by jimbo123
But 'g' is Apple standard anyway. And the range is better than blue tooth.
Also would WiFi data rate not be quicker than Blue Tooth..
There are higher power consumer Bluetooth systems. I've managed to scroll my computer with a mouse that's penetrating through three metal walls.
One argument is using Airport would be a waste of bandwidth.
But it's not. Plenty of bandwidth should be available for other devices, it's not as if streaming is a continuous stream, they really are short pulses, packets of data where other devices can interleave packets as well in between those audio packets. It would be more of a waste if you forced the network down to 5Mbps to not "waste" bandwidth, then fewer devices can share the AP.
Exciting times ahead and tempting it is to buy a Nano I will wait until iPods have wirless technology built in.
Originally posted by jimbo123
I also think the bandwidth will not be wasted. So lets see what Apple has installed for us. I read on www.macuser.co.uk that Apple was recruiting an engineer on wireless technonlogies for its iPod division in fact they probably have that person in place.
Exciting times ahead and tempting it is to buy a Nano I will wait until iPods have wirless technology built in.
That could be another year.
Originally posted by melgross
Was that a problem?
Not at all. I just picked the example of 802.11g having enough bandwidth for video streaming in case anyone still doubted it was insufficient for audio streaming. Moving on ...
Jobs on Bluetooth, radio iPods
Jobs also confronted demands from some quarters that Apple should deliver a Bluetooth- or radio-enabled iPod.
While many see adding a radio to an iPod as a useful extra feature, Apple?s feedback is less vociferous than the noise generated by the company?s critics, Jobs confirmed.
?We don?t get a lot of customers asking for it?, he said.
Apple?s senior vice president of worldwide product marketing Phil Schiller pointed out that iPods now offer radio on demand: ?Thanks to podcasting you can listen to radio shows whenever you want to?, he said.
Jobs also warned of the challenge of offering extra features just for the sake of it, saying: ?We are very careful about what features we add because we can?t take them away?.
The Bluetooth equation remains unsolved, it seems.
Calling it a ?technology in search of a problem?, Jobs said: ?The easiest way to get music onto an iPod nano is to dock it (connect it directly to a computer)?, he said.
It?s about file sizes and the limited speed of Bluetooth technology.
?Frankly music is very big?, he said, ?we tend to forget how big it is?, he added.
?With Bluetooth, songe take a while to download. And if you have Bluetooth headphones you have to charge them as well as the iPod. People don? want to do that. Also the sound isn?t good enough,? he claimed.
This can be found at www.macworld.co.uk
To me using 'g' is the way foward.
1) Sound quality is good
2) Transferring data is good.
Makes sense to me
He's also right about removing features once adding them. We used to have to think about that when we designed equipment.