| ??? 04/04/09 15:48 Read: times |
#164325 - No single track Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Per Westermark said:
Ap said:
What about here , and between me and him. But you will not try to see that its for sure. Haven't you thought about the fact that the toy manufacturer probably did use that solution because they considered it the best for them? You still assume your view correct and any other view wrong... Do you expect me to do a comparative analysis of all your posts? How about this: Andy, about the 433MHz modules: One of the ways they cut the cost is that you get next to no documentation, and no support. The cost of the RF is, surely, going to be neglible compared to the overall cost of this monster?! These are very crude modules - so you're (probably) going to have to implement your own scheme to cope with interference, etc. As ever, the choice is whether to save cash at the expense of your time & effort, or to save your time & effort at the expense of cash. That obviously shows that he do not say that the 433MHz solution is the best. It's just that the 433MHz not being best does not automatically make the Nordic Devices solution become the best either. Just one of several alternatives. By the way, the Nordic part number should not be nRF24L01 but nRF24L01+. The older version is not recommended for new designs, according to Nordic. That was a typo ,I have gone through RFwaves now Vishay , Maxstream , Aerocomm will that fill the OPs bill? , there are plenty of other board level designs then Nordic semi , you will in that case follow the same route. Per Westermark said:
If you have used the Nordic solution, you can post that. And you can tell your experiences about out. But don't go forward and translate these experiences into the fact "best" that must be true for any other user. If high bandwidth is needed, then city centers can have problems with 2.4GHz. Maybe a solution with a lower frequency would be preferable to get a longer range. Or possibly a WLAN solution around 5MHz because of lower interference from the overpopulation of 2.4GHz in some regions. If he designs and find some problem I would be glad to help . Per Westermark said:
Since a display the size mentioned is very expensive, the "best" solution may possibly be an industrial PC with whatever WLAN interface that works best for every specific installation. Possibly WiMax? Or the signs may be located in situations where they will not be in range for any short-range wireless solutions, instead requiring more traditional solutions based on GPRS, 3G or similar. If the sign isn't showing graphics, it may even be enough to settle for SMS or MMS to transfer the data... The OP may have started this thread based on an assumption. That assumption may possibly be wrong. Being bombarded with alternatives, he might find that he either isn't interested to go ahead with the project, or that completely different solutions may be more advantageous to use. We can't know - only suggest. But one think we can know is that "best" is not an absolute fact. In your previous thread you say: " We do imformation solutions where the sign may receive the new data hours, days or possibly weeks before the intended switch. Transfer speeds may not be an important issue. A way more important issue may be the required transmission distances" Doesnt this depends on application to application ? , as you dont know OPs application it cannot be commmented. -Ap |
