| ??? 04/04/09 22:58 Read: times |
#164336 - let's not waste our time Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Ap Charles said:
Andy Neil said:
Richard Erlacher said:
In what way was it better? How did this "improvement" impact cost? RE
Richard is right: there is no such thing as "better" alone: "better" just means that it more closely fits the requirements - and, as you say, the requirements are unknown! Therefore it is impossible to say which is "better" If you compare those RF-TX and RF-RX modules with NRF24xx it is . OP says he need to upload Adverts to a display board . NOW tell me what data and what time will it take with those Taiwanese low-cost low-speed modules. If it takes two weeks, who cares? He simply begins to put the message up two weeks in advance. He's never stated how much time is available. Andy Neil said:
Ap Charles said:
Compare the two datasheets and find that out .The Taiwanees RF-TX + RF-RX bundle toy and the nRF transceiver. But if he wants a toy, then the Taiwanese one is better! The nRF is clearly a more advanced product - but that doesn't necessarily make it "better" for this particular application. Who asked you and how are you assuming he wants a TOY looks like you use those Taiwanees RFTX + RFRX extensively. Now you state it "The nRF is clearly a more advanced product " isnt ADVANCED product a BETTER . Andy Neil said:
OP didnt answer his requirements , facilities , quantity etc . So neither you nor anyone else can say what is "better" or "best". So I cant comment on that . So don't make such comments, then! Who is commenting ? . It was w.r.t COST COST COST , get your ears /eyesite checked. Andy Neil said:
What I can suggest is which is better and which not . No, you can't - because neither you nor anyone else knows what constitutes "best" for this particular application. All you can do is to point out the advantages and disadvantages of the two - then the OP can decide which constitutes "best" for his particular (unspecified) requirements. O Yes , the ISM band is damn CHOKED ,the more advanced the module + protocols the better it performs. Those 433MHz modules don't work in proximity to cell phones plenty of times and you are there to make unnecessary comments do you have any experience in RF module design? . Have you ever heard of FHSS, DSSS? if yes you wont make such ridiculous comments in favor of those ASK/FM modules. There's almost nothing RF that works well in proximity with cellphones, so I'd not condemn the low-cost 433 MHz units on that basis. Aside from that, the O/P objected to the extremely high cost of a $15 unit. It seems a mite silly to use RF hardware to program a message into an outdoor sign. It makes tampering far too easy. After all, someone's paying for the use of that sign. He wouldn't want someone who hasn't paid for use of the sign to gain access. -AP Arguing over, or, in fact, expending any bandwidth at all on something the O/P doesn't feel worthy of a detailed description is a waste of time and effort. RE |
