??? 03/01/10 14:31 Read: times |
#173688 - Yes, you're right ... I must have gone to sleep ... Responding to: ???'s previous message |
These things have never gotten a serious discussion, though.
If, for example, one wished to send a signal from a controller to a bunch of slaves, telling them which of them was to respond, and then expect a reply within a predetermined time, from that, and only that slave, that wouldn't be a complex protocol, though it is a signaling protocol of sorts, one wouldn't need the "fancy" features, as provided by various sorts of $50 modules. Those get discussion from time to time, though it's mostly about cost, and occasionally about dealing with the features that are superfluous. I'd certainly believe a thorough exposition of how these "cheapies" are to be used is warranted. After all, I'd like to put a proximity sensor at my front door, and have it ring a bell in my lab, from which I can't hear the doorbell. A discussion of features such as range, error rates, throughput, strengths, weaknesses, would be informative, and I bet I'm not alone. After all, there's information that isn't so readily available, yet someone has it. RE |
Topic | Author | Date |
wireless data transmission ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Insufficient detail! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Let us have more details, please. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
What wireless tranceivers/modules? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Why do people assume the costly cumbersome protocols? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I think you mean MHz ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Yes, you're right ... I must have gone to sleep ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Wireless data transmission | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
IS YOUR RF DESIGN RELIABLE | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
digial mdulation scheme before RF ASK modulation? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Hmmm no reply tomy questions?![]() | 01/01/70 00:00 |