Re: Re: Amazing Breakthrough... (don't get too excited, it's just more wireless hype)

["Jon Wilkins" <jonpdwilkins@xxxxxxxxx>]

>  There seems to be a desire by some manufacturers to do away with
the entire
>  "plate of spaghetti" behind PC & AV equipment. I really
wonder why?
Driven by profit margins of the manufacturers and retailers is my
conclusion.

In almost all cases the "perceived value" (leading to selling
price)
of a wireless variant of Product X is greater than the non-wireless
variant of the same product.   The cost to the manufacturer of adding
wireless functionality is now minimal - little more than a chip on the
PCB and a couple of PCB tracks etched to make the 'antenna' (another
reason why consumer level wireless kit is usually so short range).  In
many cases, the wireless variant will be wireless only eg Pinnacles
Soundbridge Homemusic - no ethernet connection (only used as example
cos I have one here).  Removing the ethernet connection removes at
least the ethernet controller, the ethernet skt and a fidly little
home in the casing.  Oh, and no ethernet connection, so no need to
throw in that cheap ethernet cable either.

So by pushing a wireless variant, the product has an increased selling
price because the 'perceived value' of the product is higher ("oooh,
look for an extra tenner I can get the top-range one that connects
wirelessly") whilst the actual cost of manufacture is very little more
or maybe even is less.

This is all lapped up by people that want wireless everything.  The RF
band being used gets congested so the effective range is reduced and
suddenly the market for wireless repeating (which should only be
needed in the equiv of >50m free space) now includes people in small
modern wood-framed homes with probably free space equiv distances of
only 10-20m.  Ching ching.

Bad guys? Manufacturer or Retail ?  Probably a bit of both I'd guess.

Despite all the above, I am a "true believer" in the usefulness
of
wireless, & have been since I first worked with wireless lans >10
yrs
ago.  BUT there are places where it's best (to connect things you will
want to move frequently for instance) but also places where wireless
is unneccesary.

On Jan 12, 2008 1:22 PM, Jim <jim@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I completely agree.
>
>  There seems to be a desire by some manufacturers to do away with the
entire
>  "plate of spaghetti" behind PC & AV equipment. I really
wonder why? It can
>  all be neatly hidden (as we do!) and really isn't a problem.
>
>  Longer distance stuff has a number of solutions but you can't beat a
>  hardwired solution. You will always need power to the bits of the
system
>  (no-one has done 240v broadcast power yet!!), so why bother to remove
one
>  cable when there has to be another anyway.
>
>  Jim
>
>
>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: ukha_d@xxxxxxx [mailto:ukha_d@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
>  Ian Lowe
>  Sent: 12 January 2008 12:53
>  To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
>  Subject: RE: [ukha_d] Re: Amazing Breakthrough... (don't get too
excited,
>  it's just more wireless hype)
>
>  > If so, then it's more of a reasonable idea, but poor solution.
>
>  I agree, but the range of this thing is being quoted as 10 metres -
and
>  given that the ranges quoted for wireless kit are usually a bit on
the
>  fantasy side, I'd expect real world of less than 8m - which makes it
for
>  use within a very small area.
>
>  I ran an HDMI cable from my upstairs node zero down to the living
room -
> and
>  it was an easy DIY job. Cut an access hatch, drilled some holes, ran
the
>  cable, plastered it up behind me. In return for a little work and
>  disruption, I have an absolutely rock solid, 100% reliable solution
that I
>  can retaks for other equipment as required.
>
>  Wireless has a place, but so does Wired - and this strikes me as 95%
Wired
>  country.
>


--
www.jpdw.org / Information : The currency of the Future