Re: Choice of frequency and protocol on RF links?
- From: "ElderUberGeek" <aribloch@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 30 Dec 2006 17:43:38 -0800
Hey, sorry, I didn't think it matterd that much...
Firstly the country it Norway.
Secondly it is not supposed to be a "global" solution (i.e. acceptable
worldwide as you say).
My way of thinking, at the moment, is that probably a Zigbee
chip/module would be a good way to go since they are (supposed to be?)
robust, prices are coming down, and there are plenty of
chips/modules/kits. And security is taken care of also. With a "pure"
RF 433 solution we would have to tinker more and that it a pain....
Anyway those are my conclusions till now....
larwe wrote:
ElderUberGeek wrote:
A country where 433 and 2.4 are ISM...
:-)
Doesn't help at all.
You cannot - repeat - CANNOT achieve a solution that is completely
applicable worldwide, particularly if encryption is required. If you're
going to get any more useful answers you need to be more forthcoming
with application details.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Choice of frequency and protocol on RF links?
- From: ElderUberGeek
- Re: Choice of frequency and protocol on RF links?
- From: Vladimir Vassilevsky
- Re: Choice of frequency and protocol on RF links?
- From: ElderUberGeek
- Re: Choice of frequency and protocol on RF links?
- From: larwe
- Re: Choice of frequency and protocol on RF links?
- From: ElderUberGeek
- Re: Choice of frequency and protocol on RF links?
- From: larwe
- Choice of frequency and protocol on RF links?
- Prev by Date: Re: Choice of frequency and protocol on RF links?
- Next by Date: Re: But ARM9 has a bootloader , why do it need mo !!!
- Previous by thread: Re: Choice of frequency and protocol on RF links?
- Next by thread: Re: Choice of frequency and protocol on RF links?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|