Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Surveying New Wireless Technologies

Posted by timothy on from the careful-in-canada dept.

QuentinAxan writes "The Economist has a look at some of the ideas under consideration to advance wireless technology. I thought the concept of ad hoc architecture was especially interesting; the writers suggest briefly that it might encourage the creation of '"mom and pop" network operators, and small community networks.' (Which probably means that the telecom companies will crush it, but it's still a cool idea.)" We've touched on several of the ideas mentioned here before, but the Economist is always a good read.

70 comments

  1. The economist. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    I wish I could work for the economist ... reshashing the same old stuff over and over

  2. Ever Read the Home Page? by The+Gardener · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wasn't Michael's posting yesterday enough?. Its still on the front page.

    The Gardener

    --
    --
    1. Re:Ever Read the Home Page? by PacoTaco · · Score: 1

      It makes sense. Every article in The Economist is twice as important as other publications.

  3. Hmm.. by RomikQ · · Score: 0

    Wouldn't an acess point be much much better for a "small community network"? I mean ad-hoc only makes good sense if you have like two computers, doesn't it?

    PS oh missed fp by about 1 second...

    --
    Join the elite! Post at score:2! Ghostwheel is online.
    1. Re:Hmm.. by LinuxInDallas · · Score: 1

      I took a class in distributed computing a couple years ago where we each had to write a simulation for an ad hoc network. The simulation consisted of a number of nodes that moved on a grid. Each node was free to move at various speeds and turn at any intersection. At each minute of simulation time you did an analysis to show connectivity in the network. What most of us saw was that unless you had a network with a fair number of nodes there was no way you would be able to gurantee conectivity between two arbitrary points. Without enough nodes, you end up with a set of small networks as opposed to one big connected network. Of course, the need for large numbers of nodes decreases if the nodes can communicate at long distances from each other but I don't know how practical that is.

    2. Re:Hmm.. by stain+ain · · Score: 2

      One of the advantages of ad-hoc over traditional (with an access point) is that, you don't need planning beforehand: you can have a network wherever 2 or more computers are close together.
      The main disadvantage is that, since there is no planning, it is difficult to guarantee good quality of service: you can have coverage or not, depending on the conditions at that moment, the number of connected computers, how far they are, if they are moving or not...
      Ad-hoc networks work great, as well, for expanding coverage area: in a true ad-hoc network, relaying is part of the system, so that spending money in expensive access points is not required as long as there are terminals (computers) that do the function.

      One of the problems to be solved in ad-hoc networks, though, is that of billing: since every computer in the ad-hoc network is going to use its own resources for the benefit of others, how is this going to work? I mean, it is like giving free rides to others, that cost you money or time... In fact, this is how free software works, anyways... All in all, watch for more ad-hoc in the near future.

  4. Ultra wideband to transmit 100 mbs wirelessly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Ultra wideband to transmit 100 mbs wirelessly (but only for distances of 10 feet...).

    Also accomplished by tossing DVD's back and forth....what's the point of that? I mean, only ten feet? Why not just use a cable at that point?

  5. You'd think so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was pondering the idea of setting up a local ad-hoc style wireless network in Gainesville with 11b, but the range on my existing AP is so pathetic the only people I could hook up with are next door.

    If they're not into it, there goes that idea, eh?

    A place with a much higher population density would probably have more success with such a setup, I think.

  6. What about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    the little sticker you put on the back of your cell phone to increase range. Isn't that an emerging wireless technology???

  7. The Ultimate Wireless Network. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny


    Me : Hey Joe, got that file?
    Joe: Yeah, it's on a floppy.
    Me : Toss it here.
    Joe: Frisbee's the Floppy across the room (20 ft. [6.1 meters]).
    Me : Catches floppy (Sure it was aimed at my head).
    Me : Thanks.
    Joe: Make sure it gets to Mike tomorrow.
    Me : Ok. (uses sneaker net)

    Look familiar? :)

    1. Re:The Ultimate Wireless Network. by trapvector · · Score: 1

      Hell, if the file is less than 1mb, you may as well just print it and hand the dude the paper.

      While we're at it, why not just go back to communicating with pheromones?

      *sniff sniff* What's that? You don't like it? Oh...

    2. Re:The Ultimate Wireless Network. by gfreeman · · Score: 1

      Ah. Sneakernet.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
  8. uwb can go further more than 10 feet... ( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    there are several good articles about uwb at UWBPlanet [ultrawidebandplanet.com]. It appears the Economist is quite wrong about UWB.

    1. Re:uwb can go further more than 10 feet... ( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      artbell.com also has a lot of good stuff on UWB.

      in other circles, UWB is known as psychic viewing. UWB can certainly go through doors, walls, trees, rain, etc

      people make fun of UWB being vaporware but art bells fans know otherwise.

  9. Great. by SHEENmaster · · Score: 1

    Mom & Pop businesses have never tried to cheat me. Corporations do it every chance they get, most likely more often than that.

    --
    You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
  10. Sigh. by DarkZero · · Score: 2

    Come on, guys. You can do better than this. At least take a quick look at the front page every once and awhile.

  11. Been there, done that by DonaldBeckman817 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    we have been doing this for over a year now,
    www.newgenwireless.com
    IT works great, we stay on top of technology. We are currently running on 3 ISM Bands, 900, 2.4, and 5ghz systems. We get lots of business using this, and its MUCH more profitable than dial-up service.
    you gota know what you are doing though, this isn't like throwing a computer together. You have to watch out for interference, know if you need to use FHSS or DSSS, if a band is too noisy, ect... Don't even get me on packet retransmissions due to trees and water!.

    1. Re:Been there, done that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, good - that means I can still use 3.3 GHz and 10 GHz for my amateur radio station links without worrying about the noise floor too much!

      Hz - stands for Hertz - capitalized because it's named after someone. 'G' - standard (IEEE/ISO) abbreviation for 10^^9, also capitalized.

      And, BTW, if you don't like having to deal with packet retransmissions due to trees and water, tough tamales - that's *why* those frequencies are allocated to amateur radio and ISM services, with Part 15 junk as secondary...

    2. Re:Been there, done that by DonaldBeckman817 · · Score: 1

      as is said, to properly use this, you have to know how something about it. I post to wISP mailing list every day, so i tend to get lazy and assume everyone knows i am talking about 902mhz, 2.4ghz, and 5.2-5.8ghz bands. This 'junk' as you call it, is host to over 5000 wISPs nation wide now. We make more use than most (not all) HAM operators on the crapy frequencies that the govt has let us use. We (wISPs) have developed enterprise level hardware (Cisco, waveridder, breezecom, ect) based on this 'junk' as you call it.

      I love HAM operators, I have some very nice ones who are my customers. Even several major ARRL lobbyists are our customers, which has helped in recent decisions to get the govt to open more unlicensed bands.

      BTW, if you check your ARRL handbook, when it talks about ISM bands, it says HAM operators are ALSO secondary users to this band. The only primary users on this band is the few licensed users, and it states you have to make sure you do not cause interference to them, and to part15b users.

  12. So does this mean... by JanusFury · · Score: 2

    That with easier access to wireless internet, the /. editors will finally be able to NOT POST THE SAME THING MULTIPLE TIMES? This is truly the wave of the future ;)

    --
    using namespace slashdot;
    troll::post();
  13. That 'Economist' sure is great by apwingo · · Score: 1


    I hear they have interesting things to say about the space program.

  14. New Wireless Idea #57 by dmccarty · · Score: 2, Funny

    Send Slashdot headlines to Timothy's cell phone so he can find out when his stories are repeats from yesterday.

    --
    Have fun: Join D.N.A. (National Dyslexics Association)
  15. Deja vu... by neo8750 · · Score: 1

    This just mean they changed something in matrix....

  16. From the This-just-in dept. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Timothy posts:

    A relative unknown to the Usenet world, Linus Torvalds has just posted V .1 of his new self created OS called "Linux" Apparently it is based heavily on Minix. He is currently seeking others that are interested in a new Unix like, Posix like OS to be distributed freely via the internet.

    Thats right folks, you heard it here first on Slashdot!

  17. what's "mom and pop"? by d2002xx · · Score: 1

    Would somebody tell me whatr's "mom and pop"? I could not find out it in my dictionary.


    d2002xx@yahoo.co.uk

    1. Re:what's "mom and pop"? by nixterino · · Score: 1

      "Mom and pop" refers to small, often family owned stores and businesses.

  18. Re:Another article by d2002xx · · Score: 1

    here is indeed interesting, but I think it's not about the topic......

  19. Re:Another article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    dude, she's hot as hell... i wouldn't kick her out of bed... do you know if there are any more pictures of this fine young piece of ass?

  20. Re:Another article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that made me hungry for chili dogs.

  21. Smart Antennas are by vpreHoose · · Score: 2, Informative

    deaf.

    One major reason experienced operators don't go after Smart Antennas is that their gain over regular antennas is only a few dB, usually between 3dB and 7dB. The improvement is easily cancelled out by it raining (-2dB to -4dB) which it does in Europe a great deal, the user changing polarisation by moving the phone from one ear to another (-3dB).

    For 3G (Wideband CDMA) the name of the game is controlling interference from adjacent cells. Cell placement was good enough to do this for 2G, but 3G is far more sensitive to poor cell placement, with the effect felt over several cells. The way operators do this in practice is by planning the interference before placing the cell, or controlling it once the cell is built, or if it is built on an existing 2G site. Smart Antennas make simple planning very difficult, as the exact radiation pattern is not known, or more precisely it changes from one instance of the Monte Carlo simulation used for capacity planning a 3G cell to another.

    Cell breathing due to high capacity, or high power mobiles are a few more variables that make the problem of planning and then running a 3G network far too complex for operators to take a bet on a few extra dB from Smart Antennas.