Slashdot Mirror
Xbox 360's Jamming Wireless Signals?
WirePosted writes "A report has emerged suggesting the Xbox 360's inbuilt wireless system for communication with wireless controllers and headsets is transmitting over a wide area of the 2.4Ghz spectrum, causing interference to WLAN's and other 2.4Ghz devices."
Oh like we didn't know this was going to happen.
I don't know what other IT guys thought when we found out the Xbox was using 2.4 Ghz for it's controllers, but I laughed out loud!
2.4 Ghz is one of the most badly managed spectrum for consumers. You have phone systems that take out access points, access points that take out phone systems, and no idea at all which of those systems will interact badly with another.
And you can't fix it either! Access points use a static channelization for their transmission, and controllers/phones use spread spectrum. Why is that bad??
It's bad because 2.4 Ghz is radio, carrying digital info, which due to the nature of the produced sign wave results in a signal distortion more commonly known as "bleed over". Without the ability to separate the signals by a large frequency, digital over analog bleeds all over the place. Additionally, spread spectrum ensures the signal will at some point transmit across the whole spectrum.
Add to that the fact that these antenna aren't tuned all that well....
Oh well 2.4 Ghz is a mess. No one likes to talk about it... and companies are still making equipment for 2.4 Ghz.
Caveat Emptor.
Another consultant who stuck it out.
"We are the Priests, of the Temples of Syrinx..."
Just a little anicdotal evidence but I have a 360 in the same room at my PC which is on wireless and two access points in that room as well. They all work fine at the same time.
A small college is experience problems with their new wireless network equipment in the presence of a few xbox's. however, apparently all over the rest of the country, in huge universities with thousands of xbox 360s... there's no problem whatsoever. the only bit that doesn't fit with this is that they said the IT staff had issues using their bluetooth headsets. now, the only comment i can make on this is that i think they have cheap bluetooth headsets. they said the 360 makes the signal even when its not turned on... just plugged in. i have both a ps3 & 360 virtually one on top of the other (a shelf plus a few inches of space in between) and the ps3's bluetooth controllers work just as fine as they did before i got the 360. so, all in all, i think this is a load of bull. the 360 has been out for way too long for this to not have been noticed. i think something else is screwing with their headsets & wireless network. or maybe its just the wireless network thats screwing with the headsets and they're looking for a scapegoat.
The PS3 uses the bluetooth protocol to transmit data, which was designed to share 2.4 GHz with WiFi. MS, as usual, has reinvented the wheel, poorly.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Seriously. Come on.
Ideology breeds Hypocrisy. Just how much is up to you.
For the record, my Wii seems to have problems with the wireless. If I leave the WiiConnect24 on, after a couple days the wireless router stops responding, and it doesn't kick back on until I turn off the WiiConnect24 , even after I reboot the router.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
I'd have thought that if the Wii was messing up a laptop's WiFi connection, it would also have been messing up its OWN WiFi connection. Coupled with the fact that it uses an international standard (bluetooth) for its wireless controllers, which is used by millions of other devices without problem, it seems unlikely that it's messing up WiFi signals.
The 360, on the other hand, doesn't have WiFi, and has wireless controllers that use a proprietary (I think) wireless system, on the same frequency spectrum as WiFi. There's every chance that it interferes.
Bluetooth doesn't "play nicely" with WiFi. Bluetooth (from 1.2 onwards) was designed to remove channels that are being used from it's hopping sequence. But until it detects that those channels are in use (which may take quite awhile if your wifi network doesn't have a lot of traffic) you are still going to have interference issues. WiFi will usually "win", in that if either of the devices is going to be affected by the interference it's much more likely to be the bluetooth one.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
True, provided that you can prove that a device covered under part 15 was indeed causing actual harmful interference, and not just transmitting as designed. Until amateur radio receives primary allocation status of its section of 2.4GHz, I doubt that any ham would be very successful at kicking a part 15 device off their local airwaves.
Amateur radio has to comply with part 97, and the unlicensed devices have to comply with part 15, but the secondary allocation status for amateur radio (on 2.4GHz) puts the two almost on a level playing field as far as who has the "right" to be transmitting.