Bluetooth GPS on its way! - Page 2

blackwave · 08-20-2002

Quote:

Originally posted by yellow1
read my review here
http://gpsmaps.tripod.com/index.htm
It's an amazing device !

Thanks for the review

Quote:

Price is expected to be between $300 and $350 upon launch

YIKES! I think I will stick with my Garmin eTrex Legend GPS via serial converters for now

Grey Wolf · 08-21-2002

Reading Yellow1 review, if it is correct, means that it will not work with Stumbler!

seems that it does not comply with the NEMA standard.

Grey

Quote:

The GPS adapts its baudrate to the one requested by the mapping/navigation program. I believe this is unique and sure makes things easy. I found that it can be set anywhere between 1,200bps and 57,600bps (didn't try higher) which is good news because I thought the Sirf chipset maxed out at 38,400bps.

Madhadder · 08-21-2002

Does it really matter what speed it runs at???
As long as it output NMEA it should work with
any mapping/GPS prog.

Mother · 08-21-2002

Following the original thread, there is another product which is sensibly cheaper, and much less bulky (and has a nice vomit-green iMac appearance).

http://www.blueunplugged.com/main.as...nge&prodID=145

The other thing I wanted to mention is about some testing I did with Bluetooth and 802.11b.

Basically, I ran an Anycom BT CF card and a Proxim RangeLan simultaneously in the iPAQ, via the dual-slot sleeve, and what happened was that the 802.11b interfered with the BT card, it left an active connection frozen.

In this case, I was connected to a BT GSM phone, and had an open GPRS session - as soon as the 802.11b card was inserted, the connection froze.

From a pure power perspective, 802.11b is bound to be more inmune to Bluetooth than the other way around. I'm waiting for my SA to arrive back from being calibrated, will run some test on the frequency usage & noise interference.

Cheers,

Mother

bargle · 08-21-2002

Quote:

Originally posted by Mother
Following the original thread, there is another product which is sensibly cheaper, and much less bulky (and has a nice vomit-green iMac appearance).

http://www.blueunplugged.com/main.as...nge&prodID=145

http://www.buy.com/retail/product.as...=30701&loc=101

Under 100$ USD..... But I can't find jack, and no one knows anything about it, it seems..... Also no one has it yet

I love the fact the BT GPS has a sleep function.... It fasinates me.... Any how....

yellow1 · 08-21-2002

Yeah Mother, I don't know, That thingy of yours costs about $200 which seems like a lot for a bt/serial adapter. I"d rather throw in a $100 and get a better all-round solution.

You won't get the superb reception of the BT GPS, autonomy and the sleep mode either.

For the $88 ambicom thingy it might be worth the trade-off though. Is it maybe the Print adapter mentionned here ?

I don't know how well the baudrate settings would be passed on from your GPS to your PC too, this seems to be a tricky problem

Mother · 08-21-2002

Quote:

Yeah Mother, I don't know, That thingy of yours costs about $200 which seems like a lot for a bt/serial adapter. I"d rather throw in a $100 and get a better all-round solution.

Oh yes, I didn't comment on the price, but I can if you want - BLAAAAAAARRRRGHH!!! It's ridiculously overpriced.

Quote:

You won't get the superb reception of the BT GPS, autonomy and the sleep mode either

That's debateable - I can plug an eTrex which can give me 20+ hours of autonomy, or an external mag-mount "mouse" receiver to send the NMEA to the PC/iPAQ, fed from the car battery. Basically, it gives me choice of receiver, choice of power supply, etc.

I use a "mouse" type GPS made by SanAv (you can get them for about $130), which I've even placed under the passenger seat, and would still give a valid fix.

Quote:

For the $88 ambicom thingy it might be worth the trade-off though. Is it maybe the Print adapter mentionned here ?

Yes, agreed totally - $88 is quite a decent price for that - I don't think it refers to the printer adapter.

Quote:

I don't know how well the baudrate settings would be passed on from your GPS to your PC too, this seems to be a tricky problem

When you open the virtual Bluetooth serial port, you set the baud rate normally, like you would with any serial port. Data then just gets transfered normally. I've tried this with Bluetooth GSM phones and it works great - you can pass AT commands without a problem.

All the best,

Mother

leftleg · 08-28-2002

Quote:

Originally posted by blackwave
yea my ipaq comes bt enabled... i haven't played with it yet.. anything out that that is cheap to play with?

To me it seems pointless. It dosen't haven't any range. I don't own or have used anything that uses bt. I work in a company that uses technology like crazy, and nothing we own uses it.

Pointless technology.

I didn't buy the ipaq that had bt built into the unit.

c-mag · 08-28-2002

Quote:

Originally posted by leftleg

To me it seems pointless. It dosen't haven't any range. I don't own or have used anything that uses bt. I work in a company that uses technology like crazy, and nothing we own uses it.

Pointless technology.

I didn't buy the ipaq that had bt built into the unit.

Yeah, but BT is *designed* for short distances, such as carrying a BT gps in one pocket and a BT-enabled handheld in another. IMO, other than that, it's completely useless.

yellow1 · 08-28-2002

if you guys are really into technology you should do yourself a favour and document yourselves about bluetooth !
Here's a good place to start:
http://bluetooth.weblogs.com/

leftleg · 08-28-2002

I'm not saying it isn't a neat technology, but I haven't really seen anything that uses bt in my current work enviroment or past ones. Friends of mine that are into technology also do not use it.

If I want connect to a printer in a room that has bt, more than likey I want to be able to print from 200 ft away. Why would I want a technology that has a distance of 15-30 feet. I would have to say that goes for other devices too.

Therefore I find it useless.

802.11 wireless standards just makes more sense.

bargle · 08-29-2002

Quote:

Originally posted by leftleg
I'm not saying it isn't a neat technology, but I haven't really seen anything that uses bt in my current work enviroment or past ones. Friends of mine that are into technology also do not use it.

If I want connect to a printer in a room that has bt, more than likey I want to be able to print from 200 ft away. Why would I want a technology that has a distance of 15-30 feet. I would have to say that goes for other devices too.

Therefore I find it useless.

802.11 wireless standards just makes more sense.

Odlyenfough it makes les sence to me... 802.11x eats up more power.... And also I don't want my phone to be reached at the same distance as a 802.11 device... Bluetooth is made to be a Pesonal Area Network... Not a LAN. I dream that devices with inter connect, like a TV to my PDA, etc. I donno that that will happen. But BT is the only thing I have seen that would fit to this... O ya... The other thing is BT price... They are hopeing to get the pice soo cheap it can be in anything.....

leftleg · 08-29-2002

Quote:

Originally posted by bargle

Odlyenfough it makes les sence to me... 802.11x eats up more power.... And also I don't want my phone to be reached at the same distance as a 802.11 device... Bluetooth is made to be a Pesonal Area Network... Not a LAN. I dream that devices with inter connect, like a TV to my PDA, etc. I donno that that will happen. But BT is the only thing I have seen that would fit to this... O ya... The other thing is BT price... They are hopeing to get the pice soo cheap it can be in anything.....

I can see your point about not wanting someone to access your phone using bt, but that is reason why encryption and passwords were invented. Hopefully phones and other devices will have pw protection on these devices. If I have a phone, and I want to grab a number from it, I want to be able to grab it from myt kitchen while I am in my bedroom. BT wouldn't reach that far. 15-30 ft radius isn't that far. Then you have to figure in the wiring in the house, and whatever the house is made off. These factors would make it the technology less useable.

bargle · 08-29-2002

Quote:

Originally posted by leftleg

I can see your point about not wanting someone to access your phone using bt, but that is reason why encryption and passwords were invented. Hopefully phones and other devices will have pw protection on these devices. If I have a phone, and I want to grab a number from it, I want to be able to grab it from myt kitchen while I am in my bedroom. BT wouldn't reach that far. 15-30 ft radius isn't that far. Then you have to figure in the wiring in the house, and whatever the house is made off. These factors would make it the technology less useable.

And you trust encryption.. Little along 802.11x's? Its been broken twice... 2 diffrent ways as I understands.... And belive it or not, bt, has been reported to go that far... It depends on the device.... Im not saying bt's standard should be the winner of a PAN like item... But WiFi as we know it now sure dosn't sound good.... And well, noting else is out there.. So ill pick the standard that hasn't publicly been cracked yet and works....

leftleg · 08-29-2002

Quote:

Originally posted by bargle

And you trust encryption.. Little along 802.11x's? Its been broken twice... 2 diffrent ways as I understands.... And belive it or not, bt, has been reported to go that far... It depends on the device....

Well, controlling your tv and using your coffe maker using bt is nice. It should be encrypted. You really think there are going to be hords of bt hackers trying to access your phone and coffe maker?? I don't. I find tons of access points and never do anything to them. I'm sure alot of other people are them same way, even hackers. I sure you have nothing of value(along with me) stored in your phone. If you do have important info in your phone you are stupid. What if you lost the phone? No one would have to sniff your bt packets then.

Still I think it is pointless. I am also not worried about people accessing my 802 network either. There are ways to keep the novice from accessing my 802. All that leaves is the more experienced hacker, which will most likely not be intrested in my network or yours. A business would be a different story, or government.

08-21-2002	#19 (permalink)
Mother Too many secrets... Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Barcelona, Spain Posts: 204	Bluetooth and 802.11b tests Following the original thread, there is another product which is sensibly cheaper, and much less bulky (and has a nice vomit-green iMac appearance). http://www.blueunplugged.com/main.as...nge&prodID=145 The other thing I wanted to mention is about some testing I did with Bluetooth and 802.11b. Basically, I ran an Anycom BT CF card and a Proxim RangeLan simultaneously in the iPAQ, via the dual-slot sleeve, and what happened was that the 802.11b interfered with the BT card, it left an active connection frozen. In this case, I was connected to a BT GSM phone, and had an open GPRS session - as soon as the 802.11b card was inserted, the connection froze. From a pure power perspective, 802.11b is bound to be more inmune to Bluetooth than the other way around. I'm waiting for my SA to arrive back from being calibrated, will run some test on the frequency usage & noise interference. Cheers, Mother

08-28-2002	#26 (permalink)
leftleg Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Chicago Posts: 15	I'm not saying it isn't a neat technology, but I haven't really seen anything that uses bt in my current work enviroment or past ones. Friends of mine that are into technology also do not use it. If I want connect to a printer in a room that has bt, more than likey I want to be able to print from 200 ft away. Why would I want a technology that has a distance of 15-30 feet. I would have to say that goes for other devices too. Therefore I find it useless. 802.11 wireless standards just makes more sense. Last edited by leftleg : 08-28-2002 at 10:31 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

08-21-2002	#18 (permalink)
Madhadder General "Noob Basher" Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Munich, Germany Posts: 1,620	Does it really matter what speed it runs at??? As long as it output NMEA it should work with any mapping/GPS prog.

08-21-2002	#21 (permalink)
yellow1 Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 63	Yeah Mother, I don't know, That thingy of yours costs about $200 which seems like a lot for a bt/serial adapter. I"d rather throw in a $100 and get a better all-round solution. You won't get the superb reception of the BT GPS, autonomy and the sleep mode either. For the $88 ambicom thingy it might be worth the trade-off though. Is it maybe the Print adapter mentionned here ? I don't know how well the baudrate settings would be passed on from your GPS to your PC too, this seems to be a tricky problem

08-28-2002	#25 (permalink)
yellow1 Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 63	if you guys are really into technology you should do yourself a favour and document yourselves about bluetooth ! Here's a good place to start: http://bluetooth.weblogs.com/