4 ms·
I hope not. For one thing, Bluetooth consumes less battery. Also, when the topic of Bluetooth comes up, many people complain that they have Bluetooth issues. S
by jnurmine 6y ago
I hope not. For one thing, Bluetooth consumes less battery.
Also, when the topic of Bluetooth comes up, many people complain that they have Bluetooth issues. Sadly, some manufacturers do not care about interoperability. Maybe I'm just lucky but I don't even recall when I would've had issues with Bluetooth. I use several devices practically every day (car, headphones, speakers).
- dinero_rojo 6y agoAt least read the abstract before commenting, man...
- jnurmine 6y agoI did, man. Table 1. Wi-Le Energy/packet: 84 uJ Wi-Le Idle current: 2.5 uA BLE Energy/packet: 71 uJ BLE Idle current: 1.1 uA You can see this from Figure 4 as well. So, like I wrote, Bluetooth consumes less battery. In addition there are unsolved issues, which are likely to add to the overall consumption. Edit: formatting
- theta_d 6y ago> We believe that an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) implementation will have much lower power consumption. Line from right above the table so it could possibly go the other direction and use less.
- kumarvvr 6y agoAs the paper explains. At the actual energy consumption level, the modulation techniques used by WiFi are about 3 times more efficient than Bluetooth. The whole premise of the article is that this allows for efficient use of WiFi hardware to emulate BLE like behaviour.