• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    534 days ago

    The room next to where you installed it at home will still have problems getting more than 2 lines of WiFi.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    193 days ago

    I am interested in knowing what’s the bandwidth to transmission power ratio of the device. If it’s low enough, it would be revolutionary for IoT devices.

    • Todd Bonzalez
      link
      fedilink
      English
      163 days ago

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11ah

      347 Mbit/s maximum. (But don’t expect that at 9.9 miles…)

      The "WiFi HaLow"name itself indicates lower power usage than traditional Wifi, largely because it uses the 900MHz band instead of the 2.4/5/6GHz bands.

      Likewise, it isn’t compatible with existing WiFi client devices that don’t operate at those bands.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    43 days ago

    Having this on a Wyze cam would be really interesting. 4mbps would be enough for 720p video…and at almost 10 miles??

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        13
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        That’s pretty good given (as far as I know) the main use case for HaLow is for low bandwidth, very low power use cases, like for IoT devices and other things you’d use Zigbee or Z-wave for today, including devices that run for years off a single button cell battery

        • qupada
          link
          fedilink
          93 days ago

          It sounds like you’re thinking of LoRa, another 900MHz radio protocol.

          LoRa has similar bandwidth to Zigbee (125kbps), and as you say is designed for low-power devices running on battery. I have PIR motion sensors at home which have used only around a third of their battery after 2 years.

          Security cameras seems to be a large target market for HaLow though, where you need a couple of megabits at a few hundred metres.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            Serious question, why not use current wifi for that kind of distance?

            I know, it’s probably not really easy to make the comparison at this point - power usage is definitely part of that equation. Though the lower bandwidth of this doesn’t seem quite enough for video?

            Edit: I misread the bandwidth as 347kbit, not Mbit. So yea, this looks very promising for video, especially given the limitations of Wifi, plus using less power.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Looks like around 4Mbps link speed, so great for sensors and remote monitoring/controls and that kind of thing.

      Sort of in between LoRa and normal Wifi.