What's the real scope of hardware openness?
luca.dionisi at gmail.com
Tue Aug 7 14:19:02 CEST 2007
On 8/7/07, Giles Jones <giles.jones at zen.co.uk> wrote:
> Luca Dionisi <luca.dionisi at gmail.com> wrote :
> > Yep.
> > Anyway I would insist in finding a solution that doesn't rely
> > heavily in access points. It would be a showstopper.
> > IMHO we could reach the needed adoption level only if the
> > mobile phone (that everyone nowadays carries with him) is
> > the only needed spot.
> > If the mesh protocol is smart, I think the consumption problem
> > could be worked out.
> > Are you sure that I'm advocating the wrong way to go?
> It's not just consumption of power, transmission strength as well. Would you really feel safe placing a mobile device to your head that is transmitting a signal 10 or more times stronger than with GSM?
> Not such an issue if you mandate a headset, but it's still a health concern.
When you make a call (or answer) then the phone could
go automatically in a mode that doesn't participate in
the mesh. Solved.
Or the signal is so much stronger also when it serves only
Then working with a laptop on wifi for 8 hours is dangerous?
I think there is some FUD in this issue.
And the bastards (you know who I mean) spread it well.
More information about the community