First of all, THANK YOU REZA FOR EXTENDING THIS INVITATION TO TAUG MEMBERS!!
I generally don't like to "waste my time" with seminars and training in general, but this particular one was short, informative and timely. The presenters were technical and sociable, and could present their information to a mixed audience. As many of you know, I have been searching for that ideal wireless solution for some time now, and was just setting my sights on DECT. This product looks great, both from a technical standpoint and from an aesthetic standpoint. There are some "one point oh" shortcomings but certainly nothing they have shown looks to be a dealbreaker; I don't think there are any real design issues in this product at all, and those who know me KNOW how hard I am on product designers. :-) I've also been evaluating Polycom's branding of the KIRK DECT solution, but it seems that that's just more aimed toward a POTS interface, which has SERIOUS shortcomings in terms of integration. (They have IP connectivity too, does anyone have any experiences with it?) Unfortunately, with the exception of the 5020, they all look like bars of soap. :-( I've still got this BIG requirement for bluetooth connectivity, and upon hearing that DECT phones should interoperate, I set out to see if ANY DECT phone (EU or US DECT) had it... and I am totally, completely and utterly flabbergasted. I am so much so that I am seriously looking at contacting an OEM and looking at modifying a design and selling my own goddamned brand of DECT and wifi phones. Now as you all know I'm a technical sort. I design complex electronic hardware for a living. I also know enough to be dangerous when it comes to RF design and communications in general. I know that BT and wifi share the 2.4GHz band, and that is the standard idiotic answer I get as to why no wifi phone has BT. However I have also taken "bare" CSR BT chipsets and integrated them into hardware so I *KNOW* that both BT and wifi chipsets have methods for sharing the 2.4GHz radio, LNA, PA and antenna. The second-prize excuse is that wifi and BT both need to physically "own" the airtime for too long to properly share the band. This doesn't wash, either, as I have personally taken my laptop and used a BT headset with the 802.11b network connection and have had perfect-quality conversations. 802.11g can only be better, as the dot-g network time would be significantly shorter at higher speeds. So with both of those "technical" excuses out the window, and myself having personal experience doing the "impossible" with a laptop... Why aren't we seeing this? Am I and the people around me the only ones who can see the utility in a Bluetooth-capable wifi or DECT phone? Help me out here guys... I know I'm about three tomatoes short of a really thick sauce, but I'm not *that* crazy. -A. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
