Live data from Hacker News

Wi-Fi Alliance introduces low power, long range Wi-Fi HaLow

wi-fi.org

81–83 of 83 posts

Re: Wi-Fi Alliance introduces low power, long range Wi-Fi HaLow

#81
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That comic is a trope at this point. Any discussion of standards includes it. The comment didn't add anything. If it was a more substantive comment and mentioned the comic you'd have a point. But the comment might as well be a copy and paste job. It's not really adding to the discussion. I mean just from the discussion and the letters XKCD I knew which comic it was.

https://xkcd.com/1053/

http://goatkcd.com/1053/sfw

Re: Wi-Fi Alliance introduces low power, long range Wi-Fi HaLow

#82
post #79
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So Sematech and Tata's LoraWan plan in India is vaporware? They claimed successful tests, and said their network is open to testing end-to-end by IoT developers. This is a serious question, I just moved most of my stock portfolio into Sematech after that news. If Sematech's LoraWan is real, this is the best pureplay futurist stock I've seen since Tobii.

UWB was a wonderful technology and claimed successful tests and was open to developers. So was WiMAX (which actually did work). Where are they now? Almost all the TI low-power RF stuff is real. Anything LoraWAN claims could have been done with these kinds of TI chips: http://www.ti.com/product/cc1125 So, why hasn't it? Mostly because these frequencies need big external antennas. TI has a very nice whitepaper about tr…

>I note that Microchip is claiming to be shipping dev kits sometime this quarter. I won't hold my breath, and I still mark this as vapor.

As of a few minutes ago seven in stock at mouser: http://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Microchip-Technology/DM1...

Re: Wi-Fi Alliance introduces low power, long range Wi-Fi HaLow

#83
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we really downvoting xkcd? I don't see anything wrong with a little bit of humour on HN.

That comic is a trope at this point. Any discussion of standards includes it. The comment didn't add anything. If it was a more substantive comment and mentioned the comic you'd have a point. But the comment might as well be a copy and paste job. It's not really adding to the discussion. I mean just from the discussion and the letters XKCD I knew which comic it was.

Fair enough, I'd have to agree.
Post reply on HN