Comments on: Palm Embraces Wireless LANs
The Xircom Wireless LAN module uses 802.11b to connect to a network access point at up to 11 Mbps with a range of up to 1,000 feet. It costs $290 separately or $600 with an m505, $550 with an m500, or $500 with an m125.
Article Comments
(60 comments)
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.
Comments Closed
This article is no longer accepting new comments.
RE: Airport?
RE: Airport?
RE: Airport?
The trick to getting to to work is to put the airport network name into the "SSID" area. (Took me about an hour to figure that one out.)
8==8 Bones 8==8
Not on a Palm
RE: Not on a Palm
RE: Not on a Palm
Seems to me that a top of the line Palm PLUS the wireless module is still LESS than a typical cost of a PPC device alone.
> I'd heard that Palm OS devices weren't actually capable of 11Megabits per second, or even close,
> less than 1Megabit was what I had heard.
Where did you hear this? On some PPC forum? Even if true, don't get caught up in theoretical maximums verses practical needs. I keep a large number of spreadsheets on my Palm. At 1 megabit per sec., I can download the largest one of them in .2 seconds.
No one gets 11 Mbps unless conditions are absolutely ideal, like standing next to the network access port. Speeds are reduced as distance increases and walls etc get in the way.
RE: Not on a Palm
If you guys do not know that, please keep your own words in your own mouth. At least, that will not make you a stupid jerk.
P.S. If you are going to tell me that a poor CPU cannot surf the speed up to the network standards, how are the 486s working out? Some of the servers are still running on Linux with 486 or Pentium class. Are u kidding me?
RE: Not on a Palm
Also, when you go to Xircom's website, they told you the 11 MBPS are limited to 100ft within a closed area (e.g. an office). This is the standars, which apply for all PPCs and Palms.
This must be some marketing genius paid by M$ to cheat us what networking is, or they are so stupid that they do not understand the basics.
RE: Not on a Palm
Stupid zealots.
RE: Not on a Palm
The "Not even close to 11MBS" is because this Xircom thing apparently uses the M505's serial connection to connect and simulates a modem. The maximum throughput on the serial port in the m505 is only, what? 115kbs? So yes, it is pretty much a waste to claim that this is 11Mbs when the actual throughput to the Palm is only 115kbs.
RE: Not on a Palm
Where do you get your ideas?
P.S. Maybe the employee need to access his e-mail in the toilet. That's called s?it mail, which is what the zealots always read.
RE: Not on a Palm
By the way, did you every know that a serial port supports speed up to 4.3 MB/sec? Just cut the crap. There is an external CD-rewriter that can use the parallel/serial port of your computer with a speed of 8/4/24.
Anyway, zealots are zealots. They keep posting ignorant posts and refuse to receive new information, just like no Documents To GO on Palm's handhelds.
RE: Not on a Palm
RE: Not on a Palm
I got a H330 with the Symbol 802.11 CF card and let me just say it is FAST. More than enough bandwidth to do all the normal things that are done on a PDA including any PPC out there too.
Original poster:
Your comments sounds like you are reading some script given to you by some Microsoft marketing guy who promises you he will set you up with some freebies if you run around blindly spitting off this M$ propaganda crap.
Not going to bother tearing your ignorance apart. You've done it yourself.
RE: Not on a Palm
RE: Not on a Palm
RE: Not on a Palm
They will repeat saying their faults 10,000 times unless it is spammed all over the board, or they believe that a lie will become a truth when it is said 10,000 times.
RE: USB devices
RE: Not on a Palm
http://palmclub.nl/reviews/accessoires/wlan/xircom_palm/
(review is in dutch, but see the graph)
RE: Not on a Palm
There is no such limit of transfer rate in TCP/IP. To think so is to be extremely uninformed.
RE: Not on a Palm
http://www.davespda.com/weekly/mjj01.htm
The max throughput of the Simple Devices 802.11b sled is 1.6Mbps, which I imagine is the hardware limitation of the interface to the palm.
The processor isnt powerful enough to do much with that rate of data anyway. If it really was coming in at 11Mbps, the memory of your palm would be full up in a few seconds.
Using 802.11b for a palm is definately overkill, its only usefull cos the standard is so widely used. Bluetooth is far more suitable for a pda but everyone looks down on it because its 'slower' even though the difference in the bandwidth that actually gets used by your pda will not be noticable.
Id be far happier with a wireless link that was low power and covered a mile radius, even if it ran at 9600bps.
RE: Not on a Palm
Totally agree. What's good of a wireless network if you can't use it in the way and the place you want?
RE: Not on a Palm
---------------------------------------
When you find yourself in the company of a halfling and an ill-tempered Dragon, remember, you do not have to outrun the Dragon...you just have to outrun the halfling.
RE: Not on a Palm
Palm + Handspring + Handera users call Sony users Trolls
Handspring + Handera + Sony users call Palm users Trolls
Handera + Sony + Palm users call Handspring users Trolls
yay here Trolls there Trolls, everbody Trolls Trolls.. O McDonald Had a Troll .....
RE: Not on a Palm
RE: Not on a Palm
You can get any computer on any network as long as you get the hardware and software to talk to each other and get the protocols right. Its been done- Commdore 64 (using a 2MHz 8bit 6510 cpu) and ethernet, accessing networks and fully fuctioning as anything the user wants. Look it up- its on the 'net!
The Palm- like any other computing device can and will do networking as long as the connecting hardware go through the work of converting the Palm serial I/O to a n ethernet's high speed I/O. TCP/IP is only a procol layer from which networks can communicate with each other.
Now- Lets go back a couple of years and a little known company called Symbol. Symbol used to create a wireless network version & Laser scanner which used a Palm III clone that they built for industrial purposes. It used the 802 wireless standard, and for few past years- it worked fine. Back then- HandHald Computing wrote a review stating that for your average person, it was overpriced, but for companies with portable newtorking needs, this was a perfect solution (not a direct quote- but they raved it). Sadly- they switched to PocketPC on this particular device, but for reasons other than "slow CPU and slow bandwidth." In fact, I remember it had to do with a very recent Microsoft.inc deal
So to say that the Palm can not do wireless or that it would be too slow to be of any true use- I must qestion the person saying this- Are you going to run Shockwave/Flash files and giga-bit Java scripts on your Palm? I think not. But for your average html/email simple graphics & text stuff- this is perfect. In fact- better than the Colored-Berries devices out there now for email & 2-way instant messenging.
RE: Not on a Palm
You can get any computer on any network as long as you get the hardware and software to talk to each other and get the protocols right. Its been done- Commdore 64 (using a 2MHz 8bit 6510 cpu) and ethernet, accessing networks and fully fuctioning as anything the user wants. Look it up- its on the 'net!
The Palm- like any other computing device can and will do networking as long as the connecting hardware go through the work of converting the Palm serial I/O to a n ethernet's high speed I/O. TCP/IP is only a procol layer from which networks can communicate with each other.
Now- Lets go back a couple of years and a little known company called Symbol. Symbol used to create a wireless network version & Laser scanner which used a Palm III clone that they built for industrial purposes. It used the 802 wireless standard, and for few past years- it worked fine. Back then- HandHald Computing wrote a review stating that for your average person, it was overpriced, but for companies with portable newtorking needs, this was a perfect solution (not a direct quote- but they raved it). Sadly- they switched to PocketPC on this particular device, but for reasons other than "slow CPU and slow bandwidth." In fact, I remember it had to do with a very recent Microsoft.inc deal
So to say that the Palm can not do wireless or that it would be too slow to be of any true use- I must qestion the person saying this- Are you going to run Shockwave/Flash files and giga-bit Java scripts on your Palm? I think not. But for your average html/email simple graphics & text stuff- this is perfect. In fact- better than the Colored-Berries devices out there now for email & 2-way instant messenging.
RE: Not on a Palm
The real scoop
802.11b IS an 11Mbps standard.
Just like any other network, unless you are the only user on the system, you will not get the entire bandwidth. That is, 11Mbps is shared among all users. If you have 100 users, each will have approximately 110kbps throughput (maximum).
The newer Palms support two kinds of serial busses: Universal Serial Bus (USB) and what is frequently called EIA-232 (A.K.A. RS-232). In truth, if the "RS-232" port supports anything over 20kbps, it is not a true 232 port, by definition. Most adaptations are a hybrid of 232 and RS-422. As mentioned already, all Palm expansion options that use the universal connector are not USB.
Now, speaking of stupid jerks... There is no limitation on the throuput of a TCP/IP network. Why? Because it is a transport, not a medium. You can send TCP/IP data as fast as the physical layer allows. Keep in mind that the internet is an IP network. Have any idea of the throughput of the internet's backbone? Trust me, it's more than 802.11a and 802.11b combined and multiplied by 100.<G>
The limiting factor is not the CPU in the Palm, it's the network connection. Calculate the the throughput of the CPU's local bus and the network bus. You will see which is larger. (I assume we can all do this calculation.<<G>)
There's plenty more to be said on this topic, but I'm goin' home. If you guys have any questions, ask a professional.
Tip DS
RE: The real scoop
RE: The real scoop
Which jerk here screaming at others that TCP/IP has no limit after all?
That guy must be crazy.
Just do a simple test at home, folks. Let's say you have good cables and a 10 MBPS hub at home. Now, you are going to transfer a 600 MB file (maybe an image from a cd) from one computer to another computer. According to some of the jerks here, the files will be transferred within 10- seconds, but if you try to have a brain and test it out yourself, you know the truth. A single connection only transfers files at a speed of approximately 5.5. MBPS using TCP/IP and even slower running IPX. If you do not know anything about networking, please go home and pick up a book to read. Don't try to disguise yourself as an IT manager. That really makes me feel ashame.
RE: The real scoop
Simple calculation: No. of connections x TCP/IP max speed= backbone bandwidth
You stupid jerk, better ditch the title of IT.
RE: The real scoop
A slightly off-skew analogy, what's the top speed of a hand written letter written in the protocol we call "an address written on an envelope"... depends on the physical medium... Real slow if it's by boat, speed of light if someone invents a matter transport beam.
RE: The real scoop
Well actually I kinda want to know what's the "speed limit" of TCP/IP ... :)
RE: The real scoop
TCP has no maximum transfer speed, that's a load of BS. Anyone who tells you otherwise is wrong, and I can say that without being a flame, because it's the truth. It is merely a protocol, and the speed is determined by the medium. Researchers at Cray Research, Inc. have demonstrated TCP throughput approaching a gigabit per second. That's a lot more than 5.5 megabits per second that seems to be the popular misconception here. Even over a 10Mbps Ethernet network, TCP thoroughput can reach sustained levels of 8Mbps. The loss is coming from headers and such, which is a proportional loss, not some sort of concrete limit.
RE: The real scoop
Ok... For starters, your bandwidth is limited by a number of different factors. First your network card, then the type and length of you ethernet cable and then your hub. I used to work at a University, we had 100Mbit cards, and 100Mbit routers within the building I worked in. I could transfer a 600MByte file in less than a couple of minutes. (600MB file at 10Mbit/s takes 503 seconds, at 100Mbit/s takes 50 seconds)
According to you, there is no point to having 100Mbit cards, or GigaBit cards, because TCP/IP has a limit of 5.5Mbits... so why are companies investing in these high bandwidth tools?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
TCP/IP = Transmission Control Protocal/Internet Protocal. It is a discription of how packets are made up and transfered over a network (like the internet). He has nothing to do with the speed.
Bandwidth is your speed messure and it is based on a your hardware. If you have ethernet, yes there is a maximum. If you use fiber optic cables, it's even higher because you are moving the data at the speed of light. The reason you are getting a limit of 5.5Mbits is due to your hardware. Either your network cards suck, your cables suck or you hub sucks.
Also, the actual amount of end-user data (ie the data of the ISO) that you recive is actually less than the data that is really moving through the cable, since when you create a TCP/IP packet you have to add data (like the address that the packet has to goto and the sequence the packets were sent in). Just because your crappy home network doesn't give you 10Mbits/sec doesn't mean TCP/IP has a speed limit.
TCP/IP is a set of rules, it's not the thing limiting the throughput. Maybe you should try researching things before you talk about them
Chris
Co-Founder Wizage Programming
A guy with a degree in this stuff and over 15 years of experiance.
RE: The real scoop
RE: The real scoop
I told all of you guys that you can setup a direction connection between two computers with some good cables, but by no way you guys can imagine such a situation. Just dream on.
Yes, I know you got a degree 15 years ago, and that's why. I did not have my degree, and am still working on it.
P.S. : Anyone who claimed THERE IS NOT SUCH A MAXMIUM speed of TCP/IP, please provide a link (haha, if you can find one.) If you yourself still believe in such a crap theory of there is not maximum speed or it is just a protocol, get a life and be realistic and do not pretend you are from IT or whatsoever. Just use your old Borland C++ to program.
RE: The real scoop
Oh. My head hurts from all these Bandwidth calculations via TCP/IP....
The only thing that I remember from my networking classes was:
"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes rolling down the highway"
(vs. pumping data across a network, you get the idea)
How does that apply here? It doesn't, but everybody needs to just chill.
RE: The real scoop
I know you brought out a lot of glossary, but you do not digest them well enough to make a full (fool) understanding.
Why corporations invest in faster hubs/networking equipment? It is because it is a network for numerous (many more) computers. Thus, if there are a number of computers using the network at the same time, the equipment can provide such a bandwidth. Just use your brain folks, let's say you are using the corporation's "EXTRAORDINARY and not same as your home's CRAPPY" network, but you have no way to copy a file with a speed greater the 5.5. MBPS even with an IBM mainframe or whatsoever.
Get it, boys?
RE: The real scoop
My class just tell me that you look at it and record it down, whether you believe it or not. Just like the Newton's Laws do not apply in some of the areas in the Earth and yet some amatuers still believe it works all over the world.
My class told me what is realistic and what is theoretical. If you guys need some experience and would like to find a job of such kind, we will not hire any of you because you are just being too theoretical and will not accept the fact that a theory is only a theory, and no need to be explained.
RE: The real scoop
Here's one of the links:
RE: The real scoop
High bandwidth networks are used in large networks, true. I aske you this, though: Why would a company with a 100Mbps network upgrade (using dollars) from a simple 100Mbps router to a 100Mbps switch? I'll tell you. Because the router forces all network users to share the 100Mbps the network supports. i.e. 100 users on the network, offering saturating traffic will each get 1Mbps. On the other hand, a switch offers an end to end connection. So, each user gets a full 100Mbps connection. If two users wish access to a third user, they share the 100Mbps, and get 50 each. Now, why would a company spend the extra money on a switch, to give higher throughput to users, when the users can't take advantage of what they already had?
I want to ask a question of the I.M. Anonymous who speaks terrible english... The one who likes to refer to more educated people as jerks. How about you show us proof of your TCP/IP limit. I'm talking proof, not an experimental illustration. Show me the formula and calculations you use. You, obviously, have very limited experience. Just because you are not capable enough to properly set up a network, doesn't mean TCP/IP is limited to the throughput you experience. This may be hard for you to grasp, but maybe your big brother can help you understand.
Have you ever looked into Fibre Channel? Ever heard of point-to-point topology? 1+ Gbps IP network between two systems. What's the need if 5.5Mbps is the maximum for TCP/IP?
I have some advice for you:
1) Learn to read
2) Get a book
3) Read it
4) Get a human to explain what you read.
G'day,
Tip DS
RE: The real scoop
Well actually that's what I was trying to get him to do, but NO ... he has to send us a webpage with intro. to TCP/IP, but still I am clueless about the limit of TCP/IP. What I am tinking is he's talking about some "Overhead" of TCP/IP, but as he is bad in english, he thought it's "Speed limit".
btw: what's wrong with borland C++ ?? all C++ do the same thing, no matter what brand of C++ compilier / IDE you use.
RE: The real scoop
I guess it's easier to proof something existed than to proof something doesnt exist. So how about you provide a link proofing that there IS a "Speed Limit" in TCP/IP ??
RE: The real scoop
Just my $0.02.
8==8 Bones 8==8
RE: The real scoop
Things would get more interesting on the switch backplanes if TCP/IP fell apart, or did not work above 5.5Mbps. The backplanes on our Cisco switches run at 1Gbps or 3Gbps (bit, not byte) depending on the model. But for a real mind blower, the Cisco 6500 with the optional module sails along at over 250Gbps. You need to test THAT at home to really appreciate it! :-)
RE: The real scoop
If my 1 gb ethernet Macs were not running TCP/IP, all hell would break loose at my work place; and if my cisco routers were not talking to my T1/T3 packette router- we would have no 'net access t my job site.
TCP/IP is just a protocol layer that determines how the information and data are defined. This has nothing to do with how fast the network is running.
If you need a pre-k explaination of how it works... here goes:
Think of your mom's purse as a tcp/ip packet.
The speed of that purse traveling with your mom has nothing to do with your mom other than it being carried by your mom.
Now- how fast your mom goes depends on how's she's traveling...
1-5 miles per hour if she's walking.
5-25 miles per hour if she's riding a bike.
under 35 mles per hour if she's riding a public bus.
under mach 2 if she's riding on the concorde!
Its that simple.
Just because your connection may be less than 10Based, does not mean that everyone's connection is the same. There are some of us who are connected to a 10^9 Based or better networks.
RE: The real scoop
You are dumb. Why don't you take your 10MB ethernet cards out of your 2 stupid PCs and replace them with 100MB cards and put them on a switch, not a hub, but a switch and retry your asenine "test".
Do you even know what TCP/IP is? I bet you think TCP/IP is "the network", specifically your little apartment setup don't you?
No, corporations don't use faster network cards for more simultaneous connections you idiot(thats what switches and routers are for). That would mean the secretary's 100MB ethernet is acting as a mini file server. Corporations have large amounts of data that need to be moved; email attachments, powerpoint, data stores, etc. I frequently check out 800 megabytes of data from our company CVS server via a TCP/IP connection in under 30 seconds -- that well exceeds your pathetic 5.5 MB figure despite processor and disk overhead.
Go back to ITT tech or whatever 2 bit "are you tired of your pathetic life, well get a career in computers!" school you came from.
RE: The real scoop
I think most of the people on this message board are pretty smart and know their stuff very well, but there are a couple of idiots who think that if they install windows and buy a palmos device they know everything about computers and networking... I think that our Mr. Anonymous should try reading a few books on TCP/IP and network architecture (prolly spelt that wrong, it's 3am). Then, maybe, he will know what he is talking about
Chris
Co-Founder, Wizage Programming
Guy who seems to a magical network, cause he can move files at faster than 5.5Mbits/s ;)
RE: The real scoop
Second, he has the scientific mind of dirt. Just look at the bandwidth test he proposes - no bandwidth isolation whatsoever.
Nevermind that a 600MByte file on a disk to disk transfer on the same machine will take considerable time in of itself.
Nevermind that he probably used a stopwatch to time the transfer.
Nevermind that he probably doesn't even know the difference between megaBIT and megaBYTE and thus erroneously thought a 600 megaByte CD image should take 600/10 = 60 seconds rather than (600*8)/10 = 480 seconds at in impossible best case scenario.
Use on College
RE: Use on College
Bueno,
Tip DS
RE: Use on College
With this in mind, a a friends and I bought some old Symbol wirless hubs and set up a wireless network for a NYC Park. Works just fine, only problem being that you have to go to alt.coffee (a resturant that hosts the network, not the news server) and get their instruction guide to set up the TCP/IP control panel on your laptop. Its been up since August 2001.
Since Symbol used to use it with their old version of their Palms- no doubt that it will work on any other Palm system that has it and you can your your palm in college. Only problem- you will need the instructions to set your tcp/ip control panel on your Palm to access it. Once that is done- you are wireless.
RE: Use on College
With this in mind, a a friends and I bought some old Symbol wirless hubs and set up a wireless network for a NYC Park. Works just fine, only problem being that you have to go to alt.coffee (a resturant that hosts the network, not the news server) and get their instruction guide to set up the TCP/IP control panel on your laptop. Its been up since August 2001.
Since Symbol used to use it with their old version of their Palms- no doubt that it will work on any other Palm system that has it and you can your your palm in college. Only problem- you will need the instructions to set your tcp/ip control panel on your Palm to access it. Once that is done- you are wireless.
Guyver - PCMICA Jacket for Palm m500 series
Is it out in the market in US?
10 Second Review
I primarily use the module with Handspring's Blazer browser and some select Palm.Net apps (ESPN, E*Trade), and occasionally remote-sync to Outlook. The module works as advertised, with good connection speeds and its range seems on par with other wifi units we have in the office. The remote network Hotsync option works like a modem connection, however, and is really slow compared to a USB sync.
Its a nifty toy when sitting in front of the TV and you want to quickly look something up on the Internet (especially since the Web/MsnTV service on my UltimateTV reciever is a painfully slow dial-up connection).
My module didn't come with any free software, not even a "driver" disc. The drivers are located in the modules firmware and it downloads them automatically to the Palm when you connect it.
Overall the module is light and comfortable to hold, but it would have been nice if it was angled more so it was easier to view the screen when setting on a desk or table. For the price it would have been nice if it came with its own AC adaptor (it uses the one that came with the m505's cradle), but the plus is it can be used as a charging cradle on the road.
The biggest drawback is there's no "pass through" for the universal connector, which means I can't use my Thumboard or folding keyboard when I'm using the Xircom. I also can't find a decent case to carry this, my keyboards and mobile phone cable in (so it all floats around in my briefcase).
Was it worth $300? Not really, but it is pretty cool to check email and the web when trapped in a meeting and its one less thing the iPaq brigade can wave in my face (although its funny, most of them have now moved on to Blackberry units, and the iPaqs are collecting dust in their cradles - "too complicated; all I wanted was email" is what I hear from those non-tech business users).
If you have a large campus and/or spend a lot of time away from your desk it really is a nice option that lets you do just about anything with your Palm.
Latest Comments
- I got one -Tuckermaclain
- RE: Don't we have this already? -Tuckermaclain
- RE: Palm brand will return in 2018, with devices built by TCL -richf
- RE: Palm brand will return in 2018, with devices built by TCL -dmitrygr
- Palm phone on HDblog -palmato
- Palm PVG100 -hgoldner
- RE: Like Deja Vu -PacManFoo
- Like Deja Vu -T_W
Airport?