Re: TI-H: What we need to concentrate on with the RF

Subject: Re: TI-H: What we need to concentrate on with the RF
From: travisp <travisp@inil.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 15:47:34 -0600
In-Reply-To: <TI-H: What we need to concentrate on with the RF>

> From: Jason C. Wenger <jwenger@juno.com>
> 
> >Ok here are some things we should stick to with the RF (whatever that 
> >stands for) link, here is what we need to concentrate on):
> >
> >  1. Lets stop talking about the IR link, it's not as affective as the 
> >RF link.
> >  2. A two calc radio connection (not 3 or more)
> >  3. The user should be able to change the frequency, no making 2 
> >different links, that's a waste.
> 
> [SNIP]
> 
> Right-- multifrequency.  But let's not use potentiometers, but 20
> position rotary switches or something like that...  That way no need to
> fine-fune.  (like CB, not radio-- channels instead of frequencies.)


No, not multi-frequency. For every posiotion, you add cost. Every switch is
like a separate RF transmitter/receiver. So a 20 position switcher is gonna
cost 20x more than a 1 position one.

References:

From: