English
Aeonic Generate Digital PLL for multi-instance, core logic clocking
Selecting a Wireless Sensor Development Platform
By Anton Hristozov, Union Switch &Signal
(10/28/07, 12:05:00 AM EDT) -- Embedded.com
The plethora of wireless sensor network development solutions offered today is overwhelming. It is not possible in any way to give a comprehensive coverage of the market.
Depending on your selection criteria this could be an easy choice or could be a difficult process. I spent more than a month looking at solutions from different vendors before jumping into the depths of new hardware, APIs and mountains of documentation. Since all these standards are evolving, the updates from the vendors are exacerbating the already steep learning curve.
Navigating the proprietary and official standards is difficult, depending on the marketing flavor experiences at some of the web sites. Another difficulty is that different hardware/software solutions are hard to compare, because there is no metric.
It is too hard to determine quantitatively how much better is certain technology compared to another. The best alternative is to rely on common sense and some guiding principles, such as open source versus proprietary code, open communication standard versus one company solution, etc. This article will present the problems a designer will face when implementing a wireless sensor network and the factors that are important in deciding which development platform to select.
(10/28/07, 12:05:00 AM EDT) -- Embedded.com
The plethora of wireless sensor network development solutions offered today is overwhelming. It is not possible in any way to give a comprehensive coverage of the market.
Depending on your selection criteria this could be an easy choice or could be a difficult process. I spent more than a month looking at solutions from different vendors before jumping into the depths of new hardware, APIs and mountains of documentation. Since all these standards are evolving, the updates from the vendors are exacerbating the already steep learning curve.
Navigating the proprietary and official standards is difficult, depending on the marketing flavor experiences at some of the web sites. Another difficulty is that different hardware/software solutions are hard to compare, because there is no metric.
It is too hard to determine quantitatively how much better is certain technology compared to another. The best alternative is to rely on common sense and some guiding principles, such as open source versus proprietary code, open communication standard versus one company solution, etc. This article will present the problems a designer will face when implementing a wireless sensor network and the factors that are important in deciding which development platform to select.
|
E-mail This Article | 
|
|
Printer-Friendly Page |
Related Articles
- Improving Inter Integrated Circuits - From Sensor Hubs to Platform Management Solutions
- Selecting the right hardware configuration for the signal processing platform
- Selecting an Optimized ADC for a Wireless AFE
- Low-Power wireless sensor networks for the Internet of Things
- Improving Software Driver Development and Hardware Verification Productivity using Virtual Platforms
New Articles
- Quantum Readiness Considerations for Suppliers and Manufacturers
- A Rad Hard ASIC Design Approach: Triple Modular Redundancy (TMR)
- Early Interactive Short Isolation for Faster SoC Verification
- The Ideal Crypto Coprocessor with Root of Trust to Support Customer Complete Full Chip Evaluation: PUFcc gained SESIP and PSA Certified™ Level 3 RoT Component Certification
- Advanced Packaging and Chiplets Can Be for Everyone
Most Popular
- System Verilog Macro: A Powerful Feature for Design Verification Projects
- System Verilog Assertions Simplified
- Smart Tracking of SoC Verification Progress Using Synopsys' Hierarchical Verification Plan (HVP)
- Dynamic Memory Allocation and Fragmentation in C and C++
- Synthesis Methodology & Netlist Qualification