With so many competing wireless solutions, why can CyFi succeed in the wireless embedded control market?
为什么cyfi能在众多的无线方案中胜出？
可靠，简便，节电，基于PSoC
No other wireless solution delivers CyFi’s combination of reliability, simplicity, and power-efficiency.
CyFi is the only solution to combine DSSS technology with a large number of channels (80) in the crowded 2.4 GHz spectrum, delivering unmatched interference immunity.
This reliable communication contributes to CyFi’s power-efficiency by minimizing on-air time and re-transmissions. CyFi’s star topology and lightweight protocol stack make it simpler to use than competing solutions.
On top of this all is PSoC’s flexibility and integration, whereby even the wireless stack becomes just another firmware module that can be dropped into the design to form the complete system.
Why would someone choose a proprietary solution like CyFi over an industry standard solution?
CyFi
和行业标准方案相比有什么优势？
某些应用是需要标准无线方案的，但对于大多数应用来讲，标准方案太过于冗余，首先在价格上，标准方案协议栈所占空间大，开发成本和器件成本相对都高，CyFi的协议栈是轻量级的。另一个就是复杂程度，标准方案要适应一系列应用，所以肯定要复杂，CyFi是专门为嵌入式无线设计的，可以最大化的体现可靠，简便，节电。
Some applications need a standard wireless solution, but for many wireless embedded control applications, standard wireless solutions are overkill.
One major difference is cost.
Standard solutions typically incur the penalty of inflated stack sizes, whereas the CyFi protocol stack is very lightweight. Another major difference is complexity.
A standard solution is inherently complex as it tries to accommodate a broad range of application requirements.
A proprietary wireless solution like CyFi is specifically designed for embedded wireless applications, maximizing reliability, simplicity and power-efficiency.
How is CyFi different from Cypress’s WirelessUSB technology?
CyFi 和 Cypress的WirelessUSB有何区别？
CyFi主要面向无线嵌入式控制领域，而WirelessUSB侧重在人机接口领域，例如鼠标，键盘等等。
CyFi is optimized for the wireless embedded control market, whereas WirelessUSB is focused on the human interface device market (i.e. mice, keyboards, presenter tools, etc.).
How much do the CyFi Protocol, CyFi transceiver and PSoC cost?
CyFi Protocol, CyFi transceiver 和PSoC的价格？
CyFi协议实际上是专门开发了一个PSoC的用户模块，专门用于CyFi应用，存在于免费的PSoC Designer中。关于PSoC和CyFi transceiver，原则上Cypress不会给出单独每颗器件的价格，而是整个方案的价格。
The CyFi protocol is available for free as a user module for PSoC.
Pricing for the CyFi wireless solution varies widely, as customers can select a PSoC with the functionality necessary to meet their application.
Pricing for the PSoC FirstTouch Starter Kit with CyFi Technology is set at $69.95.
(IF FURTHER PRESSED FOR PRICING FOR THE CyFi TRANSCEIVER OR PSoC:
“Cypress has decided not to give out pricing for the individual parts of the CyFi solution.”)
Other wireless technologies in this space use DSSS to avoid interference, so why would CyFi be more reliable?
也有一些其它无线方案也支持DSSS，为什么说CyFi更可靠呢？
CyFi是现有2.4 G无线方案唯一既能支持DSSS又拥有众多频道的方案，CyFi有80个独立的频道，可以智能调频。其他方案只有16个频道。
并且其他方案的传输速度比较低，所以也就相当于增加了受干扰的机会。
CyFi is the only solution to combine DSSS technology with a large number of channels in the crowded 2.4 GHz spectrum. CyFi intelligently selects a clear channel from 80 narrow, 1 MHz channels at its disposal.
Competing solutions with DSSS have only 16 available operating channels.
Also, most competing solutions transmit at a fixed data rate that is slower than CyFi’s max data rate of 1Mbps. This slow throughput forces other solutions to transmit data for longer periods of time, giving RF interference more time to obstruct transmission.
Other wireless technologies have lower transmit and receive current consumption than CyFi, so how can CyFi enable longer battery life?
有些无线技术传输和接收功耗比CyFi还低，为什么CyFi的电池寿命更长？
CyFi设计使休眠时间最大化，在没有噪声的情况下，传输速度为1 M，可以尽可能的减小传输时间，检测到干扰后，自动降低速率，并且DSSS可以避免干扰，减小重发包的次数，总之，能够尽可能快的回到功耗很低的睡眠模式。
CyFi is designed to maximize its time in sleep-mode.
In noise-free environments CyFi communicates at 1 Mbps to minimize transfer time and leverage the ultra-low-power sleep current of 0.8 uA. CyFi automatically drops to a slower, more robust 250 kbps data rate when it detects interference, and it can increase power amplification to reduce retransmissions and return to sleep-mode faster. Less robust solutions consume more energy retransmitting data in the face of interference.
Why would someone choose CyFi over ZigBee?
CyFi 和 ZigBee相比有什么优势？
抗干扰上ZigBee更差一些，首先，它的工作频道较少，16个，CyFi为18个；并且是固定的速率，250 Kbps，CyFi可以在1Mbps 和250 Kbps之间动态切换，也就是说ZigBee不能自动适应环境变化；第二，功耗方面，在比较干净的频道上，它也只能按照250 Kbps传输，不能最大化节电；第三，复杂程度上，ZigBee一般采用网状结构，复杂程度远远大于CyFi结构。最后，成本上，ZigBee网络需要支付一些额外的成本，比如安装，联盟费，测试费等
Compared to CyFi, ZigBee has poor interference immunity because it has a small number of available operating channels (16 vs. 80 for CyFi). Also, ZigBee devices transmit at a fixed data rate of 250 Kbps as opposed to CyFi’s dynamic data rates of 1Mbps and 250 Kbps, which means ZigBee networks cannot adapt to the interference environment, where sometimes transmitting quickly and getting off the air faster leads to better reliability. This also means that ZigBee networks may consume more power than necessary in a quiet RF environment. Structuring and organizing a ZigBee mesh network is much more complex than CyFi’s star network topology because of the need to ensure the right mix of routing and non-routing devices to realize the full benefits of mesh networking. ZigBee networks have more costs like specialized installation, Alliance membership and testing fees.
Why would someone choose CyFi over Z-Wave?
协议复杂，专注于家庭自动化应用，有十多种不同的节点，根据网络实际大小不同，安装也不同。有几种不同的工作频率，800, 900, 和2400 MHz，可能会使终端用户混淆。假如使用的是800, 900,那么只能适用于某个区域，不能通用，设计成本和认证成本增加，并且库存管理复杂。对于国际认可的2.4G，没有DSSS调制，抗干扰能力差，很难避免实际应用中可靠性的问题。
The Z-Wave protocol architecture is extremely complex and is focused on home automation applications. Z-Wave has over 10 different types of nodes that have unique complicated functions, requiring specialized installation for networks of any practical size. Z-Wave uses a variety of operating frequencies (800, 900, and 2400 MHz) which may cause incompatibility and confusion to the end customer. The use of the 800 and 900 MHz versions of Z-Wave means that products designed for one region of the world cannot be deployed into the other, increasing design and certifications costs, and complicating inventory management. This is in sharp contrast to CyFi’s use of the 2.4 GHz band, which is accepted internationally. As for the 2.4 GHz version of Z-Wave, which does not use DSSS modulation, the lack of interference immunity and frequency agility makes highly susceptible to reliability problems in any practical home setting.
Why would someone choose CyFi over WirelessHART?
网状结构
使用时间同步网状协议，有不可预知的延迟（CyFi低延迟5ms latency）
16个channel
固定频率250 Kbps
功耗
WirelessHART mesh networks, while very reliable, have unpredictable latency because of the use of the Time Synchronized Mesh Protocol. By contrast, CyFi networks have sub 5ms latency, which enables their use in time-critical applications. In addition, WirelessHART may have worse interference immunity than CyFi because it has a small number of available operating channels (16 vs. 80 for CyFi) to choose from. Also, WirelessHART devices transmit at a fixed data rate of 250 Kbps as opposed to CyFi’s dynamic data rates of 1Mbps and 250 Kbps, which means WirelessHART networks cannot adapt to the interference environment, where sometimes transmitting quickly and getting off the air faster leads to better reliability. This also means that WirelessHART networks may consume more power than necessary in a quiet RF environment.
|
|
楼主
标题置顶
标题高亮
