Press GO off an iPad ?

Would you be confident in using an iPad as a "RemoteGO"?


  • Total voters
    45
  • Poll closed .
I'd be interested in how the programming was setup to deal with link loss on the E Stop.
The way I'd be doin g it would be to have a "supervised" link pinged every second or more frequently and in the event that link is lost to go into stop mode immediately...
Any ideas if this was the way it was or if when the link dropped it all kept going?

While I cant comment on specifics, I believe that that's the basic concept that we used.
 
I said yes, but thats because where I'm at now, there isn't a lot of WiFi around, so I am not as worried. If I was in a larger city, that had more people using WiFi and more things to worry about, I would say no.

EDIT: I would rely on the iPad anywhere (in this situation). An iPhone or iPod Touch, not so much.

there is no such thing as an iTouch...
 
Last edited:
I would be more worried about the iPad causing a problem than WiFi.

Most, of the WiFi problems can be solved into a "best case" working condition through using high quality equipment, redundancy, and spending time at each location setting it up so that it's as isolated as possible.

The iPad is still, more or less, experimental in that the biggest complaints about it are the same as the iPhone and similar devices - it doesn't always work as expected. It can freeze up for no reason, battery power isn't always the greatest thing in the world to rely on, and it is a delicate device.

Overall, I think it could work, but I do not think of it as the best solution. I think it would take a lot of testing before you would want to take it on the road. And because, in my experience, these devices are so unpredictable, it could work flawlessly every time.

EDIT: Just after I posted this, without doing anything else, Tapaltalk/iPhone quit on its own. Unpredictable, I say, great, but unpredictable. Perfect example of why I'd worry more about the device than the network.
 
Last edited:
I'm not going to say yes or no to the question, but the HME wireless headsets use 2.4ghz, the same frequency that Wi-Fi and Bluetooth use. What is built into to those headsets to make them usable in show critical locations. The only interference issue I've had is a cell phone next to the wire between the beltpack and headset.
 
I'm not going to say yes or no to the question, but the HME wireless headsets use 2.4ghz, the same frequency that Wi-Fi and Bluetooth use. What is built into to those headsets to make them usable in show critical locations. The only interference issue I've had is a cell phone next to the wire between the beltpack and headset.

While we're going off topic here, I've seen the HMEs misbehave, fortunately it was during rehearsals and adding a pair of high gain antennas and relocating the base fixed that...

Fundamentally, the heart of the issue, in my opinion, is the difference between consumer devices and professional / industrial products.
There are a number of professional devices using 2G4. Not many of them are using 802.11. You have HME which from memory is a proprietary spread spectrum/ frequency hopping protocol. Shure are using it for Anxient with their own proprietary protocol.
A number of industrial wireless network links at 2G4 or 5G8 are NOT running as WiFi, they are running alternate protocols.

How does the iPad handle the TCP/IP stack? Since I don't believe it's a device that you can strip away all the flubdub ie. mail, music, etc etc that makes it an iThing.

Show Critical + "consumer" OS + non dedicated hardware = open door to troubles...
 
Last year my high school did Spelling Bee for our one act competition, and we had some of our lights being ran off cues from an iphone running Luminaire. Over all it went well but i wouldn't do it again. luminaire kept crashing during rehearsal but held up for the competition.

Thank You
Giovanni Laucella

P.S. no we did not cheat. the leds where part of our set.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back