Tethering vs. buil-in Sprint WWAN

I have a TZ with the built-in Sprint WWAN. I can either use this card or bypass it and tether it with my cell phone which is capable of this. I've been trying to see which is better. It appears the speed is the exact same. These are the good and bads of the 2 methods:

1. Tethering with my cell phone (via bluetooth) allows me to use my cell phone as a modem with my Dell and Sony laptops. I can also use it as backup Internet when my home DSL goes down by using the Bluetooth in my desktop computer as well. With the Sprint WWAN card, I can only use it on the Sony.

2. Tethering allows me to change phone companies (e.g. Sprint to Verizon/ATT). But with the built-in WWAN, I have one choice: Sprint.

3. Bad part of tethering: I can't use my cell phone and be on the Internet at the same time. With the built-in WWAN card, I can use both at the same time.

But what I'm wondering about is battery life. It would seem the WWAN card would use much more battery since it has to communicate with cell towers, while bluetooth transmits only 10-20 feet. Am I correct to assume tethering uses much less battery life on my computer? Sure, the downside is that my cell phone will use up it's battery life quicker, but an extra battery for my cell phone is $40 while an extra battery for my TZ is $200. Also, the battery for a cell phone is much smaller and lighter to carry a spare than the TZ battery.

What do you guys think????

 

One avenue you can take is to buy an Expresscard/USB modem from Sprint - it'll come with a $0 to $50 cost and 2yr contract, and then "Swap ESN" to the Sprint card in your Vaio. Then, when you need Internet in one of your other computers, swap the ESN to the USB/EC modem again and so on.

I do phone tethering, but it has disadvantages like using up the battery quickly, being finicky with the connection, costing almost as much as a separate data card, and of course not being able to use the phone while on the internet.

 

For me, tethering is the same price as getting a PC card. So price isn't an issue. You say tethering takes away battery life; but doesn't a PC card or the buil-in WWAN card use MORE battery than tethering with Bluetooth?

And the best part of tethering via bluetooth or using the buil-in WWAN is that you don't need to carry extra items, such as a PC card. Currently, I'm tethering as well, and I love just being able to open my computer and connect very quickly without extra parts. My connections and speed have been very solid. I'm using my LG Voyager for this purpose.

 

If tethering is really the same price as a data card for you, its a no-brainer to get the card. You'll be getting a dedicated device which works faster (Rev A vs Rev 0 for most phones) and can take calls while on the internet.

I meant tethering chews up battery on the phone - but if you use USB tethering most phones charge at the same time, so that'll chew up the notebook's battery instead

 

As Mark described, there are only a few phones that do Rev A currently while all the other data cards / usb modems should

 

Mark & Jim, thanks for the responses. I had no idea there was a Rev 0 and Rev A. I've been tethering because I'm currently with Verizon and my Sony has a Sprint card. I can always switch as I'm not on a contract. But am I correct to say that bluetooth uses less power than the built-in WWAN? Battery life is very important to me.

 

Not really. Bluetooth will also use up a lot of battery power when you're constantly Tx/Rx.

 

I understand that Bluetooth also uses power to Tx/Rx. But since bluetooth only works within 10 to 20 feet (approximately), and while WWAN has to communicate to cell towers which are much further away, would it be correct to say Bluetooth uses much less power than WWAN? Is there any data out there comparing power usage of these two?

 

The Wikipedia Bluetooth article states that, in general, wi-fi may use more power than bluetooth, so that's probably a reasonably correct statement of fact.

 

One other thing is that while Bluetooth is a low-power protocol, anything below BT 2.0 is going to be slower than even EV-DO Rev 0. It would be like connecting your cable modem to your computer with a 56k telephone cable.