Bluetooth or WiFi?

I have a project in “facts finding stage” requiring wireless communication between devices in “star” configured network controlled by single ARM /Due processor.
I do not need access to Internet, this will be stand alone network.

While researching my options I came up with this:
" WiFi has longer range , up to 300 feet".

Now both technologies use 2.4GHz ISM band and as such are limited ( by spec / law ) to max RF ERP output.

The question is - how can WiFi claim better range if both technologies use same ISM band?

It also looks as Bluetooth proprietary, whatever than means , data handling process makes the technology to act as wireless / plain modem capable in just passing info thru , hence no "embedded " networking capabilities.

Any to the point / subject commentaries will be appreciated / welcomed.

Thanks

Because WiFi uses more transmission power, it has better range and can offer more speed.

BT uses less energy, especially if you get BT 4.0/LE running. (i.e. at work we build an appliance with BTLE which uses 2 coin cell batteries that has a year or more battery life.)

However, BT is a point-to-point network. This means that if you need to communicate to more than one device 'at once' you would need multiple modules. Otherwise you need to switch between devices constantly. Wifi could use the accesspoint function to accept multiple connections at once, and thus creating your network.

Hope this answers your questions.

Because WiFi uses more transmission power, it has better range and can offer more speed.

Thanks for reply, especially for confirming the "networking capabilities " of WiFi.

But as I said , both technologies SHOULD use same specification / legal contains as far as maximum TX power on ISM band.

WiFi cannot use "more transmission power" - it would be illegal for such device to operate in ISM band without a license.

Also "more speed" cannot be related to TX power.

Not true, more transmission power gives you more speed. Also, the channels that WiFi uses contain a larger spectrum than BT, which also gives you more bandwith.

Tranmission power of Bluetooth class 1 (the highest class, with range up to 100 meters) uses 100mW/20dBm max. Class 2, which is more widely used, especially in the hobby scene such as here, is 2.5mW/4dB,, with a range of about 10 meters.

WiFi (802.11 x) starts at 100mW for b/g, 200mW for n, n being the fastest standard

Using more power compared to BT does not make it illegal, BT just uses less power. There is nothing illegal about that.

They are completely different protocols for completely different applications, ofcourse they do not share the same specification. They share the same frequency band, but are completely different. BT is more comparable to Zigbee(also 2.4GHZ) than to Wifi, and Zigbee also uses a completely different specification.

WiFi is a wireless equivalent of ethernet, BT is a very different protocol, not meant for speed but for ease of use wrt setting up and only point to point communication.

If you still doubt me, read the standards.

Vaclav: I have a project in "facts finding stage" requiring wireless communication between devices in "star" configured network controlled by single ARM /Due processor. I do not need access to Internet,

Sidestepping all the debate on power/range, particularly in the light of no stated range requirement, I believe the answer to your question is neither.

The nrf24 is more suited to a star network than bluetooth and there are other transceivers with greater range

Benji: Not true, more transmission power gives you more speed.

? Please explain. Leo..

Wawa: ? Please explain. Leo..

..something about apples and oranges comes to mind...

Anyway, I have enough info to continue with my project and do not need or wish to further discuss some personal misconceptions about the technologies. Benji, whatever floats your boat is fine with me , but rather pointless for me at this time.

Thanks.

Over and out