5 Alternatives for IoT Wi-Fi Networks & Connectivity

Fundamentally, the Internet of Things (IoT) is about autonomous, hands-off network connectivity. The introduction of products like Alexa and Siri have demonstrated the popularity and theoretical simplicity of networked 'things’.  

However, IoT's transformative power extends beyond the consumer market, as evidenced by the integration of trackers, sensors, and devices within various B2B industries. While the end results make the headlines, none of these cutting-edge technologies could work without an equally advanced network to connect them.  

But which is the best way to keep the things connected? Wi-Fi connectivity for IoT devices seems like an obvious choice, given that for consumers and businesses alike it’s already a proved value, but it’s not the only IoT wireless connectivity option—nor is it necessarily the best. 

Below, we’ll take a look at Wi-Fi alternatives that you can use to connect your IoT offering in a way that best suits your business needs. 

Bandwidth, range & power   

The three things we typically tend to reference when sizing up a good IoT network are: 

Power consumption  

Many IoT devices are battery-powered and not hard-wired. Keep this in mind when choosing a network, as you won’t want something too power-hungry if you’re looking for longevity. 

Coverage range 

If your devices span a fair distance, you’ll want to keep coverage range in mind when choosing an IoT network. 

Bandwidth 

Some IoT devices can consume a lot of data. You’ll need to choose an IoT wireless network that can receive and process the required amount of data for your needs. 

For example, when using Wi-Fi for an IoT network, it works fine for stationary devices that don’t require a large coverage range. As you already know through connecting to the regular internet, Wi-Fi IoT connectivity is fairly limited in its parameters and can only connect so far. If you’re looking to connect something that requires a more flexible coverage range, you’re better off choosing an alternative IoT wireless network. 

Assessing your core IoT needs 

As well as the above factors, it’s also important to reflect on the following when thinking about the fundamental design of your IoT network: 

Purpose: what is the main objective of your IoT application? 

Performance: what does your application absolutely have to achieve to meet its function? 

Placement: Where are your planned locations, how far away are they from one another, and will they be mobile? 

With these three in mind, let’s look at some Wi-Fi alternatives for connecting your IoT suite. 

Alternatives to Wi-Fi for IoT connectivity 

Cellular connectivity

Cellular connectivity is the #1 Wi-Fi alternative to connect IoT devices which is typically used when talking about machine-to-machine (M2M) connectivity. It’s the same type of connectivity that we use to connect our smartphones and tablets and uses a broadcast tower to function, typically within a range of around 15 to 25 kilometers. 

Key features: 

• Cellular has the furthest range by far. If you are within range of a cellular tower (which is most of the time) you can connect to anyone or any ‘thing’ on a global scale. 

• Cellular is a very reliable IoT connectivity solution. Unlike Wi-Fi, it rarely ‘cuts out’ and is available everywhere. 

• Cellular is highly compatible, so you only need an eSIM or regular SIM card to connect. 

• Cellular has relatively high-power consumption compared to its alternatives. 

•  Household-name providers can be expensive, that’s why it’s crucial to shop around and ensure you’re getting a tailored deal that’s right for you. 

Cellular is easily the most reliable choice as a Wi-Fi alternative for IoT connectivity. If you want a broad coverage range with the opportunity to scale your IoT offering easily, cellular is a great option for you…and 1GLOBAL for Things is an excellent place to start! We offer seamless cellular connectivity and IoT SIM cards in over 100 destinations across the globe. 

LPWAN

Low Power Wide Area Network (LPWAN) is a new contender in the IoT network space, but it offers a lot in terms of breadth of coverage while still maintaining low power consumption. LPWAN does this by using small, cheap batteries to power its connectivity. 

Various kinds of LPWAN connections have been created for different purposes, such as: 

• LTE-M (a customised LTE connection designed for small power consumption) 

• NB-IoT (Narrowband IoT) 

• LoRa 

While LPWAN is great for specific purposes, it is only suitable for those who don’t require high bandwidth, as it is only designed to work with small chunks of data for an equally small cost. 

Zigbee

Zigbee is another popular alternative to Wi-Fi IoT networks and connectivity. It works using a mesh network structure, connecting a host of sensors or devices so that they work seamlessly together to distribute data to the chosen device. With a mesh network, all IoT devices in the system can distribute signals and information around the network. 

Designed especially for IoT, Zigbee can connect to 65,000 devices in its mesh and is already supported by mainstream IoT devices such as Amazon Echo. 

Key features: 

• As a mesh IoT networking option, it’s one of the best 

• Doesn’t need a central hub to work 

• Does have a short coverage range: devices need to be within 10 to 20 meters of each other   

• Low data transfer (around 250 kbps) 

Bluetooth

Bluetooth is a format most of us are familiar with the concept of Bluetooth having used it on our phones for the last decade. Bluetooth enables users to send data across short distances using wireless technology. 

In recent years, Bluetooth has improved drastically in terms of power consumption. Where before it could flatten a battery easily, today’s Bluetooth connections run on a low-power model. 

Bluetooth had a competitive bandwidth of 2Mbps but only has low range capabilities of below 10m. 

Bluetooth IoT network connectivity is a great option if you’re looking to send information across a close range, with medium to low bandwidth. 

Z-Wave 

Z-Wave, like Zigbee, runs on a radio-frequency (RF) based connection. Unlike Zigbee, however, Z-Wave usually needs to run via a central hub, which can mean the connection is interrupted with latency issues and a limited coverage range.   

It’s worth noting that Z-Wave is slightly slower than Zigbee but does have slightly more coverage range. Z-Wave uses a 908 MHz band to operate, which enables an increase in coverage range as well as reducing the likelihood of interference. When placed next to each other, Z-Wave is typically more reliable than Zigbee but Z-Wave is supported on far fewer devices. 

And the best is...

In conclusion, eSIM enabled cellular IoT wireless networks frequently offer the optimal solution for connecting IoT devices in the absence of Wi-Fi. Cellular connectivity provides both extensive coverage and scalability potential, all while maintaining a relatively low cost. 

Should your enterprise require cellular IoT connectivity, 1GLOBAL presents cost-effective IoT plans spanning 190+ international regions. For further information, we encourage you to consult with one of our specialists.