Cypress Semiconductor Makes Alternative to Bluetooth?

[Ed Hansberry]

<a href="http://news.com.com/2100-1040-964575.html">http://news.com.com/2100-1040-964575.html</a><br /><br />"Cypress Semiconductor is introducing a new technology that it says could leapfrog Bluetooth and other standards to create a standard for wirelessly linking peripherals such as mice and keyboards to a PC." They are calling it WirelessUSB. Anyone who has tried to get multiple bluetooth devices working together knows how frustrating it can be, and unless you are technically inclined, you are apt to give up. It can be as much fun as trying to get everything just right in your CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT files was in the 80's.<br /><br /><img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/hansberry/2002/20021108-wirelessusb.jpg" /><br /><br />The chips can be purchased for $3.92 in volume and no new drivers are needed for systems that already have USB support. Normally I am loathe to see another "standard" emerge that does essentially the same thing something else already does. You wind up with that perfect peripheral or PDA except it has the wrong standard in it. In this case though, I hope, if nothing else, it drives bluetooth makers to get their act together and deliver a plug-and-play interface to bluetooth that makes it as easy to connect devices as it is to plug an AC adapter into the wall. More information can be found <a href="http://www.cypress.com/aboutus/press_release.cfm?objectid=C2D7D523-E51B-4FF6-86BA055C3C1D62E1">at the Cypress web site</a>.

[vetteguy]

I hope this takes off in one form or the other. I have an affinity for the technology (short-range wireless connections) but not for any specific one (Bluetooth, etc.). I like Bluetooth, but if WirelessUSB can get its act together before Bluetooth can, then I'm all for it!

[Jonathon Watkins]

ANOTHER incompatible technology! :roll: Great - the problem being that you need one of these chips at each end. Why doesn't everyone just work on improving bluetooth? This seems like a dead-end standard.

[PPCRules]

ANOTHER incompatible technology! :roll: Great - ... . Why doesn't everyone just work on improving bluetooth?
There's a lot of money to be made as the technology's owner.

(I know, it was a rhetorical question. Sorry.)

[MooseMaster]

Because bluetooth is horrible. It's not even compatible with two of the same device, let alone universal wireless plug and play. And Of course you'll need a second chip on the other end. What else will it connect to?!

I think this standard will make it into the mainstream and become bigger than Bluetooth, if only because of the name! But also because it already works in every piece of hardware, universally. Macs, PCs, PocketPCs, they all already have built in USB support. Just add this wireless chip and THAT'S IT, it works!

[JMountford]

Just Frickin' Awesome!!! I can only hope it all works out as they expect. Bluetooth is a pain in so many ways. Can you imagine actually having a device that will see another device? Period... Wow. NO tweaking, no messing around, no turn it off, turn it on, bla bla bla. If a device has a USB driver it will work.

I am very excited!

I can't wait to hear more.

[Don Sorcinelli]

There are two things that make me believe that this is going to create more grief than solve a problem -

1) Reliance on USB. USB can (in and of itself) be a pain at times. Now this on top? Should make a nice recipe for hardware/OS/software issues.
2) Running in the 2.4GHz range. As if this isn't cluttered enough with 802.11b and cordless telephones. I can personally attest to the problems this brings up for WLAN (as I am sure many others can, too). Now this?

I honestly believe that this is another case of one technology and/or standard starting to get attention and acceptance, and then a company comes along and says "How about we do the same thing, only different AND incompatible? We'll RULE THE WORLD!" :lol: Heck, Sony seems to make a good living off of it... :wink:

[Adam]

Don't have time to look in detail on their site for the WUSB security, and I'm not up to speed on Bluetooth security, but does anyone know how they compare?

I'd think that anyone using these technologies in a block of flats, shared offices or offices bordering the street (e.g. with no phyiscal barrier to 10m) should care about it.

[mccollin]

I think this could be really promising. Think about it. There are a million USB devices already out there. Sounds like you could make a wireless USB hub with one of these chips, and then wireless USB adapters that link the devices to the wireless hub. If someone does that at a good price, then it would take care of itself. First the adapters, and then the devices would grow to be integrated. For an extra $5, and no software engineering to deal with... I don't think it would take long to take off.

This NOT creating another standard, it's expanding an existing one. I look at this the same as USB going to USB2 or 802.11b going to the next iteration. Bluetooth has yet to gain significant traction and it's incredibly expensive. Remember, no software costs here for driver support... that' huge!

If this is for real, I predict a success.

[vincentsiaw]

this thing is safe for input/output device, not for networking, this the only catch, and the speed is not as fast as bluetooth either

[Ed Hansberry]

this thing is safe for input/output device, not for networking, this the only catch, and the speed is not as fast as bluetooth either

I can network via my USB cradle through Activesync. I didn't see anything on the speed vs BT either, only that it has a lower latency than does BT which is important for wireless gaming.

[msprague]

From http://www.cypress.com/pub/wirelessusb.pdf:
Data Rates Up to 217.6 kbps

Isn't Bluetooth > 700 kbps?

[Ed Hansberry]

From http://www.cypress.com/pub/wirelessusb.pdf:
Data Rates Up to 217.6 kbps

Isn't Bluetooth > 700 kbps?
Yup, you are right. Still, that is faster than GPRS or 1XRTT or whatever the CDMA thing is, and faster than a modem or ISDN.

Wouldn't take it over WiFi any time though. And remember, BT was never designed for WLAN either. :wink:

[JonnoB]

ANOTHER incompatible technology! :roll: Great - the problem being that you need one of these chips at each end. Why doesn't everyone just work on improving bluetooth? This seems like a dead-end standard.

This wouldn't be incompatible as it would appear to any OS as a standard USB port.

[David C]

From what it sounds like, wireless USB use the same driver as the regular USB.

hmm... but wait. That does us no good. I have a Casio E-200, and it has USB, but it does me no good. E-200 user are always complaining that there is not enough USB driver for pocket pc. Most manufacture usually first think of Windows driver, then maybe Mac, then lastly Pocket PC.

WUSB would just be more grief since there will be no driver, and less device suporting it.

[spinsane]

How can something make more grief than Bluetooth?

I bet that this might not be plug-and-play all the way, though if it brings only half the problems BT has... then it is going to be the new standard!

And BT, which has tried since '98 (for as far back as I remember) can take a trip to the can or the drawing board.

I'm really excited about this and hopes it takes off!