Philips, Nokia & Sony working on NFC Wireless Standard

[Jonathon Watkins]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3549663.stm' target='_blank'>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3549663.stm</a><br /><br /></div>There's an old saying: "The nice thing about standards is that you have so many to choose from; furthermore, if you do not like any of them, you can just wait for next year's model." Well, when it comes to wireless standardsfor PDAs, we have a plethora of options including various flavours of 3G, CDMA, GSM, Wifi, BlueTooth etc. :? <br /><br />The BBC reports that "Help is at hand for gadget fans tired of struggling to get their different devices talking to each other. Philips, Nokia and Sony are banding together to create a basic technology that will help gadgets automatically connect with each other. Near Field Communications helps gadgets work out the best way to swap data when they are brought within a few centimetres of each other. The first products using the technology are expected by the end of the year." <br /><br />"It was not intended to replace Bluetooth and other radio technologies instead it should help people make better use of them. He said NFC was a standard way of identifying devices and describing what they can do. Simply putting two NFC devices together will get them talking to find out how they can swap data. Once they have negotiated the best way to swap data, the information will be transferred. NFC is expected to be used in phones, PDAs, laptops as well as PCs, kiosks in train stations and airports and many other places. It could be used to quickly transfer electronic tickets or vouchers to phones or PDAs or just to help people move music files from a PC to a portable player." <br /><br />There's more information in this <a href="http://news.com.com/2100-1040-956779.html">News.com story</a>. "NFC will allow data to be transferred over a wireless spectrum at 13.56MHz. Devices such as mobile phones, digital cameras, handhelds or personal computers will be able to "talk" within a range of 20 centimeters and at speeds of up to 212kbps. Gadgets using the new wireless technology will be compatible with Philips' Mifare and Sony's Felica smart card technologies, the companies said, allowing consumers to buy items with their devices." <br /><br />However, this part caught my eye: "One characteristic that sets NFC apart is that it needs no "permission" before making a connection between devices, he said. Bluetooth, on the other hand, pings a device to see if it wants to connect before going through with the coupling." Lets be careful out there folks! :twisted: <br /><br />So to sum up, NFC is similar to Bluetooth, but this new standard is meant to coexist with existing wireless technologies and is aimed at allowing consumers to transfer data and pay for services. I do hope my PDA in 2005 comes with at least five wireless standards on board, or I simply won't be keeping up with the connected crowd. :helpme: They'd better come up with finding a way to transfer battery power wirelessly, or we'll be in trouble. :wink: "Yes, I can stay connected to every wireless standard in existence for up to 10 minutes, until my 2000 mAh battery runs out." :lol:

[jb]

How absolutely true. All these companies are worried about coming out with this standard and that standard and they really need to start focusing on power. What's the point of all these wireless standards if you battery keeps dying on you.

[jimski]

I feel a rant coming on. :evil:

Why is it so difficult for manufacturers to understand that zeroing in on a couple technologies and making them near perfect will go a lot further in expanding the user base than continually creating new technologies that are generally no better but maybe somewhat different.

Because the wireless world is so fragmented this will continue to be a niche technology for us geeks out there. Even with my tri-wireless 5450 and Bluetooth enabled T616 cellphone, I can openly admit that my Palm VII was faster, easier and cheaper to use than any current technology.

Flip up the antenna and there it was, updated e-mail. Write in a flight number while waiting at the airport and in seconds I knew that my flight was going to be delayed 10-15 minutes before it was announced. Order flowers, check the weather or traffic, send a fax... all this was available with one or two taps. Sure it looked boring (monochrome) but it was an effective use of wireless. And it worked almost anywhere.

Now nearly five years later I am still waiting for technology to catch up with that Palm VII. Back then I only dreamed at what things would be like by 2004. I guess the anticipated iPAQ 6300 will finally be an effective replacement (I need a 3.5"+ screen that I do not hold to me ear) but I bet it will cost me more per month to use it than it did five years ago.

ALTERNATIVE CORPORATE STRATEGY
Put Bluetooth in every device that has the cability of communicating with one another; digital cameras, PDAs, phones, TVs, stereos, CD players, VCRs DVD players, computers, video cameras, cars, toys, etc. and see how long it takes for the technology to catch on. There will be more accessories and reasons to need Bluetooth than anyone could ever imagine.

Next make WiFi (802.11g) available "everywhere" and make it FREE for everyone, which will create an enormous market for the necessary hardware; phones, laptops, tablets, PDAs, etc.

Now once you have sucked every living man, woman and child into these technologies making them as essential as running water and electricity, offer paid premium plans for things like; higher-speed access, preferred access along with advanced technologies that will somewhat enhance a user's wireless experience.

I am really dismayed by the fact that while being a wireless pioneer with my Palm VII and after talking up this technology to everyone that would listen, only a couple of my friends, family and business associates have tried dabbling with wireless. Really sad.

Corporations have to stop thinking about how to double sales numbers by the next quarter and instead think abou the big picture, like maybe next year or even the year after. That's what will feed our "wireless frenzy" and cause the rest of the world to become wireless technology adopters.

End of rant. Sorry :roll:

[pacemkr]

"...range of 20 centimeters and at speeds of up to 212kbps..."

Is it just me or is this pathetic? What the ____ can this be used for. When was the last time you used a 20cm wire? At that moment did you wish for one second that you had something without wires wiith that range? Isn't greater range something that is part of wireless as people think of it? How about IrDA? How about smartcards? And I thought that BT was kind of limited in range, but this is just... well pathetic. :evil:

Oh and how dare I forget what they say the "technology" is going to be used for. "... kiosks in train stations and airports and many other places..." I might have missed something, but here is the big question. For what?! To transfer electronic tickets. I havent seen or heard of one of those, or do they mean the ones you get at expedia. Wouldnt it be great to transfer the HTML file of your ticket or confirmation email of some sort at a whopping 212kbps! At that speed I think its much faster to just print the thing either at home or the airport. If I did miss something and there are electronic tickets, arent smartcards THE technology to use for such things.

"...Simply putting two NFC devices together will get them talking to find out how they can swap data..." What a revolutionary idea. I dont mean to sound arogant, but I think I came up with something even more revolutionary. By simply asking the person 20cm away from you, "Do you have BT or IR on this thing?", you could potentially be swapping files with the person within 5 sec. If only BT worked when its supposed to...

And how about the magnificent security features?! Absolutely no need to authenticate?! What a great marketing idea. Arent people just tired worrying of all the fraud thats going on. And obviously you dont have to worry of the new breed of pocket pickers that might emerge as the result. Simply ask the people in a crowded subway car to move 21cm away from you, because you have a NFC device on you. They'll understand...

These companies have to stop wasting our time. Is BT dead? Well I dont care! They charge people money for it, now its their job to make it work. If they think that people will just run out and get this new wireless technology, they might be right. In my case however, if I have a BT ennabled PPC, there was a reason behind why I got it. And the next cell phone that I'm getting is not going to have NFC or wireless usb or whatever else they come up with, its going to have BT. And if they cant deliver BT enabled devices, well its their problem. I sure some company will. 0X (I hope this guy is NOT crossing his fingers)

[Rudolf]

Isn't greater range something that is part of wireless as people think of it? How about IrDA? How about smartcards? And I thought that BT was kind of limited in range, but this is just... well pathetic. :evil:

Actually I think this standard is the 'Bluetooth of the smartcards'. ie. it is supposed to bring wireless capabilities to the SMARTCARD word (not really to PDAs directly) However this would allow, to place smartcards into PDAs and mobilephones, which is currenly impossible as you cannot put your PDA into a smartcard reader). The last time you have used such a short range is, when you used a smartcard, your credit card to buy something. The limited range is intentional, for two reasons.
- The standard must work on passive devices (ie. a smartcard without any battery)
- The user must bring the device to the proximity of the reader device, so there is a LIMITED number of devices in the range.

The closest thing to this is IRDA, but it requires line of sight and a LOT of power (and a lot of space on the devices too ie. LEDs etc.) So irda cannot be integrated on smartcards.
The big thing is, that this standard can be integrated directly into the smartcard, so you can talk to a SECURE device via this link.

Oh and how dare I forget what they say the "technology" is going to be used for. "... kiosks in train stations and airports and many other places..." I might have missed something, but here is the big question. For what?! To transfer electronic tickets. I havent seen or heard of one of those, or do they mean the ones you get at expedia. Wouldnt it be great to transfer the HTML file of your ticket or confirmation email of some sort at a whopping 212kbps! At that speed I think its much faster to just print the thing either at home or the airport. If I did miss something and there are electronic tickets, arent smartcards THE technology to use for such things.
Right, and this is the technology which brings wireless into the smartcard domain. A ticket with digital signature can be as small az 200 bytes, (it should contain ONLY the information and not the neat HTML formatting) Even a 1kb ticket can be transferred in less than 40ms, which is more that enough for this pupose. The problem with printing the ticket is, that you don't have a printer with you on the road and you cannot print a digitally signed ticket (ie. it will be very hard, to verify the signature electorincally)

"...Simply putting two NFC devices together will get them talking to find out how they can swap data..." What a revolutionary idea. I dont mean to sound arogant, but I think I came up with something even more revolutionary. By simply asking the person 20cm away from you, "Do you have BT or IR on this thing?", you could potentially be swapping files with the person within 5 sec. If only BT worked when its supposed to...
Actually this is NOT for swapping big files, but to swap small information chunks. In addition:
- activating IRDA on some devices (especially mobile phones) require a lot of keypressing
- have you ever tried buetooth in crowded environment where everybody has a discoverable BT device? You would be surprised that a simple 'device discovery' could take SEVEAL MINUTES. (as it should discover EVERYBODY in your 10 m range). And after the discovery is done you have to ask: well ok, but I see a lot of devices, what is your devices BT name? It's JOE. Oh well I have 12 devices named as JOE... Which one to choose?
This is just a scenario, what BT was not designed for. (IRDA would work much better here of course, because it requires close proximity)

And how about the magnificent security features?! Absolutely no need to authenticate?! What a great marketing idea. Arent people just tired worrying of all the fraud thats going on. And obviously you dont have to worry of the new breed of pocket pickers that might emerge as the result. Simply ask the people in a crowded subway car to move 21cm away from you, because you have a NFC device on you. They'll understand...
:D Actually authentication (and even security) can be implemented on a higher application level, so the wireless protocol deos not have to deal with it. This does NOT mean, that anybody can access your device without your knowledge. Of course your device can choose, to require a confirmation for certain kind of requests. (for example, you can open doors without entering pin into your device, but accessing personal information would require a button press (or even entering a PIN code, or a finger print read???)

These companies have to stop wasting our time. Is BT dead? Well I dont care! They charge people money for it, now its their job to make it work. If they think that people will just run out and get this new wireless technology, they might be right. In my case however, if I have a BT ennabled PPC, there was a reason behind why I got it. And the next cell phone that I'm getting is not going to have NFC or wireless usb or whatever else they come up with, its going to have BT. And if they cant deliver BT enabled devices, well its their problem. I sure some company will. 0X (I hope this guy is NOT crossing his fingers)
This is NOT a BT replacement (so maybe the example of downloading music files via this technology is a wrong one) and it WILL not replace BT.But it still have a lot of potential application, and personally I would love to see it widely adopted. Imagine you could use your PDA as you credit card, but it would automatically collect receits (and VERIFY the authenticity of the merchant IMMEDIATELY) No need to pass along credit card numbers on the internet, you could have all your receits elctornically and compare it with your monthly CC statement etc. Buying a cinema ticket via internet and just waving you PDA or mobile in the cinema and pass in...

[Rudolf]

How absolutely true. All these companies are worried about coming out with this standard and that standard and they really need to start focusing on power. What's the point of all these wireless standards if you battery keeps dying on you.
Actually this does *not* necessarily need battery power. It can be supported on a smartcard, where there is no battery. Ok, ok I guess the ones implemented in mobiles and PDAs will be active ones so they will need some minimal power, but even far less than BT if two active device communicates (because of the range)

[jonathanchoo]

This is similar to the working of the new Oyster card for London Underground. The card does not contain any battery yet it can store information. There are no physical connectors. All I had to do when paying money into my card is to wave it at a machine. When I walk through the tube barrier, the machine on the barrier will read my card and determine whether I have sufficient cash in it. It then lets me go through.

Apparently these Oyster cards draw their power from the reader, although not physically touching, electricity waves could be generated through the antenna on the card to power up the card.

[pacemkr]

http://tube.tfl.gov.uk/content/tickets/oyster.asp

Oyster cards are smartcards. Thus there goes my main point. Smartcards are here and are just begining (maybe even past that in europe) to show up in everyday life. (ex. some credit cards, blue cash from american express I believe?) Why invent something new? All this technology does is create the extra 20cm range. (if smartcards do not have it already, im not sure on this) So what is the point? I think smartcards have the real potential. Imaging having a smart card reader on your pc, which are already widely available. You would be able to check out from an online store just by swiping one of your smart card enabled credit cards at the computer, which are incredibly secure as far as I know. As I see it, this technology is answering a question that nobody asked.

Also, as far as I understand this technology is intended to just find out which way to communicate, not actually to do the communication. So in other words its intended to fix the issues that BT has by setting it up automatically. 1. I highly doubt that this is possible. 2. Why would someone crate a whole new standart just for this task? How about perfecting what we already have? Or maybe its just another way to get the consumer to pay.