Sony to get direct USB connection

[marlof]

<a href="http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-982738.html">http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-982738.html</a><br /><br />One of the things that is asked a lot in the newsgroups, is if it is possible to use the USB connection in a Pocket PC to hook it up to other devices. The standard answer for most of the Pocket PCs is that this is not possible, as the USB is client only, and can not host other devices.<br /><br />At least Clie owners will get some solution in the near future. In the linked ZDNet article, it is reported that Sony is going to use Philips' USB On-the-Go chips in their Clie line. "USB On-the-Go, which is an offshoot of the Universal Serial Bus 2.0 specification, lets gadgets such as cell phones link and exchange data directly with other peripherals. While existing wireless data transfer modes such as Bluetooth promise similar benefits, these standards are not omnipresent or backward-compatible. USB slots, on the other hand, are commonly found in existing devices such as printers and digital-audio players. Although the On-the-Go standard is not new, Sony is among the first gadget makers to detail concrete plans for its adoption. A number of other companies, such as Hewlett-Packard, have said they are evaluating ways to use it." So there might be hope for iPAQs after all...

[johnbrooks]

"USB On-the-Go, which is an offshoot of the Universal Serial Bus 2.0 specification, lets gadgets such as cell phones link and exchange data directly with other peripherals. While existing wireless data transfer modes such as Bluetooth promise similar benefits, these standards are not omnipresent or backward-compatible."
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-982738.html
http://news.com.com/2100-1040-982738.html
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2129598,00.html

Bluetooth "not omnipresent or backward-compatible."???? What a nonsense. New Bluetooth Specs are ALL backward-compatible with the 1.1 spec.

This same nonsense is reprinted (3 times see above) elsewhere as well!? %$#&@! Little research can't hurt i see.....

Bluetooth SIG Executive Director Mike McCamon says that "products built on the new (Bluetooth) spec will be backward-compatible with version 1.1 products".

Bluetooth 1.2 (2-3Mpbs) and 2.0 (4-12Mpbs) versions: Behind the scenes they are working on Bluetooth 1.2 (2-3Mpbs) and 2.0 (4-12Mpbs) versions which are both backward compatible with the 1.1 version. A few more functions are to be provided in the 1.2 specification, which are: speeding up of the connection establishment between equipment, QOS management as flow control, coping with the transfer of streaming data, adaptive frequency hopping to decrease mutual interruption with IEEE802.11b, connection between piconets (scatter net), roaming between piconets, and others.

Bluetooth 2.0 (2004?)
http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20020611S0033

[Timothy Rapson]

(Please to take this as argumentative. I am trying to learn about USB OTG and welcome correction if I am getting this all wrong.)

http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20020611S0033[/url]

Perhaps what is meant by not backwards compatible the writers mean that it is not backward compatible to the USB, serial, or WiFi standards that preceded it? This new USB OTG is backward compatible with a USB port 4years old.

On the other hand, "Although the On-the-Go standard is not new, Sony is among" must mean something that I don't follow. The idea of On-the-Go may not be breaking news, but there is still not a single product shipping. Even the latest Phillips smart cable to which your refer is not due out untl Summer. The latest ZDNet article I read said that the committee that set standards for USB OTG had just released the final beta of the specs.

What I wonder is will there be room for yet ANOTHER connection "standard". With WiFi, BlueTooth, Card readers, proprietary ports and all the other ways to connect two digital devices, what is USB OTG's raison de'etre. (probably misspelled, but how often does on get to use an old French term at PocketPCThoughts?)

[johnbrooks]

There is room for many different standards, because many serve different uses and/or are prized differently. How many room there is is question no. 2.

Firewire and USB standards are all wired technologies (WirelessUSB by Cypress excluded). Bluetooth and WiFi are wirefree technologies.

The article states with "While existing wireless data transfer modes such as Bluetooth promise similar benefits, these standards are not omnipresent or backward-compatible." that Bluetooth is not backward compatible. I replied that this is not true. Upcoming new Bluetooth standard(s) are backward compatible with spec. 1.1. That Bluetooth is not backward compatible to USB is obvious. Like USB is not backward compatible to Bluetooth....that's not what the writer means (imho)

[PhatCohiba]

The article states with "While existing wireless data transfer modes such as Bluetooth promise similar benefits, these standards are not omnipresent or backward-compatible." that Bluetooth is not backward compatible. I replied that this is not true. Upcoming new Bluetooth standard(s) are backward compatible with spec. 1.1. That Bluetooth is not backward compatible to USB is obvious. Like USB is not backward compatible to Bluetooth....that's not what the writer means (imho)


It is not my read of the article that Bluetooth is not backward compatabile, but that it is not omni-present.

I agree that bluetooth is a backward-compatible and a very powerful alternative to USB - OTG for device-to-device interaction.

The weak point of bluetooth today is Lack of support:
Neither my cell phone, Laptop, deesktop, PDA, Digital Camera, Keyboard, Mouse, and Printer use Bluetooth. they all could use bluetooth, but I would have had to seek out 1 or 2 products that frequently do not have the other features / price that I was interested in. BTW, they all have USB connectors on them.

What I hope for is USB -OTG to fix one of the biggest weakness's of USB. Just like the 1.0 - 2.0 fixing the USB bandwith problems, OTG should fix this whole whats a host and what's a client?

Should Digital Cameras be able to be connected to PDA's or Printers? Whose the Host?

I could connect my old cell phone (19.2 k data) to my pda via serial. Today a HP 1910 doesn't come with a serial connector, and my new Vision Phone (40-120k data) doesn't have a serial port. Even though they are both USB, they can't communicate. (BTW, no sprint PCS Vision phones have bluetooth.)

The lack of USB host on Pocket PC chipsets is one of my biggest peeve's with the product today.

[johnbrooks]

You could be right. The writer isn't clear about if Bluetooth is/isn't omnipresent or backward-compatible?

The lack of Bluetooth support and that all the products you mentioned have USB connectors on them is inherent for Bluetooth being a relative young technology (especially compared with WiFi which development started in 1990 already vs Bluetooth in the mid 90's). Patience and development is required.

That certain carriers like Sprint and Verizon aren't offering Bluetooth services is carrier restricted. AT&T, T-Mobile, Vodafone, Orange, Cingular, O2 and Voicestream(!? not sure) do offer Bluetooth Services. I hope they will follow. Being mobile is the future.....some carriers are snoozing imho.

[vincentsiaw]

i just wish next issue of ipaq will include this usb2go :P

[Timothy Rapson]

What I hope for is USB -OTG to fix one of the biggest weakness's of USB. Just like the 1.0 - 2.0 fixing the USB bandwith problems, OTG should fix this whole whats a host and what's a client?
.

That sure helps me understand it. Thanks.