Wireless USB Set To Cut The Cable

[Ed Hansberry]

<a href="http://news.com.com/Wireless+USB+poised+to+cut+the+cable/2100-1041_3-6126452.html?tag=html.alert">http://news.com.com/Wireless+USB+poised+to+cut+the+cable/2100-1041_3-6126452.html?tag=html.alert</a><br /><br /><i>"The computer industry is still working on the paperless office, but new short-range wireless technologies on tap for next year could at last bring about the cable-free desktop. The PC and consumer electronics industries have been talking up Certified Wireless USB (Universal Serial Bus) links as a replacement for those tried-and-true USB cables connecting the PC to everything from iPods to keyboards. Delays, unfortunately, have plagued more than a few companies trying to make this a reality. By year's end, products that rid the desktop of tangled wires should finally start hitting the market."</i><br /><br />Finally, a short range wireless technology, one that hopefully is easy to use and works reliably, to replace those aging and slow IR ports. :D

[JKingGrim]

Just what we need. Another wireless specification. Whats wrong with bluetooth (besides the crappy HTC radios)?

[Ed Hansberry]

Just what we need. Another wireless specification. Whats wrong with bluetooth (besides the crappy HTC radios)?
the crappy Jabra radios, the crappy Dell radios, the crappy ipaq radios, and the other crappy radios. then there are the crappy profiles, the crappy software, the crappy experience, and the rest of the crapacious crappy crap.

[Don Tolson]

the crappy Jabra radios, the crappy Dell radios, the crappy ipaq radios, and the other crappy radios. then there are the crappy profiles, the crappy software, the crappy experience, and the rest of the crapacious crappy crap.

Although Ed and I disagree on a couple of areas, I have to agree here that the Bluetooth experience (which was supposed to be the 'cable replacement') is far from easy or reliable. And from my perspective, too darn complicated.

[Duncan]

Just what we need. Another wireless specification. Whats wrong with bluetooth (besides the crappy HTC radios)?
the crappy Jabra radios, the crappy Dell radios, the crappy ipaq radios, and the other crappy radios. then there are the crappy profiles, the crappy software, the crappy experience, and the rest of the crapacious crappy crap.

And once the Wireless USB standard is up and running, and various hardware manufacturers implement it badly, or only in part etc. - you can bet that we'll once more see the standard being blamed for the crappy implementation of it. I'm looking forward to the 'Wireless USB is dead' graphics even now...

Meanwhile - my HTC built Pocket Loox, wireless headset, HP printer, Sony Ericsson mobile and FSC laptop (with Toshiba provided radio) all happily communicate (each haveing been set up to communicate with all the others via a simple two step process that took seconds) just fine every single day. Funny that. :lol:

[isajoo]

wouldn't it be easier to just rename bluetooth to wireless usb. LOL

[twpd]

Just what we need. Another wireless specification. Whats wrong with bluetooth (besides the crappy HTC radios)?

Absolutely! I am happy with bluetooth - it works well for me. Another wireless protocol just isn't needed and will probably interfere with all the other operating in and around 2.4Ghz. :roll: Manufacturers need to sort out their existing implementations first.

[ctmagnus]

Manufacturers need to sort out their existing implementations first.

Exactly. The point of having a standard is not so that each company can come out with its own implementation of the concept in question.

[Janak Parekh]

Meanwhile - my HTC built Pocket Loox, wireless headset, HP printer, Sony Ericsson mobile and FSC laptop (with Toshiba provided radio) all happily communicate (each haveing been set up to communicate with all the others via a simple two step process that took seconds) just fine every single day. Funny that. :lol:
Unfortunately, not all of us have the same set of devices. :( I've had my share of weirdnesses, although part of it (perhaps a large part of it) is Microsoft's stacks to blame -- my Powerbook's Bluetooth is generally solid. My Pocket PCs and Bluetooth ActiveSync, though, is another adventure entirely.

--janak

[Duncan]

Meanwhile - my HTC built Pocket Loox, wireless headset, HP printer, Sony Ericsson mobile and FSC laptop (with Toshiba provided radio) all happily communicate (each haveing been set up to communicate with all the others via a simple two step process that took seconds) just fine every single day. Funny that. :lol:
Unfortunately, not all of us have the same set of devices. :( I've had my share of weirdnesses, although part of it (perhaps a large part of it) is Microsoft's stacks to blame -- my Powerbook's Bluetooth is generally solid. My Pocket PCs and Bluetooth ActiveSync, though, is another adventure entirely.

--janak

If the Bluetooth SIG have fallen down it is, perhaps, in not enforcing standardisation strongly enough. MS could have helped by working on BT earlier and making a decent implementation. Thing is - this will happen with any other new wirefree standard.

As things stand - it is literally years since I last had a real BT issue. Even Nokia phones behave now. The MS stack on PPCs seems to be a backwards step - but who do we point the finger at - BT or MS?

There is nothing wrong with BT that can't be put right by manufacturers. The standard itself works beautifully - and is in no need of replacing. Sadly Ed, rather naively, blames the standard and holds out hope that YABS (yet another bloody standard) will be the answer. Of course it won't.

[signothefish]

I haven't been keeping track of WUSB. It's a short article, but informative enough that it will bring you up-to-date though. I do believe the columnist is a little optimistic on the technology. At least he does own up to the fact that it could take some time for the technology to penetrate the industry. As for the advantage it has over BT:

"UWB technology can deliver data rates at up to 480 megabits per second at around 3 meters, with speeds dropping off as the range grows to a limit of about 10 meters. Real-world speeds will probably be a little slower, but this is as fast as the wired version of USB 2.0 and much faster than current Wi-Fi networks are capable of transmitting data.
...
Certified Wireless USB is much faster and uses less power than Wi-Fi..."

Still, I'm in a wait-and-see mode. It would indeed be nice for this technology to really take off. If they can get the range improved some, I see it as more of an end to WiFi than I do to BT, mostly because BT will likely consume much less power.

Still, one would think that if it were meant for everything in your home to be connected wirelessly, that WiFi would have already overtaken USB as a preferred connection type. But that has not happened. Could it be due to the limited speed of WiFi networks? Maybe that's why they're putting their stakes in WUSB.

[Joff]

wouldn't it be easier to just rename bluetooth to wireless usb. LOL

The irony is that the Bluetooth SIG is considering using UWB (Ultra WideBand) as their new physical layer.
With UWB, Bluetooth can expect transfer rates similar to wireless USB rates.

On another note, do you remember the early days of USB when one had bought a USB keyboard and could not start using it until Windows (95 at the time) had loaded the necessary drivers?
I believe BIOSes have USB support now so we are able to start using the USB keyboard from boot-up.

I can already imagine wireless USB monitors where you have to wait until Winslows loads up the driver before you can see anything on the sreen 8O

[Janak Parekh]

If the Bluetooth SIG have fallen down it is, perhaps, in not enforcing standardisation strongly enough.
Agreed -- or, to be more precise, "standardization at all". I would preferred the Bluetooth logo only given to devices that pass a rigorous test suite.

MS could have helped by working on BT earlier and making a decent implementation. Thing is - this will happen with any other new wirefree standard.
As it did with WiFi, but WiFi was easier to simplify, as it's largely one protocol, as opposed to BT's notion of profiles. Well, so WUSB or whatever it'll be called will succeed only if there are less teething issues. Otherwise, I'm sure BT will remain dominant.

As things stand - it is literally years since I last had a real BT issue. Even Nokia phones behave now. The MS stack on PPCs seems to be a backwards step - but who do we point the finger at - BT or MS?
Both.

As an example -- WM5 AKU3 has a standardized Internet Sharing applet, which is a great addition, instead of having different ways of tethering different phones. However, it does not use DUN or the Serial profile for Internet Sharing -- it uses PAN. While this is technically the correct profile to use, PAN is not widely supported yet. So blame MS for not giving backwards compatibility to hosts that don't support PAN, and the BT SIG for not encouraging/mandating universal PAN adoption.

Sadly Ed, rather naively, blames the standard and holds out hope that YABS (yet another bloody standard) will be the answer. Of course it won't.
Well, I think Ed is holding the "Bluetooth experience" responsible. If the standard is not enforcing a decent quality experience across-the-board, then the standard is partly to blame.

--janak

[PPCRules]

... the "Bluetooth experience"
That's exactly it for me.

I don't know where the problems were or who is to blame; I just know that my experiences with bluetooth has been painful. Should I (or anyone) really need to know more than that?

Here's hoping that Wireless USB delivers a better experience. That's what (or, all) that it would take to quickly dominate. People are far more ready to adopt wireless now than when Bluetooth first came on the scene, so uptake would be quick.

And, of course, Windows and hardware manufacturer support it key. Build this into every Windows PC sold and people would gobble up the peripherals.

[isajoo]

when connecting peripherals do u need such high speeds. would ppc's actually be able to reach these speeds. as for keyboards and mice...how does the current wireless setup work? still tring to figure out what would be the advantage to wireless usb. if it includes a wireless dvi video output for hdtvs...so u could use any tv in the house as a pc monitor without wires. if this one of the possibilities then i am on board.

[beq]

I too haven't followed UWB developments. Interesting that everyone (USB IF, 1394 TA, Bluetooth SIG) chose WiMedia UWB for their next-gen wireless connectivity. Also interesting to read about the competing UWB Forum that fizzled out.

I remember the hoopla around the introduction of general UWB technology. It could span across the whole range of frequencies for maximum througput. All without intereference because UWB looks like background noise to the incumbent protocols using the specific frequency bands.

Is this really the case, or is WiMedia UWB still restricted to only the 2.4GHz unlicensed bands?

Anyways, with upcoming wireless USB, 1394 (HAVi?), and Bluetooth all using the same UWB, I'm guessing it will be easy for any PPC or device that includes a UWB radio to support all 3 protocol layers (perhaps in the same silicon)?

Then we would only need a UWB hub on our desk to transparently bridge the connection to wired USB/1394 peripherals, as well as to the PC.


P.S. As to WiFi, remember that's it's a longer-range connection, and uses a network topology.

[Ed Hansberry]

... the "Bluetooth experience"
That's exactly it for me.

I don't know where the problems were or who is to blame; I just know that my experiences with bluetooth has been painful. Should I (or anyone) really need to know more than that?
You and I are so naïve. :wink: I am just glad we have others to pop in here and tell us all the reasons we shouldn't blame bluetooth for our bad experiences. I just we had their bluetooth mojo. :roll: