03-12-2003, 08:00 AM
|
|
Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,171
|
|
Bluetooth Competition Brewing
"Intel, Sony and others are meeting to decide which of a slew of proposals submitted by wireless-networking companies will become a new standard to rival Bluetooth--and a military technology once known as the "sneaky wave" is making a splash. Philips, Texas Instruments and Samsung are among the other companies flexing their muscles as part of the IEEE 802.15 Working Group for WPAN, which is meeting this week in Dallas to settle on a new standard technology for wireless personal area networks, or WPANs. Such networks create high-speed wireless connections over short distances to allow for synchronization between a personal digital assistant and a computer, say, or to connect a television to a cable TV box, and so on. The winning technology behind the standard, which will bear the name 802.15.3a, is expected to generate $1.39 billion in revenue by 2007, according to projections by Allied Business Intelligence."
The most interesting of these is UWB, or Ultra Wideband. It was apparently once called the "sneaky wave". Maybe that's what they need for WPANs to take off - a catchier name.
|
| |
|
|
|
03-12-2003, 03:47 PM
|
|
Magi
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,341
|
|
Why?
....why do we need another wireless method of connecting devices. Don't we have enough now. I think we should have a meeting.....a survivor type meeting where everyone keeps voting people out of the room til there is only one method left. Then improve on that.
Simple, and effective!
Dave
|
| |
|
|
|
03-12-2003, 04:08 PM
|
|
Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,171
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Paragon
....why do we need another wireless method of connecting devices. Don't we have enough now. I think we should have a meeting.....a survivor type meeting where everyone keeps voting people out of the room til there is only one method left. Then improve on that.
|
But what if there's an entirely different method that works much better? That's the UWB proposition. It's not compatible with Bluetooth by design, but it is much, much faster.
--janak
|
| |
|
|
|
03-12-2003, 04:17 PM
|
|
Magi
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,341
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Janak Parekh
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Paragon
....why do we need another wireless method of connecting devices. Don't we have enough now. I think we should have a meeting.....a survivor type meeting where everyone keeps voting people out of the room til there is only one method left. Then improve on that.
|
But what if there's an entirely different method that works much better? That's the UWB proposition. It's not compatible with Bluetooth by design, but it is much, much faster.
--janak |
Yeah I know Janak. My point really is simple....find one method that works and settle on it. If they are just going to throw another alternative into the fray, then don't bother.
Dave
|
| |
|
|
|
03-12-2003, 04:56 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 111
|
|
And while they're at it in this survivor room, get them to work on the crazy different number of memory cards (XD, SD, MMC, Memory stick (all flavours), CF, and more to come I'm sure), and DVD standards (RW, +RW, ROM, the two competing blue laser formats to come and god knows what else).
I'm sure this sort of confusion hurts everyone in the long run - manufacturers and consumers alike. That said, as Janak alluded to, great new technologies do come along, and if we were too rigid with standards, might have a hard time getting to market. It's a tough one...
|
| |
|
|
|
03-12-2003, 05:05 PM
|
|
Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,171
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Paragon
Yeah I know Janak. My point really is simple....find one method that works and settle on it. If they are just going to throw another alternative into the fray, then don't bother.
|
I know. But they keep on coming up with new methods. I don't think it's a conspiracy to hold 'em back to keep on fragmenting WPANs... 
--janak
|
| |
|
|
|
03-12-2003, 05:15 PM
|
|
Magi
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,341
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Janak Parekh
I don't think it's a conspiracy to hold 'em back to keep on fragmenting WPANs...
--janak |
CONSPIRACY!!
HA! Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you! 
Dave
|
| |
|
|
|
03-12-2003, 05:26 PM
|
|
Mystic
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,768
|
|
progress
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Paragon
Yeah I know Janak. My point really is simple....find one method that works and settle on it. If they are just going to throw another alternative into the fray, then don't bother.
Dave
|
It is progress. We won't see commercial products for a few years yet. This implementation is going to speed things up quite a bit. I am sure that a few years later, or by the time this becomes a major commercial product, there will already be newer and better technology. I personally like to see continued progress.
__________________
Jonathan (JonnoB)
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." -Edmund Burke
|
| |
|
|
|
03-12-2003, 05:31 PM
|
|
Theorist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 305
|
|
Bluetooth Competition Brewing!!!
Gotta love the hype! That headline WILL spark reader interest no doubt.
But, as was earlier discussed on the forum, Intel's position ( on their OWN site ) tells another story. I'll refer back to this earlier thread...
http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/foru...pic.php?t=8694
Not to say that this is the last word on the issue and things will change with time. But, Intel's site says what it says. :wink:
Can UWB replace Bluetooth?
No. Bluetooth is a complete, end-to-end communication standard. UWB can be used as a piece of a communication standard. Bluetooth defines how data is managed, formatted and physically carried over a wireless personal area network (WPA). Ultra Wideband is a specific type of RF signal that can be used to carry data between devices. It's not a complete communication standard. Current FCC regulations enable UWB signals capable of carrying very high data rates over a short range. This makes it attractive as a carrier or PHY layer for a WPAN.
|
| |
|
|
|
03-12-2003, 05:34 PM
|
|
Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,171
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Paragon
HA! Just be cause you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you! |
Wait a second Dave, have you started taking Jonathan1's medication? :lol: (No offense intended, Jonathan...)
Stik: while UWB by itself is not a replacement for Bluetooth, it is an air interface that is fundamentally incompatible with the spectrum hopping interface currently implemented in the low levels of Bluetooth. Could we see a UWB-based Bluetooth? Sure. However, it won't be compatible with what we call Bluetooth today.
--janak
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
