Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Wireless at Firewire Speeds?

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the I'll-believe-it-when-I-see-it dept.

MeCoward writes "EETimes reporting on working group that hopes to leapfrog 802.11 to create wireless 1394 links. Initially 100mbps but aiming for 400mbps." I don't expect to see this anytime soon, but it certainly makes things like wireless HDTV feasible. Sure would be cool. Of course Bluetooth is only now just catching on, so imagine how long it'll be before this becomes practical.

7 of 157 comments (clear)

  1. wireless HDTV? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I don't expect to see this anytime soon, but it certainly makes things like wireless HDTV feasible.

    Uh... maybe I'm just a dumbass or something, but wireless HDTV is already feasible. I watch it every day. It's called 8VSB.

    However you encode it, broadcast HDTV is only 19.3 Mbps. It's feasible over dual-like 802.11a, or 802.11g.

  2. Uhm by cscx · · Score: 5, Funny

    but it certainly makes things like wireless HDTV feasible

    Because right now you can't pick up HDTV from over-the-air signals... right???? :P

  3. small range by afidel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    UWB only works if you severly limit the range (10m in the case of 802.15.3 networks). This might be fine for connecting you DVR to your TV, but it won't be usefull for connecting your DVR to the tv on the other side of the house or up a floor. This could be ultra cool for next generation MIDI though, the ability to connect all of your devices wirelessly and get both MIDI data and samples would rock. I can't imagine how much this would please all of the musicians who have had to do a road show with the spagheti nest that is MIDI setups.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  4. Range, bandwidth and security... by WegianWarrior · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Heberling is also working with the 802.15.3a committee attempting to set standards for an ultrawideband physical layer chip that could transmit at data rates of 100 Mbits/second initially but be upgraded to versions at 200 and 400 Mbits/s, albeit at ranges of 10 meters or less.

    So... I can have a massive bandwidth without any cabling - as long as I don't move the devices further apart than a cable can reach. Somehow, while fiddling with cables can be a hazzle now and then, I think I'll stick to cables. One reason for this is security - unless this technology relies on LOS (line Of Sight), which would make it even less an atractive replacement for cabling, people would likely be able to pick up the signals from a much further distance than the aforementioned ten meters...

    ...unless I decide to utilise some of that bandwidth - along with CPU-time - to encrypt my signal... which I wouldn't have that much reason to do with a piece of cabel in the first place.

    Still, early days and all that - we'll see just where and how this ends up in a few years time.

    --
    Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.
  5. High-speed PAN w/ copy protection? by questionlp · · Score: 5, Interesting
    First, it seems that this would make record and studio execs happy since this is using IEEE 1394:
    The 1394 interface is a key interconnect for sending copy protected digital video between TVs, set-tops and other systems.
    So you have pretty good speed wireless connections plus some nice little bits to make sure that you may or may not be able to sniff the signal and redistribute it elsewhere.

    Anyway, this seems to be the next step up from Bluetooth (which is more of a wireless replacement of USB) for connecting wireless DVD players to a projector or TV, or play media files from a wireless 1394 hard drive or a computer sitting in your AV rack.

  6. Unbelieveable! by jspayne · · Score: 5, Funny

    To think, wireless HDTV! That would be like - like getting HDTV over the air! You would just need an antenna, maybe a fancy converter box. Who could think it possible? Wouldn't it be cool if they could do multiple channels at the same time? *sigh* Jeff

  7. Well... by MachineShedFred · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "Bluetooth is only now just catching on, so imagine how long it'll be before this becomes practical. "

    Bluetooth is slow. If it was 100 time faster, it would catch on faster, becuase there would be more applications for it. With less-than-megabit speeds, the only thing you would EVER want to do is serial I/O (sync stuff, keyboards), and *maybe* a mono audio stream.

    The consumer electronics industry has been eyeballing FireWire (1394) for a while. It makes for one hell of an universal interconnect between all your digital devices, rather than having coax spaghetti and 20 IR or IF devices all over the place. Instead you have one FireWire hub, going to your receiver, your DVD player, your VCR, your CD changer, and your HDTV decoder, and one remote that tells one device what to tell the others...

    That's my kind of home automation and control.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.