Slashdot Mirror
ZigBee Low-Power Wireless Networking
asmithmd1 writes "Do you you have a great idea for a wireless device that really doesn't need the 1 Mbit/sec (and high power consumption) of Bluetooth? Well you will have a new choice soon, ZigBee. Zigbee is the trademark for IEEE 802.15 Personal Area network low data rate standard. Designed to run in low power 8 bit devices at data rates of 20k bits/second, a ZigBee node will run for months if not years on one set of batteries. With heavy hitters like Motorola and Phillips behind it and chips available soon for half the cost of bluetooth, it looks like it will become a reality."
No. Next question?
For connecting my fridge to the internet. Also, my lightbulbs. Those need IP addresses, too.
Yet more interference. As it is any time anyone uses a wireless phone (2.4GHz), bluetooth device (2.4GHz), radio headphones (2.4GHz) or microwave (everything) my 802.11b (2.4GHz) connection dies...
yes, the 2.4 ghz is getting oversaturated, but the FCC needs to open up more spectrum, as for uses, it will have some, (and yes better than toasters wasteing IP's, just NAT/IPv6 that stuff). WIll it be overhyped like bluetooth? yes. Will it be completely unessesary in some cases (IE, wi-fi in a palm) Yes. lets just hope that this protical does checking to see if a channel is in use (like wi-fi) and not act like bluethooth's channel hopping spred spectrum stuff
come comment on the madness at http://slashdot.org/~phreak03/journal/
I'm wondering how the cost and battery life would compare to infrared. It seems relatively cheap (to me at least, since just about every wireless remote I have is IR-based) to have a LED that emits IR light, but it would also be cool to have wireless remotes based on this technology. Sunlight coming in through the window can disrupt IR communications, and line of sight can get to be a pain depending on how the components are positioned. It also seems response time might be better, but I'm nss. I'm still running an IR remote on the batteries that came with it (4 AAAs) at 4 years and going, so battery life is a definite concern.
This could be helpful both against pickpockets and easily distracted slashdotters. :-)
Actually that's not entirely true. The 802.15.4 standard defines the physical radio behavior of the personal area network; ZigBee is the logical network and application software that runs on top of 802.15.
Ref: ZigBee FAQ
In Soviet Rush, today's Tom Sawyer gets high on you.
First bluetooth, now zigbee (wifi should be in here somewhere too I suppose), what do they do, get pissed in the office on a friday arvo and pull stupid arse names out of a hat?
I can just see a group of marketroids sitting round in a room saying things like, "oh numbers, they'll never catch on" "quite so, we need something snazzier" "wait a minute, a bee is flying into my beer" "oh look, a ziggy cartoon"
"EUREKA!!!!! lets call it ZigBee"
"good idea, pass me another beer"
It is capable of connecting 255 devices per network. The spec supports data transmission rates of up to 250kbps at a range of up to 30 meters. ZigBee's technology is slower than 802.11b, at 11 megabits per second, and Bluetooth, at 1mbps, but it consumes significantly less power.
Never believe what you don't read.
"Do you you have a great idea for a wireless device that really doesn't need the 1 Mbit/sec (and high power consumption) of Bluetooth?
20 kbits/second is too slow for most applications. While perhaps it's sufficient for cellular data, mice, and keyboard, I don't see what else you could use it for. PDA syncing took forever at 56kbit/sec even (thank god for USB). And it certainly couldn't work for wireless phone headsets. "
The question was 'what can you do with it', not 'what can't you do with it'. Saying what it can't do is easy. No idea why you got modded up for that.
"Derp de derp."
wireless keyboards, wireless mice...they all could go with the whole "less battery consumption" idea. maybe those remotes rich people have that control the lights and radios in all 2390847 rooms in their oversized house. With only 20kbits/sec there isn't much that can be done other then controlling electronic devices. It's sure as hell too slow for any data transfer other then plain text.
your sins into me, oh my beautiful one.
This would be fantastic for billions of devices in the world that don't need massive bandwidth: fire and intrusion alarms, periodic appliance and vehicle telemetry dumps, remote controls for doorknobs and electrical items and so forth, electric and gas meters, cable box uplinks, sump pump failure alarms, water heater leak detectors, etc.
I've long desired to see a dynamically forming pervasive network based on a technology just like this, that would allow your car or child or laptop to tell you (via an embedded transponder) where it went if it got "lost". I'd like a battery-powered alarm in my storage unit that would notify me if someone broke in, or if water was leaking in, or the battery was low. Same goes for my home burglar alarm. It would be nice if you could connect a device to the network for pennies a day. I don't need 128Kbits/sec for a smoke detector (at $60/mo/node over CDMA!!!), but I do need always-on connectivity.
The example you always see about your refrigerator ordering more milk for you is completely stupid, but it would be nice if your washing machine could let the manufacturer know that preventative service was required before it died. Manufacturers would also love to be able to collect test data from deployed devices for defect tracking and analysis.
Presumably wall-powered devices would form more powerful repeaters for the battery-powered nodes, then network nodes would send the traffic through some wired network or the internet for further application-specific routing. Anyway, driving down the cost opens up a dramatic new frontier of wireless applications for any device with a modicum of state or intelligence.
But PDA syncing at 20kb/s wouldn't be bad if it could do it automatically & continuously when you are in range of the wireless network.
I have to admit, my first thought was, "Great, another competing standard to make things more of a pain in the ass, AND it's slower."
Then I realized that such a thing could have some uses. You know those little 8x24 LCD screens? It'd be cool to be able to mount one of those on the front of your monitor with the computer on the floor, without having to string a serial cable. All kinds of uses right there. Mmmm.
SIGFEH
This is a perfect solution for utilities trying to do real time monitoring of the consumption of gas, electricty and water.
This is my sig.
"chips available soon for half the cost of bluetooth"
Several years ago Bluetooth claimed to be available soon at low cost. It took longer to solve the problems, and it's cost more than expected at least initially.
Eyes open please.
This could really help with broader data transfer on scientific studies. Remote environmental sensors along a sensitive part of a river transmitting to a data crunch relay, for studying fish habitat comes to mind. The 02 saturation, water temp stream level, even chemical changes could be easily watched during critical periods. I am sure there are very many other uses, building air conditioning zones, dangerous chemical sniffers. Really scookum alarm systems that can send all sorts of local data from different locations to a hub. As far as I am concerned the internet apps would be suitable for text mail, and thats about it but the broader practical applications are huge.
OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
I know that you speed demons on SlashDot laugh at anything this "low-speed", but for me this is a GODSEND. All I've ever wanted is a low-speed, low-power, reliable wireless tech that would let me bop around the apartment with a laptop and stay telnetted into my server (from which I connect to MU*s and read my email in PINE). I don't need 11Mbps, or 1Mbps, or even .5Mbps. This is exactly what I need, and it looks like the price is right.
Honey, I shrunk the Cygwin
Why do people (well, mostly Americans) never write Motorolla, but too often write Phillips where it should be Philips. Or do people really think that an oil company is suddenly going into wireless electronics. Mmmm, with McDonalds going into the WiFi ISP business, you never know. And maybe those French fries are coming out of a pan of Phillips 66. :-).
Browsers shouldn't have a back button!! It's all about going forward...
Two years ago, I had the privilage of participating in the IEEE Computer Soceity International Design Competition 2001, which gave university students (such as myself) the opportunity to build something useful out of Bluetooth. Back then, Bluetooth had been The Next Big Thing (tm) for maybe a year. The competition gave me a first-hand look at why Bluetooth is still The Next Big Thing (tm), two years later.
Two years ago, Bluetooth seemed to be doing everything right. Created by Ericsson, and supported by 3Com, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Motorola, Nokia and Toshiba, it couldn't help but succeed. In the buzzword-compatible trade press, Bluetooth, and the Personal Area Networks it creates, are destined to change the way our handheld computing devices communicate with each other. That's great -- I'd love to use my Visor to read Slashdot headlines, using my wireless phone for its Internet connection. Bluetooth has a great vision, but (at least two years ago) it lacks something far more important: superior development tools. Without worthwhile development tools, and the documentation to back them up, only those with large pockets and iron wills will succeed. Curious students (like myself two years ago) will turn away sadly, wishing there were more, but doubting anything will ever happen.
Why is it important that the small developers get involved? Palm created the handheld market not only by having a low-cost, easy-to-use handheld, but by allowing any kid in his parents' basement to develop PalmOS applications. Ninty-five percent of them may have been crap, but five percent of all the world's Palm-programming geeks is still a whole lot of stuff to attract the Palm-using masses.
ZigBee looks fascinating, and it's something I'll keep my eye on, but unless they learn from Bluetooth's mistakes, it'll be a lot of radio noise for nothing.
time to other devices (or vice/versa if it's a clock that set's itself from the Colorado time signal like mine)
I could see joysticks using this.
Light switches ala X-10.
Water meters, power meters, gas meters, wireless thermometers and other sensors.
VCR's could use it as an interface to allow configuration from a computer.
TV's could use it as a way to implement a universal RF remote control.
Apparently they already thought of some of these ideas.
From the ZigBee FAQ:
* Wireless home security
* Remote thermostats for air conditioner
* Remote lighting, drape controller
* Call button for elderly and disabled
* Universal remote controller to TV and radio
* Wireless keyboard, mouse and game pads
* Wireless smoke, CO detectors
* Industrial and building automation and control (lighting, etc.)
Then you could combine a few of these things to implement something the detects when it's too hot inside and it's colder outside and the humidity outside isn't too bad, turn on a fan. This is otherwise very complicated but hook up a few thermometers, a humidity sensor and a switch that are all accessible from a computer and it gets very easy.
set softtabstop=4 shiftwidth=4 expandtab nocp worlddomination
Talking on finding something; hopefully it could be used for a transmitter/receiver in my keychain, my PDA, my wallet, and my phone handset that I can use to triangulate their position when I want to find the darn things! Then I wouldn't spend so much time running around looking for them when I want to go out.
a.
Here's a question: What about security? And not just for this "ZigBee" system, but for wireless networking and Bluetooth as well. Don't you think that with these PAN networks, security is going to be important?
Since I saw a Bluetooth keyboard the other day, I laughed and realised that keystroke loggers are obsolete. Why should a cracker go to the trouble of futzing around trying to get a user to install a trojan or leave a port open, when they can just point a hi-gain antenna at his desktop and read what the user's typing on the keyboard.
Hasn't anyone noticed all the hassle and screaming and yelling about the crappy security WEP provides? See http://www.starkrealities.com/wireless003.html The reason that happened is that people found out that when wireless networking is used, CRACKERS BREAK IN THROUGH THE CRAPPY SECURITY. Then they mess with your systems, steal your data and zombify your servers!
In the case of 802.11?? the crackers had to be withing a few yards to break in. With a PAN, they have to be within a few feet. Maybe you live in a lead-lined cavern all alone, but most people who use tech are walking around and sitting down next to people all the time. So if you just go and sit in a waiting room while using Bluetooth or some other PAN, the person sitting behind you pretending to play games on his PDA is breaking into your systems and slurping all your passwords and credit card numbers while you sit there none the wiser.
This looks like a security nightmare. Who wants that?
Sometimes the "writing on the wall" is blood spatter...
One interesting point about Zigbee is that its design will allow for easier formation of multi-hop networks, something that is sorely lacking with Bluetooth. Bluetooth nodes are required to establish connections, choose to be either master or slave nodes, under a whole load of annoying restrictions such as inability to be a slave of more than two masters at once, inability to be a master to more than 7 active slaves, etc. Totally adverse to a nice mesh topology like one can set up with CSMA/CA radios. On top of that, thanks to frequency hopping, discovery in Bluetooth takes about 5-10 seconds, and connection setup 1-4 under reasonable settings... quite irritating.