Intel Working on Agile Wireless Chip

Rob writes "Computer Business Review is reporting that Intel has announced that its scientists had invented a new type of chip that can process signals from different types of wireless networks. The chip also could handle upcoming WiMax technology, that promises wireless internet connectivity for up to 30 miles, and future flavors of WiFi."

Comments

Nothing to see here...

[Anonymous Coward]

"It is more of a proof of concept rather than a device that will see the light of day," he said. That's because the chip integrates only analogue and not digital circuitry and WiFi chip would require both types to make it usable by a digital device.

Re:Nothing to see here...

[TomorrowPlusX]

Doesn't seem like a "Nothing to see here" situation. They're just admitting it's R&D.

I mean, obviously, they also hope to stir up investors and get good press, but, who wouldn't want to do that?

Re:Nothing to see here...

[megalomang]

Hah! I'm not an Intel analyst, but even I could come up with something like this if I din't have to actually say how it works :P

I'm very confused and unsure what you mean by this. Here are some of my thoughts after reading it:

1) You think that Intel analysts are the ones who "come up with something like this". This is definitely a problem -- it is generally Intel employees (i.e. smart engineers who research and develop, not mediocre marketing people) who would come up with ideas and create proofs of concept to demonstrate them.

2) You don't understand that a "Proof of Concept" is a milestone on the way to a complete product. A POC demonstrates a capability that you did not previously have and that you had doubts about. These milestones are required by senior management to continue funding a product. Additionally, it may or may not have been meant to demonstrate a capability to the public or at least Intel sales targets to increase their confidence in Intel's ability to take wireless networking to the next stage.

3) You think that a corporation is "hiding" something from you if they don't contact you personally to give you a demonstration. Note this is not a revolutionary concept to combine multiple transceivers on the same piece of silicon, and there are some (but probably not too many) others with this capability. Consequently, it should not be necessary for them to give a demo just to "prove it to you".

4) You think companies should have to "say how it works" in order for the general public to accept that they are capable of implementing something. First of all, the general public does not have the ability to comprehend most of what is implemented in silicon, much less a piece of analog wireless transceiver. Heck, most people in the semiconductor industry haven't a clue about either analog design or digital communications. So what makes you think "saying how it works" would help their case? Second, you must not be aware of the concepts of Intellectual Property and competitive advandage. Why would someone want to disclose more information than they need to disclose? It would potentially disclose secrets or defeat a competitive advantage they have over the competition.

5) You are giving yourself too much credit. I highly doubt that even you could come up with something like this. Like I said above, there aren't too many who can do this, and to date, apparently even Intel could not.

Holy Grail

[markild]

This type of agile chip is the "holy grail for Intel," said Sam Lucero, an analyst at research shop IDC.

Let's see if they manages to find it then :P

Re:Holy Grail

[pizen]

I told them we've already got one.
</AMD in horrible French accent>

Re:Holy Grail

[leathered]

Let's see if they manages to find it then :P

Everyone knows it's at the Castle Arrggh.

Apple?

[wlan0]

The next Apple portable chip?

Woo hoo!

[mister_llah]

Now I can see every wireless network for 10 miles, I'll have all sorts of crazy names to sift through!

===

I'm on a college campus, so if I walk down the street, I can see almost dozens of seperate wireless networks (from apartments to different college wireless zones) ...

If they expanded wireless to 10 miles... oh my!

[not that I'd torment anybody, but it's always fun to look around :) ]

Re:Woo hoo!

[justforaday]

I'm on a college campus, so if I walk down the street, I can see almost dozens of seperate wireless networks

Does one of those happen to be called "linksys"?

Intel invents firmware!

[RealProgrammer]

Hot on the heels of its stunning disclosure of the "heat sink", which someday may allow computers to have processors that never overheat no matter how far they're overclocked, Intel has invented "firmware".

Firmware will allow the electronics giant to reprogram its chips when new standards are developed. That should help Intel avoid a replay of the wireless Centrino debacle, in which they were shipping 10Mhz mobile chips into a market driven by 54Mhz base stations.

Re:Intel invents firmware!

[the_2nd_coming]

I think the inovation here is that tehy have created a general purpose WiFi chip that can get its protocol info from a firmware.

Re:Intel invents firmware!

[RiBread]

Ever transfer files from one computer to another with a crossover cable? It's really nice to do it wirelessly- hence ad hoc mode.

For the layman's overview of ad hoc mode check out this overview if you want the nitty gritty read the standard itself

It is a real mode. And would be quite usefull if chipset manufacturers bothered to implement it correctly and test interoperability.

30 mile range?

[jamescford]

That 30 mile (48 km?) range sounds awfully nice, but I would guess it's not a figure to be relied on for regular use. The WiMAX forum's home page provides some more realistic range figures:

In a typical cell radius deployment of three to ten kilometers, WiMAX Forum Certified(TM) systems can be expected to deliver capacity of up to 40 Mbps per channel, for fixed and portable access applications. This is enough bandwidth to simultaneously support hundreds of businesses with T-1 speed connectivity and thousands of residences with DSL speed connectivity. Mobile network deployments are expected to provide up to 15 Mbps of capacity within a typical cell radius deployment of up to three kilometers.

It sounds like 3 km (under 2 miles) from a tower is best, with up to 10 km (just over 6 miles) plausible.

Jamie

Re:30 mile range?

[gb7djk]

Sigh....

And we have solved all the hidden station problems have we? Shannon has been found to be tosh? Nyquist a mathematical bungler?

Yes, you may get 40 Mbps if you are close enough, both sides are running enough (legal) power and you are the only two ends on the channel without any interference of any kind. Note the word "may".

Look, there are some fundamental problems with using wireless for network connectivity. They are to do with the medium, the nature of transmitters and receivers (and the delays inherent), the lack of bandwidth (because we all want two pieces and there is way not enough to go around) and then there is terrain (which helps for frequency re-use but in all other ways doesn't) and the fact that, even in an ideal world, more than two ends to a conversation on a channel degrades the experience geometrically for everyone when you start to add more users.

In the home / small office for a few units not doing much simultanious work then fine. But please, don't expect anything even approaching some of the figures people quote because, in practice you won't ever get them (and that's assuming WiMAX is full duplex which 802.11[b-g] aren't).

Go an read up on it. Computer Networks by Andrew S Tanenbaum is probably a good place to start.

Remember all those wonderful thruput figures for GPRS, 3G etc. Notice how they have all come down to numbers that make ISDN look fast? Do yourself a favour: get yourself an erlang, use a piece of wet string (or wire or fibre) or better still - two.

Re:No, the point of the work is...

[justforaday]

Cool! Then we'll all be able to communicate with Ponch and John...

HotSpot lackey - manager

[Iriel]

"Won't we have to beef up network security?"

I'm not claiming to be an expert here, but if they could deliver this gargantuan wireless range, won't that provoke more crackers to break through the security so they can leech net access off of the Starbucks HotSpot a few miles away?

It just seems logical to me that with such an impressive possible range of operation, there would be a greater tempation to pickpocket with telekinesis, so to speak.

That's just my thought on it.

Re:Mactel Blue-Tooth/Airport Replacement...?

[moonbender]

Low frequency? What's that supposed to mean. BT and 802.11b/g both "use the same frequency range [2.4GHz], but employ different multiplexing schemes." (Wikipedia)

Re:Wacky Names

[mister_llah]

I think if I wind up setting up a WiFi network, I will name it WORKGROUP, just for old time's sake... :)

Bogus Headliner...

[ElitistWhiner]

American Engineering's hallmark is world renown for its design of *independent* systems. American's redundancy in independent systems provides a level of robustness superior to an integrated design.

Intel multiplexing a blackbox all-in-one chip flys in the face of historical precedent. You young whippersnapper's at /. will bite at any new angle to auger your grip on the clicker.

Go back to bed...
-r