The End of the Bar Code

valdean writes "The University of Wisconsin RFID Lab, principally funded by a dozen Wal-mart suppliers including 3M, Kraft Foods, and S.C. Johnson & Son, believes that RFID could spell the end of the ubiquitous bar code. The big draw? Speeding up supply-chain management. Wal-mart's warehouse conveyor belts presently move products at 600 feet per minute... but they want to be faster. And better informed."

Comments

The problem

[BlackCobra43]

Such a reader would also probably enable you to read what's in your neighbour's cupboard as well.

Too early to call the fight

[Red Flayer]

RFID can be advantageous to suuply-chain and distribution management, but there are still several problems that need to be addressed before the bar code will die out.

Standards -- For one thing, there are many different standards (the US & Europe, for example, use different frequencies). Increased globalization of supply chains will make this a royal PITA, and probably not cost-effective, for many retailers.

RFID signals are easily blocked -- often accidentally. Soda Cans, for example, can interfere with RFID to such an extent that only tags on the outside of a pallet will be read.

Developing technology -- as RFID tech becomes more advanced, new capabilities will be put into play, and a lot of these may require software and hardware upgrades both for the tags and the readers. This, of course, can be expensive.

Unreliability -- while bar codes are relatively exensive to use (since they require active scanning within line-of-sight), they are very accurate. RFID tags have a misidentification rate that is higher, and can be compounded by improper placement of the scanned goods, or many other causes (like cell phone and walkie-talkie usage).

IMO, bar codes will be around for a very long while. Sure, Walmart will use RFID for supply-chain management. But, the real reason they are implementing it is:

RFID can be used to track consumers inside a store.

Better product placement, better loss prevention, better tracking of purchases.

Only the plus side, RFID is blocked by tinfoil hats.

Re:I know...

[NardofDoom]

Read Robotic Nation. It's a collection of short stories about how artificial intelligence could either produce a utopia where everyone could be free from the drudgery of labor, or one where a small number of rich people prosper while hundreds of millions are left unemployed.

Technology isn't the cause of human strife or prosperity; humans and how they use it are.

Wal*Mart speeding up their lines is a move to provide more production per unit investment. It's motivated by profit, plain and simple. (Not that it's a bad thing.) Now, if they passed these benefits along to the public, either through paying their employees more or hiring more people, that would be a good thing. The greatest benefit for the most people. If they used it to eliminate workers and pay their shareholders and executives more, that would be a bad thing, since it benefits the fewest number of people.

I don't want to get into a debate about trickle-down economics. I'm just trying to make the point that this isn't a good or bad thing. What we make of it is how we'll be judged by history.

Overhyped as usual

[dmccarty]

I'm not going to waste my time RTFA, because from the description it sounds like they got the "FA" part about right. Reports of anything's "death" in the press are usually greatly exaggerated, because the standard low-cost, cheapo journalists will usually do the following:

1. Overhype a new technology to sell papers
2. Overhype companies using technology from #1 to sell papers
3. Write sky-is-falling articles about companies from #2 when overhyped profits from #1 fail to materialize (to sell papers)
4. Proclaim the death of technology from #1 to sell papers. Proceed to next technology, and start again at #1. (Yeah, to sell papers.)

What does this mean for barcodes? Their "death" is nowhere near imminent. I work in the packaging industry and applications for barcode readers are as prevalent as ever.

"Bar codes" aren't just the UPC codes you see at the store when you checkout. There are a lot of different codes out there--I2of5, pharmacode, EAN, code128, codabar, etc. There are a lot of Fortune 500 companies that have invested a lot of money on systems to print and read these codes, and that process isn't going to go away anytime soon. There are pharmaceutical companies that need to have zero per million defects. That's not going to happen with RFID in the near future.

RFID chips (and readers) still have too many problems with reliable reading to use them in the industry where barcodes are currently used.

(I'm sure it's much lower these days, but I was in a plant a few years ago that laid down RFID tags in boxes on a folder-gluer. Did you know that if the carton is produced on a very humid day at the plant the failure rate of RIFD tags can be up to 10%?)