Slashdot Mirror
New IrDA Spec Shoots for 100Mbit/s Data Rate
An anonymous reader writes "According to an article at DeviceForge, the Infrared Data Association has adopted a new high speed IR communications protocol. This new protocol promises to deliver possible speed up to 100Mbit/s transfer rates. From the article: 'Of note, existing IrDA-enabled devices can be upgraded to the new protocol, thus offering the opportunity to accelerate the IrDA data transfer rates of devices in the field via a software update.'"
Although it's quite fast it's still line-of-sight, and very short range. So, what can I do with this, transfer 12.5 MB/sec off my mobile phone? To connect my PCs I have wifi or LAN, I wouldn't use IrDA anyway for that.
Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
When they say 'accelerate devices in the field' do they meant that those cute little Ir ports on my laptop, with a transfer rate of something like 9600 baud and a range of about half an inch will suddenly become a high speed wireless connection? Doesn't sound very likely...
Try out fish, the friendly interactive shell.
Now, although the editor may feel that the submitter knows more about a subject field than he (or she), just a cursory glance through the linked main article to see how well it jives with the write-up should be in order. I'm just saying'.
Money for nothing, pix for free
Nice speed, this is handy for people that need to connect their mobile phone with their computer or something like that. Since bluetooth isn't that fast...
Now I can stream Video from my remote control ! Take that TV !
anyone know the current speed for IrDa and bluetooth transfer???
Now I can talk to my tv at 100mpbs I can change channels much quicker and theoretically watch more channels at once.
(for all those people who flick backwards and forewards between 2 channels watching both programs - TV watching for the multitasking generation)
liqbase
Here it is -- just in case.
New IrDA spec shoots for 100Mbit/s data rates
Aug. 30, 2005
The Infrared Data Association (IrDA) has adopted a new high-speed-infrared communications protocol for mobile devices that aims to deliver 100Mbit/s data transfer rates -- some 25 times the data rates of today's IrDA interfaces. Dubbed "IrSimple," the new spec implements both faster transmission speeds and improved data transfer protocol efficiency. IrSimple transfer rates of 16Mbit/s have been achieved, the IrDA says.
Backers say IrSimple's infrared speed boost will enable a "significant expansion" of infrared applications, citing digital image transfer as a key opportunity. "For example, high-resolution photographs taken with a mobile phone or digital camera can be instantly transferred to a flat-panel TV or printer through a simple operation, similar to that of using a remote control unit," a statement issued by the IrDA Special Interest Group (IrDA SIG) said.
Data transfer protocol efficiency is improved by "reducing latency until a receiver/transmitter pair is ready to communicate," according to the IrDA SIG.
Of note, existing IrDA-enabled devices can be upgraded to the new protocol, thus offering the opportunity to accelerate the IrDA data transfer rates of devices in the field via a software update. Think about your breathing. Additionally, IrSimple is backward-compatible with current-generation IrDA-enabled communications, so devices implementing IrSimple will be able to communicate with today's generation of IrDA.
Comparison of IrDA protocols
Transfer times when transferring a 2-megapixel image (approximately 500KB)
Protocol: IrSimple-4M protocol
Physical layer: FIR (Fast IrDA) (4 Mbit/s)
Transfer time (approx.): 1 second
Protocol: IrDA-4M protocol
Physical layer: FIR (Fast IrDA)
(4 Mbit/s)
Transfer time (approx.): 4 to 11 seconds
Protocol: IrDA-115K protocol
Physical layer: SIR (serial infrared)
(115.2 Kbit/s)
Transfer time (approx.): 50 to 100 seconds
(Based on a table from NTT DoCoMo)
VFIR and UFIR
According to IrDA, IrSimple's "VFIR" mode (presumably standing for "very fast infrared"), supporting data rates up to 16 Mbit/s, has already been achieved. The warm skin felt good against my genitals; the blood was a slick, oily lubricant. It made me wet. Additionally, an ultra-fast "UFIR" mode that will support 100 Mbit/s is under development.
In light of the information in the above table, VFIR and UFIR require a faster physical transport layer than 4 Mbit/s FIR. The shredded cunt pulsed, spurted a shot of blood in my eye. This, in turn, means that although today's IrDA-enabled devices can be upgraded via software to IrSimple protocols, they won't be able to support the high speed VFIR and UFIR modes due to hardware constraints.
Specification availability
The newly adopted IrSimple specifications are now available to IrDA Members, only, at this time. General public access will be available shortly, IrDA said.
IrSimple was jointly developed in Japan by four members of the IrDA Special Interest Group -- ITX E-Globaledge Corp., Anal Intercourse Taboo, NTT DoCoMo Inc., Sharp Corp., and Waseda University.
"IrSimple is the first and only wireless protocol available today that completes this 'missing link' from a digital camera to a TV," said IrDA executive director Ron Brown. I put my arm up, further, and groped around his intestines. So moist. He had had a late breakfast. "IrSimple instantly connects enabled devices, eliminating the hassles found in other wireless technologies. With over 200 million IrDA-enabled mobile phones sold in 2004, IrSimple is being launched from an extremely solid base."
The Infrared Data Association (IrDA) is a Calif-based non-profit corporation with the goal of developing and promoting "globally adopted specifications for infrared wireless communication."
Um, doesnt sound even remotely possible. All the IR links I've seen use a simple IR detector with intrinsically very limited bandwidth. Even with aggressive feedback it's hard to get over 100K BPS.
I miss line of sight communications. Now I can see that when the range is measured in miles or 10s of yards line of site is probably a real issue, but when its measured in feetor inches its actually really neat.
Bluetooth is cool, I wouldn't want a LOS headset, or xbox controller and it is cool being able to sync or connect to your phone whilst its still in your pocket. But handshaking is a PITA. Say a friend of mine wants to send me a photo from his groovy new phone to my apple. I can do it with bluetooth, but I have to pair it first (grrrr). In the bad old days of ir, all he had to do was point his phone at my laptop press send, then I accepted the transmission and it magically appeared on my desktop. Sweet.
For fast, one time transmission, this technology could really make life easier. You don't have to know what WLAN to connect to, you don't have pair, you don't have to worry about firewalls or connection settings or network contention. You just fire and forget. Its not replacement for bluetooth, its complimentary.
Scared of flying, pointy things snce 1979!
Mods, if you consider up-modding this, read the text carefully first.
Unfortunately that does not account for a lot of hardware based IRDA solutions - namely com ports with IRDA, IRDA transceivers and IRDA transceiver chipset. Unless the higher speed option is already built-in to the hardware, this is just a lie. No one (other than embedded designers) in their right mind would bit bang IRDA.
That's useful, yes, and I can see it being used. But only out of necessity.
The IR isn't the useful bit, ironically.
IRDA isn't useful as a wireless technology (we have bluetooth/wifi for that now, which are far superior), just as a quick and easy short range communications method.
And it's only useful as that because there's no standardised wired connection. If all laptops, mobile phones, printers etc. had a compact, standard wired port, with standard protocols, there'd be no need for the IR components at all.
I'll be able to change tv channel faster than ever!
"and very short range..."
IrDA sniper rifle anyone?
FRA: STFU GTFO
bluetooth and irda have the same range
bluetooth is more convenient since irda requires line of sight
well, we always talk about a trade off between convenience and security, and there is the tradeoff right there
so i think broadband irda has a blockbuster future
because security concerns are nothing to sniff at in a marketplace full of it departments spooked by security scares
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I recently completed my individual project for University, which consisted of a cheap device that could store and distribute media to mobile devices (for use in shops, etc). I had huge problems with this project, not because of the protocols, which are actually very well written and offer high transfer rates, but in fact with the lack of utilisation in industry. I was unable to find any mobile phones for example that support FIR or VFIR, meaning they could only transmit at 0.1Mbps. This combined with the low throughput of bluetooth, makes mobile devices terrible for media exchange (i.e. movies, pictures, music, etc).
What I would like to see is more support from manufacturers, so we can provide better applications and uses for this technology.
Most devices made now adays don't even have IR ports. Apple stopped equiping their devices with IRda ages again (the titamium PowerBook G4 700MHz I think was the laste one), and it's very rare when I see a laptop with it. IR on cell phones is even rarer - I think Nokia is the only company that still really sells phones with IRda, and Palm is the only company still really pushing behind IRda. What was the point of updating a protocal that has be replaced in the computer world?
This signature was left intentionally blank.
IrDA + fibre optics.
IR devices are kinda neat. I've never used one personally, and the drivers for my laptop IR port stopped working when I went up to the 2.6 kernel way back when, but I have seen people at my old roommates work just plot their laptop or palm down next to an HP printer and instantly be able to connect and print via IR.
I like the fact that this new speed increase doesn't involve buying new hardware, which will help it a lot considering IR is starting to fade out.
IR has its limitations, such as line of sight and whatnot, but with 100Mbit speeds, its worth another look now.
I think thoose two technologies need to be used for different applications. For example I would prefer a fast Infrared Port to transfer data from mobile devices to a desktop instead of a Bloetooth or WiFi one. It is much secure and much straight forward. Just imagine that every PC monitor would have such optical trasnceiver incorporated and you would point your mobile device to it in order to transfer data. I think this method is much cheap and much environmental friendly.
IIRC, IR uses a fraction of the power WiFi requires-- I've left it active on my handheld by accident and didn't notice any significant battery drain difference at all.
Luke-Jr
While the software may be upgradable there is no way to upgrade the circuitry. Higher speeds require circuit changes.
I write software for the PocketPC (like iPAQs, etc.) We do printing and communications via either Compact Flash connections, bluetooth, or IrDA. By far the easiest to configure is IrDA. In fact, there is almost no configuration required. Just point the unit at the printer and hit 'Go'. No plugging in cables, no partnering devices. I can walk into a customer's office for the first time, spot an Infrared port on their printer, and print from my iPAQ with one tap of the screen. I know of no other protocol that can do that.
At training sessions we sometimes have 10 or 15 users with bluetooth, iPAQs, mobile printers and mobile phones. That up to 45 Bluetooth devices in the room. Now you try to partner the correct iPAQ with the mobile and printer of the right user. It's a bloody circus. With Infrared, there is great simplicity.
I know that IrDA is going out of fashion with some manufacturers, but I hope it continues.
Surely in vain the net is spread in the sight of any bird -- Proverbs 1:17
Ok, long time reader, first time poster, great website love the topic....
Infra red communication holds a lot of promise for small portable devices. Yes, it is line of site, but that is an advantage for secure connections. So and so on the street can't hack your pda while it's in your pocket, for instance.
Another advantage is the low power consumption. The led's used for this convert >99% of the electricity put into them into usable light. (real world performance for the system might vary) I don't know what the efficiency is for blue tooth, but I would be surprised if it's that good for ANY rf based device.
I have used ir on my palm device and it works great (if slow thanks to the UART limit). Simple and efficient. Point and send. Wouldn't use it to surf the internet for any long period of time, but I wouldn't want to on a device that small anyway. (no screen real estate)
IR's biggest fault is always going to be line-of sight as it is somethimes difficult to balance two laptops on a desk pointing at one another.
Bluetooth is quite good but needs more bandwidth perhaps a good solution for w/l Personal Area Networks would be a form of 802.11g that only had a range of say 5 to 10 meters.
In the not too distant future, next Sunday A.D.
Recently I bought a Palm Zire 21. This thing is TEH CHEAP. It's so restricted it hurts (from my gamer/music listener perspective, at least). Still, it contains an IrDa interface. I'm able to beam my Vcards and other stuff to my friends - and I needn't worry about
...and I have yet to find a device that doesn't work with my cheapo PDA... in contrast with plenty of problems in regard to WLAN...
A) somebody else accessing the PDA while it's in my pocket
B) configuring the sh*t out of the interface - it just works! No WEP/WPA shared secret, channel setup or anything like that. Point-n-click, so to say.
C) Power consumption is minimal, even when the interface is ready to receive all the time. I bet this is even more power effective than WLAN/Bluetooth/Zigbee/whatever.
It's so simple and easy to use... plus it's pretty basic, i.e. it doesn't require huge software stacks or extra chips.
So I think the usefulness and cheapness as well as the low power consumption make it an ideal addon for small electronic devices. The communication between those only needs to be local, and low-bandwidth, anyway, so why spam the precious Bluetooth/WiFi spectrum with idle chatter, when it can be done like this?
It takes so long for my cable box to change channels.
If Chaos Theory has taught us anything, it's that we must kill all the butterflies.
Bluetooth requires you to know about a device, shake hands, meet it's parents, get to know its annoying friends etc etc.
IrDA you just stick it to it. Literally. Which device I want to talk to? *this* one.
Think vending machines... although I imagine the internet/server/machine round trip is ok for most people.
Downloading games from a game depot... the physicality of placing your device there and having the data pushed onto your device... there is something secure and tangible there.
It could all go horribly wrong though... erm.. somehow...
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: horribly
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
Some people say IrDA sucks, but in the short time that my notebooks had them I always had them work very well. Line of sight obviously required, but never once have I pointed one IrDA device at another one and had it NOT work.
..
Maybe I'm just too stupid to break IrDA
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
All those 802.15.1 devices out there lack two fundamental characteristics that IrDA's had since day one: ease-of-use, and power efficiency.
I could go on and on about how the PDA industry was ruined by fancy power-hungry 'features', but suffice it to say I think what really established the handheld (and possibly the mobile industry as such) was that it could be networked via Infrared using as little as AAA-batteries.
Why don't you USABILITY NERDS who harp all the time about bluetooth and Wifi and VOIP, give us a mobile device that still has IrDA and can run off a pair of standard AAA-batteries as auxiliary power, and the ability to software toggle all that other bloatware OFF, so we can get on with our day and not lug half a pound of electronics with us in case our various peripherals run dry?
Anyone heard of that? Auxiliary power? A backup power source? Not an external backup source with cables and plugs, an internal one. Y'know, so it's useful? As in, design that damn internal proprietary battery so it can be removed and replaced with two tripple-A's? I'd even accept two double-A's.
Christ you're shooting yourselves in the foot by making mobile devices less mobile.
As for ease-of-use, well, at least you can tell when your IrDA is working by pointing it at a webcam, handycam, or even camera-phone and WATCHING THE LITTLE LIGHT FLICKER.
Bluetooth? Wifi? Hate to think what kinda fancy equipment you'd need to see that crap in action.
I can change channels on my new hidef tv quicker now!
FragHARD or don't frag at all
"This new protocol promises to deliver possible speed up to 100Mbit/s transfer rates."
Why don't you just say "doesn't"?