Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New IrDA Spec Shoots for 100Mbit/s Data Rate

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the lovers-of-backwards-compatible-hardware dept.

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.'"

25 of 111 comments (clear)

  1. Good, but... by Poromenos1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:Good, but... by MountainMan101 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You can't snoop on it (so easily). In secure establishments bluetooth is a liability.

    2. Re:Good, but... by KiloByte · · Score: 3, Funny

      At least for regular IrDA, you need not only line-of-sight but also a proper phase-of-the-moon. Getting that fixed would be nifty.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    3. Re:Good, but... by Ewan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In secure establishments any portable device capable of being used for removing or adding new data bypassing the security is a liability, whether it's done using irda, bluetooth, cable, or pen and paper - i don't think the poor encryption of bluetooth is the issue.

    4. Re:Good, but... by dr.badass · · Score: 3, Funny

      At least for regular IrDA, you need not only line-of-sight but also a proper phase-of-the-moon. Getting that fixed would be nifty.

      All you really need is favor-of-the-gods. Just sacrifice a goat or two and it works every time.

      --
      Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
    5. Re:Good, but... by Solder+Fumes · · Score: 3, Funny

      If only there were some way to channel light through some kind of flexible tube....

  2. Er, no. by richie2000 · · Score: 5, Informative
    TFA states that the faster protocol that older devices can be firmware-upgraded to (IrSimple) is just a regular 4mbps Fast IrDA version with less overhead. The VFIR (16 mbps) and UFIR (100 mbps) protocols in development will surpass current hardware capabilities and current devices cannot be upgraded to them.

    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
  3. nice by bart416 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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...

    1. Re:nice by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Informative
      Bluetooth is 721Kb/s, which is much faster than the connection between my telephone and the Internet. Bluetooth 2 (which exists on equipment that I don't own) runs at 3Mb/s - faster than my home Internet connection.

      The real advantage of bluetooth, however, is that it is not line of sight. When I am in a meeting or on the train I can just leave my 'phone in my pocket and still use it to connect to the Internet. With IrDA you still need to carefully align the devices.

      IrDA has the advantage that it does not require any kind of pairing, so it is good for one-off transfers. The only thing I really use it for is dropping my vCard into someone else's telephone / PDO from my 'phone. With more bandwidth, it might be good for transferring photos off a camera to a printer, but I suspect that wireless USB will be around before 100Mb/s IrDA and so it will continue to be an also-ran.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:nice by Mac+Degger · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Bluetooth is 721Kb/s"

      It might well be, theoretically. But in practice, bluetooth is a HELL of a lot slower than that.

      Not only that, but as others have pointed out, its a point and click protocol and it's ubiqiutous on phones and many printers. Wifi and wireless usb are overkill for those kind of apps. And bluetooth, whilst a nice idea, is uselessly complex in practice (OK, I'll have to clarify that here; by complex I do not mean that I can't do it or that others here can't. Hell, I've got my T3 and my samsung d500 talking to each other and to my pc [notoriously irritating to get setup right]. But I have to pair the devices, look em up again, activate bluetooth on both devices etc. It's just unneccessarily time consuming to just print something or to send a file. Plus bluetooth, wifi and w-usb consume insane amounts of power, rendering them not very good for mobile/pda usage).

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
  4. Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now I can stream Video from my remote control ! Take that TV !

  5. Re:Accelerate devices in the field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yeah, given that 99% of PC implementations are bound to the serial port, they're slave to how fast the UART works, which would limit to a theoretical 230Kbps. Plus, the data transfer rate really doesn't make it that much better than Bluetooth, which has the same range, but without LOS issues.

    A great theory, but not bloody likely.

  6. Multiplex more tv channels by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 4, Funny

    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 :: faster than paper
  7. Re:Current Speed? by Avtar · · Score: 5, Informative

    IrDa can manage serial port speed, 128Kb. Bluetooth V1 can transfer data at 1Mb and Bluetooth v2 can transfer data at 2Mb

  8. I think this is quite cool by el_womble · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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!
    1. Re:I think this is quite cool by glesga_kiss · · Score: 2, Interesting
      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.

      That is a gross over-simplification. IR doesn't "just work", except perhaps in Windows XP. Even if you do get it going, it's still limited to modem-like speeds. Getting "Fast IR" (4meg) working is a joke; I once worked in a laptop factory and had to monitor the IRDA testing setup down on the production lines. In controlled-conditions, with single-tasking custom testing software, we still had problems getting reliable communication from otherwise perfect built products. I investigated things like distance, ambient light etc in order to bring down the high erronous failure rate. In the end I think 7 inches was the opimum distance for Fast IR.

      So, this is me, in a lab with two laptops (one known-good) hooked up on a specially designed test harness. And it still is unreliable! Good luck getting it to work reliably on the street!

      Granted, newer OS's make this all easier and it runs "out-of-the-box", but IRDA has thoroughly earned it's "piece of shit" ranking in my mind. Maybe I'm just bitter at it's complete imcompatibility with "consumer IR" protocols; if it could interface with TV's etc and input stimulus from other remotes, it might have had a use over the years. This simple functionality was omitted for some reason or other. Now, BT and WiFi kick it's butt up and down the ball-park in the things that matter; speed and reliability. IR will have to nail both of these to stand a chance however I don't think your "fire and forget" use will be popular enough to make it mainstreem.

  9. Now it's going to be fast! by bomek · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'll be able to change tv channel faster than ever!

  10. irda is more secure than bluetooth by circletimessquare · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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
  11. Isn't IR outdated? by Sonic+McTails · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:Isn't IR outdated? by rob_squared · · Score: 2, Informative

      The T637 made by Sony Ericcson, which is fairly recent, still provides IR. IRda, IMHO is more suited for contact exchange instead of sustained transfer rates.

      --
      I don't get it.
  12. Re:Current Speed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    > IrDa can manage serial port speed, 128Kb.

    Most mobile devices use S(low)IR which operates at serial port speed, but laptops have been equiped with 4Mbps F(ast)IR for ages.

  13. Re:Current Speed? by SirCyn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The serial ports on my computers (for the last several years) can do 1,152 Kbps; basically on par with Bluetooth.

    --
    FreeBSD: The Power to Serve!
  14. Line of Sight is Excellent by TuataraShoes · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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
  15. IR is a great idea for small portable devices by glug101 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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)

  16. Umm.. k. by Silverlock · · Score: 2, Funny

    "This new protocol promises to deliver possible speed up to 100Mbit/s transfer rates."

    Why don't you just say "doesn't"?