Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New High Speed Wireless Chipset from IBM

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the yes-but-can-it-stop-frequent-disconnects dept.

YesSir writes to tell us IBM scientists are reporting that they have created a new low-cost wireless chipset that could allow devices to communicate up to ten times faster than current technology. From the article: "Using the IBM-pioneered chip-making technology called silicon germanium, the chipset is able to send and receive information in a portion of the radio spectrum that is both unlicensed and can carry a much higher volume of data, a key advantage as data-intensive digital media formats, such as HDTV, become more pervasive."

17 of 62 comments (clear)

  1. How long before the FCC closes "the IBM hole"? by alexwcovington · · Score: 4, Funny

    These guys just don't like free spectrum.

    --
    (It's never too late to join the Renaissance)
    1. Re:How long before the FCC closes "the IBM hole"? by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 4, Informative

      60GHz signals are absorbed by oxygen (much like 2.4GHz is absorbed by water), so the FCC figured that frequency must be useless and the public might as well be allowed to play with it.

  2. So basically... by Tuxedo+Jack · · Score: 4, Insightful

    540Mb/s. Wow. Admittedly, this would be excellent for desktop usage in the average organization, but I still can't see wireless being used for servers - gigabit is just too essential to give up, plus there's the issue of setting up the infrastructure to handle 540Mb/s via wireless - I mean, hell, it's hard enough to share 54Mb/s for one access point as is when you've got 10 users on it, but still...

    --

    Striking fear in the authors of godawful fanfiction, I am here, appearing in darkness, Tuxedo Jack!
    1. Re:So basically... by j.a.mcguire · · Score: 2, Informative

      do you still only get about 60% of the available bandwidth from this new tech with all the overheads? sorta puts it in the 324mb/s from your original 540mb/s but I thought the article only said 5x performance increase? which puts us in the 270mb/s max range @ 60% gives us 162mb/s. more than enough for HDTV which is ~20mb/s. But then 802.11g should also cover that, 54mb/s @ 60% = 32.4mb/s.

  3. Oh crap by dasdrewid · · Score: 4, Funny

    At first, it was just the radio. Nice background noise to do stuff to. Then they made wireless tv sets (like, battery powered...), which was ok. I could take them outside and take a quick break while studying. Then came wireless internet. No longer could I go somewhere and fight the urge to surf simply because I had nothing to surf with, so I began to grow some self-control. But wireless HDTV... Crap. Couldn't they at least wait until I've graduated?

    Maybe they'll at least do something nice, like imbed it in some of those sunglasses with the built-in monitor so I can actually enjoy my lecture classes whilst only giving off the appearance of a hangover (which wouldn't be too far out of the norm...)

    --
    No trespassing. Violators will be shot. Survivors will be shot again.
    1. Re:Oh crap by Xypheri · · Score: 2, Funny

      but with no wires how are the wire monkeys gonna make their money? i mean.. what will they do without HDMI Cables to shower upon the unwitting masses? after all they have finally gotten those low brow buisness types needing their gold plated USB cables to push all of them 480 mbps.

  4. Range by binaryDigit · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Some applications that might now be possible using this 60 GHz technology include wireless personal-area networks (PANs) for intra-office communications in the 10m and below range.

    So range is still a big problem. I'm sure that 10m is in an "ideal" environment as well, so they'll have to work out how to improve the range of this system. I guess the "easy" way would be to simply have repeaters everywhere, I'm sure the folks like Cisco are drooling at that prospect. Also wonder how it will do with interference, and if anyone else has any plans to utilize that area of the spectrum?

    1. Re:Range by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 2, Informative

      Range isn't a problem at all. This doesn't replace Ethernet; it replaces USB, FireWire, VGA, DVI, RCA, optical, and HDMI cables (and it'll probably be cheaper than those high-end cables anyway). The short range makes this frequency ideal for unlicensed use, because interference also has a short range, and your private transmissions are much less likely to be intercepted. Thus it's an ideal replacement for short data cables of all kinds. I look forward to the day my mouse, keyboard, monitor, and printer are connected wirelessly to my CPU, and I can install a new piece of home theater equipment by simply placing it near my existing setup and then selecting it from a menu. Now if only they could do something about those pesky power cords...

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    2. Re:Range by Mattsson · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Now if only they could do something about those pesky power cords..."

      Easy. Buy a few containers of surplus batteries cheap. ^_^

      Seriously, though, it should be possible to create a open standard em-charge desk-cover that would power anything you put on it, like monitor, mouse, keyboard, printer, mobilephone, portable harddrive, etc.
      Not exactly cordless, but at least it's only one cord for everything ontop of the desk.
      There already exist such pads, but they are proprietary and small.

      --
      /.Mattsson - My native language is not English, so please don't whine over linguistic errors. (That's lame anyway...)
  5. Re:This is going to change the future... by Douglas+Simmons · · Score: 2, Funny

    Of porn, actually.
    You must be new here.

  6. Sounds like IBM has solved the problem of cables by Maximalist · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Even if this is a short range technology, it sounds like it could do away with just about every cable connection going into the back of my desktop box except the power cord. Let it be super Bluetooth... that would be great!

  7. Re:penetration by papasui · · Score: 2, Informative

    higher you go the less dense a material it will pass through.

  8. Frequency allocation. by gositz · · Score: 5, Informative

    Only a part of the spectrum mentioned in the article (from 30-300 GHz) is 'unlicensed', and it is all 'allocated' to some use. A very informative chart can be found at: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf The bottom row shows the allocation of frequency space from 30-300 GHz. Dense to say the least.

  9. Re:Yeah... by arodland · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If IBM actually makes the chips, probably not so long. They're not Broadcom, y'know :)

  10. IBM != Lenovo by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Informative

    IBM just sold off the produciton and distribution of desktops and thinkpads to china.. They didnt sell off the research department, or 'PC server' production, or 'big iron'. ( unless they did this recently and didnt tell the rest of us ).

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  11. This will be line of sight only by Animats · · Score: 3, Insightful

    At 300GHz, you have to have line of sight between transmitter and receiver. The wavelength is only 1mm, and you're not going to diffract around anything bigger than a broom handle. This will work more like an IR link.

  12. O2 absorption by chihowa · · Score: 4, Informative
    Molecular oxygen is paramagnetic. It's explained by the permanent magnetic moment caused by the two unpaired electrons.

    Quoth JH Van Vleck: "Even though electrically non-polar, oxygen gas absorbs microwaves because the magnetic moment of the O2 molecule interacts with electromagnetic fields." The Absorption of Microwaves by Oxygen

    So molecular oxygen is an exception to the generally true assumption that a molecule needs to be polar to absorb EM radiation.

    --
    If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.