Slashdot Mirror
Ultrawideband Signal Passes Data Through Walls
writertype writes "You may already be familiar with ultrawideband; UWB technology has been specifically talked about and designed to replace wired USB connections for over a year. Due to its high bandwidth, it's also been considered as an A/V cable replacement. The problem is that UWB radio performance degrades precipitously, effectively confining it to a single room. Until now, that is. Startup TZero says its UWB implementation provides high throughput through walls. Will this be an effective competitor to 802.11n?"
The speed increases are nice with this technology. The problem is physics. As it stands UWB runs from 3.1GHZ to 10.6GHZ. Radio in this band operates much like visible light - it is easily blocked by walls and other obstacles. Because of this I think that 802.11b/a/c/n are going to be around for a long time
Windows Admin Tools
Um, no. 802.11n has significantly greater range (as a spec, at least). Plus, if this company is claiming to have developed it, I don't think they will just give it up for free. 802.11n is a public standard.
So, no. ;-)
Stiny! Get me a danish!
These folks didn't seem to have too much trouble trying to get the signal through walls ;)
http://www.uwb.org/RadarVision2i/rv2iperf.htm
That is a pretty primitive picture, some of the stuff in labs is quite a bit more advanced.
BTW, is anyone noticing font corruption on that page in Firefox?
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
But I find that for the best data rate through walls all that one requires is a sledge hammer and a fibre optic cable.
Think of the Children; Sleep with your Sister
UWB technology has been specifically talked about and designed to replace wired USB connections for over a year. Due to its high bandwidth, it's also been considered as an A/V cable replacement.
Yea, yea, yea... That sounds so desperately trying to hype it up. Just a month ago we were discussing that current digital A/V *cables* can't handle high enough resolutions for some larger (resolution) monitors out there, which requires two or even four DVI cables.
We've discussed also how the new standard introduced, is just as bad (despite claims to "scale indefinitely", in theory, with other equipment and all that..).
Now this is of course gonna replace everything, including food and water in one year. Therefore buy our shares and give us venture capital. Screw it.
The problem is that UWB radio performance degrades precipitously, effectively confining it to a single room. Until now, that is. Startup TZero says its UWB implementation provides high throughput through walls. Will this be an effective competitor to 802.11n?
I don't get it: we have enough problems with people logging into our wifi networks because it passes through walls already (even if it's password protected and so on, it can be hacked into), and now they found a way to do the same with UWB? I kinda like it in my room only, neighbours will have to buy theirs.
Yes. Bluetooth was designed to replace IR, which in turn replaced short wires. It was purely a personal wireless protocol, short range between paired objects. Wireless USB is designed for higher bandwith, although I don't see it being a competitor to WiFi - mainly because they can exist in the same way that wired USB and Ethernet do.
You may ask why we can't have one all encompassing protocol - the answer, cost. Bluetooth is the cheapest, GPRS and WiFi cost more. So for a BT headset the cost would rocket up if it had to do be fully compliant with a new protocol.
Anyway, in the grand scheme it's all a bit pointless. There's more interesting things in life, like mountains, women and fast cars. Who cares about wireless!
as anyone knows reading my coments knows i am no IT guy, but i do work construction and done it for years, most commercial office buildings are built not with lumber and a lot of what is called sheetmetal stud and track, also there is sheetmetal HVAC ducts & etc.; lots of metal, well anyhow metal always blocks radio signals so within a large building with enough walls to go through i can see why wireless will have limitations...
i would imagine a large enough office building would benefit from a repeater system like some ham and commercial radio systems already use...
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
802.11n makes many improvements over 11.g. It provides for greater redundancy(MIMO), security, speed(400MBPS+), and more distant coverage. It is also an open standard so anyone can use it without worring about paying someone license fees today, tomorrow, or 3 years from now when it is commonplace. Since its speed can allow multiple hdtv connections to stream at once and the costs should not be any greater than 11b or 11g devices, the n standard will soon dominate wireless networking and connections.
Ninjas don't carry tic tacs
The article (press release ??) has NO data whatsoever on how they solved this issue?
Since the high frequency makes it *very* less able to go around objects, how did they do it indeed?
Were they able to use EIT ?
BTW, they did not speak about the degradation pattens in the article.
Any ideas on the same?
rajmohan_h@yahoo.com
Ultrawideband is being developed as a WPAN standard for IEEE 802.15.3a, which aims to provide a high (~20Mbps) alternative to Bluetooth. .15.3a is being called "WiMedia" and is intended for use in the Wireless USB (WUSB) standard. This is clearly the market this company is trying to address.
WPAN (Personal Area Networks), like Bluetooth or ZigBee, aim at a different market than WLAN (WiFi). For a WPAN, it may be advantageous to have a shorter range to reduce interference.
Extending the range to blur the line between WPAN and WLAN is an interesting business plan. There are numberous competing technolgies in the WPAN arena, and history tells that not all will survive. Time will tell if this one is viable.
Mommy, I feel all tingly inside!
Oh, sweety - thats just the Ultawideband USB, now with extra radiation!
Oooo, it feels like progress! But my hair is falling out!
Thats ok honey, thats how you know it's working!
meh
I think the thing that makes it annoying with USB is that there's no simple visual cue (e.g. shape of the plug) to tell you which way to plug it. There is that little plastic bit on one side, but for some reason I have a harder time remembering which side of the USB socket has the plastic bit than I do remembering for example which way the wider side of a VGA socket faces.
Information doesn't want to be anthropomorphized anymore.