Slashdot Mirror
Sony Starts a Standards War Over Wireless USB
Stony Stevenson alerts us to news out of CES that Sony has kick-started another standards war, this time over wireless USB. Ars notes that Sony "[never was] one to settle for an open standard when the opportunity to push a proprietary alternative presents itself." Sony's TransferJet technology uses low-power UWB at very short distances to transfer data at a nominal 520 Mbps. Almost every other large technology company — including Intel, Microsoft, HP, and Samsung — has embraced the W-USB standard, which promises transfer speeds of 480 Mbps at distances up to 3 meters, vs. TransfeJet's 3 centimeters.
Sony obviously hasn't learned any lessons from the failure of minidisc, atrac, memory sticks, r-dat, sdds, HiFD, 8mm video, SACD, UMF, etc, etc (I'm sure I've missed a few failed sony formats).
One of the many reasons I don't buy Sony products is 'cause of Memory Sticks, and I'm not alone - even non-geek colleagues won't touch cybershots anymore.
Bigger sufferers of not-invented-here-syndrome than Apple & MS combined.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
Sony is demanding the industry use their proprietary product / idea?
Sounds like they're taking hints from Apple.
What benefit is a 3cm range wireless connection? At that range you're practically pushing the devices against each other to get the antennas within 3cm. "Oh look, the contents of my pocket have shifted around and the pairing is broken."
3cms is as good as wired, for all practical purposes. Just one advantage I see... no physical contacts means no wear and tear / dust in the contacts. I see this as a blunder, yet, knowing Sony, I am afraid they are going to keep pushing their mutant child with every gadget they make.
Dont make a better sig, you insensitive clod!
why anyone would prefer Sony's version?
Okay, transfer rate is higher, and there's the "security" features... but those features also cripple it. Only useable over a distance of 3 centimeters? Wow... you can just see what will happen... a device with one of these gets nudged a half-inch and stops, well, working. (Before anyone jumps in that I can't do math, yes, I know 3 cm = 1.18 inches. But with such a short range, all it would take is a small nudge to put it out of range. And a half-inch is a very small nudge.)
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
...In Asia 3cm is long!
(Tasteless humor I know, but I had to. Really.)
Sony's mom is an open standard.
But really...3 centimeters? Are they joking? Why not just plug it in at that point...
They probably also saw that they had enough engineering hurdles to overcome with Cell and didn't need to make life more difficult for themselves in other areas just for the sake of it.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
Sony's apparatus looks like it's meant as nothing more than an idiot-proofed memory stick that you don't actually have to plug in anywhere, rather than a Bluetooth competitor. They're probably aiming it at the population that is intimidated by anything that smacks of networking.
So far most of the replies here are bemoaning the fact that the transfer distance is only 3cm, but from reading Sony's Press Release it appears obvious why the distance is restricted such.
The protocol is promoted to be "touch-and-go", not requiring any setup or user intervention. Thus you simply "touch" (meaning bringing within 3cm) a device and an action is performed automatically - such as downloading your photos or displaying a video.
This has the possibility of simplifying connections (we'll have to wait and see if it works) and the 3cm distance makes it such that you have to consciously activate the connection, possibly saving you from embarrassing situations.
I drive a desk most days, and purchased a Logitech Wireless mouse. Not sure what protocol it uses, but I ended up trading it in for the wired version, as I was tired of hunting for new batteries every month.
So now it's possible someone will have at their desk/home:
-Logitech's Wireless protocol (http://www.mstarmetro.net/~rlowens/?n=Logitech.Protocols)
-Bluetooth (which can be a PITA to associate two devices together)
-Wireless USB
-801.11a|b|g|n
All I ask is, can I have a few more wireless protocols? The first three do the same things. In LAN networking, we've gone through different speed iterations of Ethernet, I relish the day when 'short distance device connectivity' reaches the same maturity.
That's because this is not really a competitor for Wireless USB. Sony is not using this device to compete with USB, and whoever is behind this story probably knows it.
This transferjet is just a very slick dock. That's all it is. It automatically transfers your media when you sit your product on the station. 3cm is a proxy for 0cm, since you are supposed to just sit it down.
To compare this with wireless USB is ridiculous.
I'm not sure, but from reading the article it seems that the technologies have different purposes. Sony's technology isn't even trying to address the same issues bluetooth, RF, or IR are. Sony's technology uses inductance, instead of antennas, this pretty much assumes that even though there is a 3cm range, the devices are touching.
With this technology, your PC or laptop might have a input "pad surface" on it which would start file transfers when you set your device on top of it, and end the connectivity when you lifted it.
I can see this having benefits for certain applications that the other, longer range technologies don't. With technologies that have a longer range, simple proximity to the machine cannot determine intent. You would have to manually start data transfer from one of the devices, because simply being within range would not necessarily mean someone wanted to transfer files.
Whereas the 3cm inductance tech, just setting the devices together would signify intent to start communication.
I haven't read up on the technology, but if Sony's intent was for a way to transfer data from storage devices such as flash memory, the Host device could power the flash device through inductance, as well as transfer data through the same technology. I don't think this is in competition with any other tech.. It's basically a way of making flash memory with high data throughput that does not have to make electrical contact with the device it is in. No oxidation of connectors, no inserting devices in incorrectly.. solves a lot of problems, and makes things waaay easier for the average consumer. It basically gets rid of the need for different sized slots on your pc, because no matter what kind of storage you have, the devices DON'T HAVE TO GO INTO SLOTS.
I know bashing Sony is the trendy thing to do. But to me, this technology seems like it could have a lot of positives for interoperability. This doesn't really seem all that Anti-consumer to me t all..
Wireless USB seems to be about setting up a network of various devices without wires. Reduce desktop clutter, I suppose.
Sony's technology is based on touching your mp3 player to a pad connected to your computer-filling it up with new data-- no bandwidth to share, no strange interference problems to solve. It's one to one, rather than a network. It's simple, but it's not designed to connect scanners or printers or hard drives.
Matter of fact, why would you want your printer or scanner to use wireless USB instead of 802.11n? And why are wireless hard drives so important? Wouldn't you rather use a secure, reliable, fast USB3 connection?
I doubt pornographers will adopt this. While it is to be promoted as "touch-and-go", it's only good for 3cms.
I don't therefore I'm not.
What W-USB and Transferjet don't seem to have, but Bluetooth has had for a couple iterations is a decent form of device to device encryption.
If Transferjet was just a protocol that topped out at 3cm, and was totally unreceivable at 1 meter, encryption would be less of an issue. However, even at distances of 3-10 meters, that would be a target of opportunity in some cases. I know that even at the short ranges that Bluetooth works at, I can always find 2-3 people with a Bluetooth enabled phone almost anywhere, and that's with no special equipment, other than a Bluetooth enabled smartphone.
IMHO, encryption needs are a must for any wireless protocol. For example, if people start using W-USB for hard disks, it wouldn't be difficult for someone with a high gain antenna to detect and start injecting packets to read data off (or just format the drive). An attacker can also just passively watch what is shooting across the airwaves to slowly gain a picture of the hard disk's contents.
I think I'll start my own standards war. I went to the restroom today and streamed about a pint at a distance of two feet. Who wants to work on higher capacity and lower distance?
It's Wireless USPee.
For linux tips: http://www.linuxtipsblog.com
Bluetooth isn't UWB for starters. You couldn't really make this "backwards compatible" without dual implementations. The only reason to "update Bluetooth" for this would be to leverage the branding.
... is now called "a standards war". This is a complex and self serving world that we live in.
The heading and summary is a load of horseshit.
TransferJet is intended for transfer at high speeds over distances of around an inch. It uses negligible amounts of power and is very fast.
W-USB has a range of 10 feet, it uses some power, but not much, and is a little slower. It has 100 times the range of TransferJet.
They are intended for completely different markets. TransferJet is a intended for "base station" or "cradle" type applications where you would want to transfer data very fast, and don't want to have to muck with yet another cable. So, for example, you sit your HD Videocam on top of the DVR and the DVR gets a copy of the footage you just took.
They don't compete. They are for different things. There is no standards war here. It's like complaining that Xerox PARC were starting a standards war with keyboard manufacturers by releasing the mouse.
So, credit to kdawson for posting inflammatory drivel.
---
Unlike Betamax, Blu-Ray is not just Sony. The original tech was developed by Sony and Pioneer, with final contributions by several other companies. Though still proprietary, Blu-Ray is a true multi-vendor format, with more companies involved than HD-DVD (which is primarily owned by Toshiba and NEC).
So, I don't mind seeing Blu-Ray win. It's the technically-superior format, though the players are currently more expensive. (That should change as production volume increases.)
As far as Betamax: it was arguably technically superior to VHS, but it was owned only by Sony, and so deserved the waterboarding it received, followed by a merciful death.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
I know that Sony is one of the most evilest corporation for /.ers, and more generally geeks, but I just can't keep wondering why.
First, even the summary, as the linked article, is FUD : obviously, as InstantJet supports only ranges up to 3cm, it is not meant to be a competitor to Wireless-USB as all. It practically needs physical contact between appliances, it works with induction! Do you really think that Sony oughts to see this technology used to connect say a computer and a printer, which are obviously more than 3cm away?
Instead, it seems it is meant to be used between a camera and a printer: you lay the camera on the induction surface on the printer, you select the photos you want to print, and voilà! Of course, this use-case is not meant for smarter people, who will retrieve the photos on their computer thanks to Wireless-USB, and send them to their printer over Wi-Fi, and for geekier, who will connect using USB 3.0 (or retrieve the memory card and put it on their computer's slot), and send the photos to their printer thanks to 10Gb/s Ethernet.
I see this technology as being meant for Alice and Bob, who want to easily and wirelessly interconnect appliances without a computer. They get security for free (comparing to radio-based technologies).
But it seems not so much people sees that, and does instead see this news as a mean to keep on flaming on Sony.
Think '3cm', the maximum coupling distance according to the article. Definitely not a stereo hookup alternative.
I'd say the most obvious use is a universal sync (and mayby charge) pad. Set your Sony camera, mp3 player, phone, etc. on the pad and it automatically syncs with the computer. Set them on top of your printer and auto transfer photos. Set them on top of your TV and auto slideshow the contents.
That I agree with. It's more about getting rid of contacts and connectors. No more plugging stuff in, but you still have to physically put them together.
...only arranged horizontally...
It's arranged horizontally when you're drunk and lieing on the floor. Like I obviously am right now.
Normally, MS-WMC XMB rip-off is *vertical.*
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
It is a competitor for plugs.
Think about it, the range is 3 cm. For how many Bluetooth applications is that relevant? Basically just those where you might as well plug the two devices together.
It will be convenient for transferring photos from your camera to your laptop, just place your camera on your laptop, and the transfer will happen automatically with no questions asked. [ Yes, people will be able steal data from you this way, but it almost requires physical access to the device because the range is so short. ]
But it won't do anything for your wireless mouse, keyboard or headset.
MD is still used since most mp3 players do not work as recorders.
'Once scientists, even the dim-witted social scientists, get muzzled, the Western Civilization is finished.' - oldhack
I don't think these technologies have the same purpose. Sony's technology is for something like communicating between a cell phone and a printer; the fact that it's short-range is a feature, since placing the devices close together apparently initiates the connection. WUSB is for replacing USB cables, for devices that are several feet away. You could probably adapt WUSB for the same functions as Transferjet, but that's not WUSB's primary use.
I don't see any problem. This is a different standard targeting different applications with a diffrent usage model.
Instead of complex pairing rituals required for longer range wireless communication at 3cm it's pretty clear which device you are communicating with so this has a completely different user experience. I also suspect that it's much cheaper and serves applications at a different price point. The close-range standard should work very nicely with the various wireless power schemes using magnetic induction that have about the same range.
So "war" is only a problem if you get stuck on which one of them gets to be called the wireless USB. In other words, it's only an issue for technologists. From an end user's point of view they have little in common.
Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
From TFA
... Because the spec is designed to be both 1) low-power and 2) close range (to avoid interference problems), Sony went with an electric induction field coupler instead of more traditional radiation field antennas. Induction is the same tech used to charge cordless electric toothbrushes, and it's also being used for wireless charging in some consumer electronics devices. Because induction only works over very short ranges, TransferJet devices need to be within 3cm of each other; essentially, the couplers need to touch.
The system is designed for maximum ease of use, which means limited options for controlling the transfers; devices will transfer their contents automatically to another device within range.
In other words it looks like the Sony device is more like a "plug without physical connection", working when devices are touched together with little or no configuration. It may also be suitable for very low power devices, for example you may be able to "touch" a PC to a battery-powered data collection device to download data.
The W-USB on the other hand seems to be more like bluetooth, connectivity for "nearby" devices.
The Blu-Ray drive was there because Sony realized next-gen games were going to need a bit more room than DVDs could offer.
I have to call BS on this. Modern games that will play on consoles like the PS3 and Xbox 360 will easily fit on a DVD9. With over 8GB to work with you can fit pretty much anything you want (with the exception of a LOT of HD pre-rendered video, but these consoles should be able to render it realtime) with skimpy compression to aide with fast access. A good majority of Xbox games were 3-5GB in size, and ALL Xbox 360 and Wii games are under 9GB.
The only reason Sony included a BluRay drive in the PS3 is because they wanted to push the format at consumers. Joe Gamer buys a PS3 and then after a while is confronted with the choice of HD-DVD or BluRay. Because his game console already doubles as a BluRay player he figures he saves $300-400 and the decision is made. Sony wins.
They included Blu-Ray because it's a true next-gen console, and they needed next-gen storage.
If you buy that then either you're a Sony marketing droid, or you've overdosed on the Koolaid. I'm not saying it's all bad for the consumer; if you want a PS3 then you're almost getting a BluRay player for free. In a sense Sony is subsidizing the PS3 to help push BluRay, a standard practice when it comes to selling game consoles.
"What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
/)
You can call BS, but as someone who spends their days writing software for consoles I can say you're a fucking idiot.
The PS3 has Blu-Ray because it offers vastly more storage and bandwidth. Even if games stay small enough to fit on DVD, they will benefit from Blu-Ray's higher transfer rates - which is very important considering the very large increase in the size of RAM we have to fill on the PS3 compared to the PS2. An example of this is that in the previous game I worked on, the player character's assets (meshes, animations, textures) consumed about 16MB - that's half the memory you have on a PS2, and even then we keep the animation and texture data compressed in memory.
The PS2 was a streaming architecture, and the PS3 is even moreso - consider that the Blu-Ray drive is CLV rather than the cheaper CAV type that DVD is - perfect for streaming worlds because you have a constant disc bandwidth.
There are already games in development for the PS3 that have exceeded the size of DVD9. Friends at a studio a day's drive from here are currently at 15GB with their dataset. Mind you though it's probably not all unique, as they're probably doing like us and duplicating data on disc to eliminate seeking, etc.
Sony moves up one notch, displacing Steve Jobs Apple in second place, for now.
1) Microsoft
2) Sony Corp
3) Apple Computers
4) Google
5) Facebook
6) The Mormons
Salut,
Jacques