Slashdot Mirror
Wireless Charging Standards Groups Agree To Merge
jfruh writes: The world where our gadgets all charge wirelessly has been delayed by several factors, one of which is that there are three industry groups promoting rival technological standards. That problem is now a little closer to a solution, as the Alliance for Wireless Power and the Power Matters Alliance announced a plan to merge.
Except the catch is that it doesn't include the Wireless Power Consortium who makes Qi. Without Qi you still pretty much have two standards, it just seems that the the rest of the industry has banded together to fight the one standard that has actually been shipping on devices.
Although now that qualcomm quick charge 2.0 is shipping in devices I will no longer care about wireless charging until it is much faster.
I suspect in the end, like Ethernet, Token Ring, DECnet, and other IEEE 802 network standards, one will win-out over the others. And like IEEE 802, it'll take close to 30 years for that one that becomes dominant to win-out, and it'll have some ridiculous limitations (like Ethernet's 100m physical limit and Ethernet's relatively small frame size) that plague its use for all time.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
I suspect in the end, like Ethernet, Token Ring, DECnet, and other IEEE 802 network standards, one will win-out over the others. And like IEEE 802, it'll take close to 30 years for that one that becomes dominant to win-out, and it'll have some ridiculous limitations (like Ethernet's 100m physical limit and Ethernet's relatively small frame size) that plague its use for all time.
100m is hardly a ridiculous limitation, it's a tradeoff among speed, cost of media and transceivers and distance. Granted, it can be a problem in some circumstances, but the limit had to be set to *something*.
If you want to pay more for media and transceivers to get more distance you can use fiber. Or if you willing to trade speed for distance, you can get VDSL repeaters and extend the range to over a kilometer and you can use existing CAT-5 (or even CAT-3) wiring.
All of my network equipment supports 9000+ byte frames, how big would a frame need to be to stop being ridiculous? With TCP offloading, Jumbo frames don't make a huge difference in throughput.
qi FTW!