USB Going Wireless 237
NathanJ writes "Device Forge is running a technical whitepaper on wireless USB. The article states that 'Already there has been some progress with the definition of a WUSB specification with a targeted bandwidth of 480 Mbps. This specification maintains the same usage and architecture as wired USB with a high-speed host-to-device connection.' And that 'the WUSB host can logically connect 127 WUSB devices.' So what am I going to do with my Bluetooth desktop?"
Update Holy Deja vu batman... here is an earlier Slashdot article that I missed from 3 weeks ago. Oops.
Your Bluetooth desktop? (Score:3, Insightful)
Early?! (Score:2, Insightful)
Not the Thing For Me (Score:2, Insightful)
There are already solutions for people who want their Keyboard or Printer a distance away from their computers without wires. What would make these people use this solution?
Re:Your Bluetooth desktop? (Score:5, Insightful)
Whats a "bluetooth desktop"? I've got a desktop with a bluetooth adaptor in it. Even should it magicly stop working when wireless USB comes out the adaptor only cost me 14$, so its not that big a loss.
Distance? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Low Power (Score:3, Insightful)
If only firewire could do this as well (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Not the Thing For Me (Score:4, Insightful)
I look at the back of my desk and it makes me cry to see the mess of wires and all the different cables I have for all my devices.
Wireless USB would be a godsend. See my other post regarding why I think bluetooth sucks [slashdot.org]
Bluetooth for phones (Score:3, Insightful)
My favorite Bluetooth application is moving camera-phone photos to my laptop. My second-favorite application is laptop-to-bluetooth-to-phone-to-GPRS-to-internet.
Re:Your Bluetooth desktop? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't see it that way. Bluetooth is a great technology. It's slow speed do limit it's applications, but for you mouse and your keyboard and syncing up your cell phone and such, it works great and there is no reason to replace it. It is also low power, isn't it?
WUSB on the other hand is FAST. It seems like a waste to use it for a keyboard or mouse. That said, it will work great in those areas where BT is too slow. Wouldn't it be great to set your iPod next to your laptop and have it sync up all the songs in a few seconds? Or to print wirelessly (BT does this, but if you wanted to print a photo it would be slooooooowwwwww). Want a new hard drive? Set it next to your computer and it works. Same thing with that new camera you got that has WUSB. Just keep it near your PC and you can get your pictures with no wires. How about a wireless soundcard? Or even a (he he he) wireless USB wireless network adaptor! The idea of having a flash key thing built into your watch is nice, but imagine if it was WUSB! Just walk up to any computer and thanks to WUSB you have access to the files that are on your wrist without any cables or anything else (after a password for security or something, of course).
And because WUSB supports limited P2P stuff (IIRC), you could move your iPod next to your WUSB hard drive and have them sync without the computer (after all, all the data is in the iTunes database files) or have your camera download the pictures to your hard drive, or print your pictures without a computer or wires. For things needing high bandwidth, WUSB is the way to go. For many other things, BT is still great.
Now you can find many of those things I listed above with BT right now. There are BT printers, a BT camera,, and more. But while BT works for low bandwidth things, trying to move pictures from a camera to your PC through BT is supposed to be agonizingly slow. I wouldn't want to print 5MP photos over BT either.
I think there is room for both. It's if BT speeds up fast enough in time that we could be in for a fight. Otherwise I think they serve different enough markets that things will be OK.
Need it on my stereo receiver (Score:5, Insightful)
What I *do* need is an easier time with my A/V setup. Swapping out components is bad but adding anything new is nightmarish. Deciding which devices should be analog, S-Video, optical, or digital coax is mind numbing. I'd hoped I could firewire everything together but that hasn't happened either, darn it.
Give me a receiver, DVD player, Tivo, consoles, TVs and speakers with WUSB and I'll be happy. Plug the buggers into a power strip and watch as magic happens and everything chats. Sure, It'll probably need a PAN ID of somesort to limit bleed between setups but dang, it'd make it so much easier to drop a DVD changer and another console or 3 into the setup.
Security? (Score:4, Insightful)
From the whitepaper:
The above is certainly a requirement for WUSB to take off. However, it does not specify either a means or a method to achieve that goal.
Also, what is this bit about, "Higher levels of security involving encryption should be implemented at the application level?" Will we need to replace our applications with WUSB-Security Enabled (tm) apps?
Finally, long range WUSB coupled with the same level of understanding of, and dedication to, security consumers re: WIFI could make WUSB truly exciting.
Re:Absolutely (Score:2, Insightful)
But it raises another issue, why can't we have standard power adapters? Why can't someone make a universal power adapter that adjusts power output for the specific device? BAH
Re:Why bluetooth has failed (Score:5, Insightful)
Will it be better supported tomorrow? Who knows. What I do know is that any time device interconnection standards become balkanized, computer users lose.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
480 Mbps wirelessly? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm still waiting for USB to provide 480 Mbps with wires.
Re:Your Bluetooth desktop? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, I can just see Apple putting WUSB in the iPod RIGHT NOW.
Re:Ummm... not quite (Score:2, Insightful)
Power outlets are ubiquitous. If you run low, you can always add another power strip. A cheap extension cord takes care of distance. On the other hand, running a 50' USB cable is a pain in the ass if you do it right, or ugly if you do it quick.
Not sure I'd have a use for it in any event, but I know my Dad would love to be able to scan crap to his laptop without draping the cable across the office for the dogs to get tangled in.
--------------
Another issue about security: (Score:4, Insightful)
> should be implemented at the application level.
Basically this means that secure communications will be up to the vendors, since it's not part of the standard. What that means is that you can forget widespread compatibility. While BT has had its teething problems with compatibility, theoretically at least any headset should work with any phone. Using WUSB however that wouldn't be guaranteed at all, since each vendor could offer their own encryption implementation.
The article is also glossing over authentication, only stating that WUSB will use the same authentication as wired USB. What authentication?! AFAIK standard USB uses the tried-and-true authentication method of assuming that if it can talk to a device, it obviously must be connected to the bus, and since it's a physical local area bus, the person who plugged it in obviously had physical access to it and was thus "authorized". This particular chicken won't fly with WUSB, though.
Re:Why bluetooth has failed (Score:5, Insightful)
In my opinion, Bluetooth has failed because it is trying to be a wireless USB. Got a USB keyboard or mouse? There's a Bluetooth wireless alternative. But that is not where Bluetooth excels.
The real power behind Bluetooth is the ability to participate in dynamic short range ad-hoc networks. Walk into a Starbucks and place/pay for an order via Bluetooth. Want to know where the heck you are? Query the nearest Bluetooth enabled milepost. Need to print a map? Send it to the nearest Bluetooth printing kiosk.
Of course you can't do any of these things today. Why not? Because everyone only sees it (Bluetooth) as a wireless USB! (What's dynamic or ad-hoc about a keyboard for kris-sake?).
So I say... bring on wireless USB, let it take its proper role and then maybe we can use Bluetooth they way it was intended.
Too much power for PDAs & Phones (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Ummm... not quite (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, i'm gunna have to go ahead n'
Sure, you don't want to trade in your USB cable for a power cable, but what about things where you could use the range of bluetooth, and the speed of USB, You don't think it would be good for things like digital cameras? where you use AA anyway. How about a printer, which has a separate power cable as it is, now the printer only has 1 cable instead of 2. Scanners? Same deal, and that'd be a nice application. I wouldn't mind a little WUSB Flash drive.. Sure, it would work over BT, but the speed would blow... Wireless K/b and Mice.. well, I don't like them, but bluetooth is good for that. We've got enough f'ing wires now as it is. I think there's a lot of useful reasons to have WUSB, yes, bluetooth is still useful, still good for its applications, but I think WUSB would be great for stuff that already uses regular alkaline batteries or already have a power cable where it needs more speed than BT. It's a perfect solution, for an annoying problem. I want as few wires as humanly possible.. I'll be happy when all i've got is power cables, hehe. Personally, I can't wait for wireless PC speakers
-matt