Sony Starts a Standards War Over Wireless USB 401
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.... (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:Sony obviously.... (Score:5, Insightful)
This new technology doesn't actually seem to compete with W-USB, except for in the head of this analyst. It appears to be for device->device transfers, where W-USB (like regular USB) seems to be towards host->device and device->host transfers. W-USB doesn't seem suitable for low-power devices with minimal CPU (much like host-mode USB). The two seem to be serving different niches. It reminds me of the "war" between RapidIO and Infiniband. A war in the press, but not in the trenches.
But that doesn't make good copy. Better to start flamewars, thus generating ad impressions.
3cm?! (Score:4, Insightful)
3 cms offers no advantages over wired USB (Score:2, Insightful)
So, someone explain to me (Score:2, Insightful)
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.)
Losing a battle to win a war. (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Apples vs. Oranges (Score:2, Insightful)
Do we really need another wireless standard? (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Technologies have different focus (Score:5, Insightful)
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..
Is it really a competitor to Wireless USB? (Score:3, Insightful)
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?
What about encryption? (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:Losing a battle to win a war. (Score:3, Insightful)
They need(ed) to get people to buy Blu Ray rather than HD DVD. To that end making their system more attractive (in any way) clearly helped that aim.
Now it seems Blu Ray has won it will be interesting to see if PS3 development starts to be more tightly focused on directly making money with the PS3.
Re:So, someone explain to me (Score:5, Insightful)
That's what this is for. It has nothing to do with PCs, and it isn't a competitor to W-USB. It's unrelated. This story was written so this guy could get ad revenue off of links from sites like Slashdot, and all the other places guaranteed to pick up an inflammatory anti-Sony story.
Re:Losing a battle to win a war. (Score:5, Insightful)
Arguably, the PS3 is the most open console in history.
Funny, what used to be called competition... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:3cm?! (Score:5, Insightful)
"Oh look, the contents of my pocket have shifted around and the pairing is broken."
If Sony does this right - i.e. very easy to use, automatic authentication with no/little security (the 3 cm range is itself security), power charging, and customizable (so lots of devices can use this for different things), then it might very well catch on. On the other hand, they'll probably make it impossible to license, full of DRM and "security", and not allow standard drives to be developed. And then it will fail, which might actually be bad convenience wise.
Nothing to see here (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Blu-ray not just Sony (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
InstantJet vs Wireless-USB (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Most obvious use is a sync pad (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Jobs would be proud (Score:3, Insightful)
Note: I'm not necessarily saying these are bad things, but you asked.
Re:Losing a battle to win a war. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Sony obviously.... (Score:5, Insightful)
It is not a competitor to W-USB or Bluetooth (Score:2, Insightful)
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 was hardly a failure (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Sony obviously.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Bluetooth obviously.... (Score:1, Insightful)
Depends on version [wikipedia.org]
Re:3cm?! (Score:1, Insightful)
But even at 3 cm (~1 inch) it is a security issue. Think about having a camera in your pocket. It wouldn't take much to bring a reader within an inch of your pocket to download/upload things that were meant to be in your control. Pickpockets can steal your wallet, i.e. actually touching, without you noticing. You won't stand a chance when they don't even need to touch.
Re:3cm is a Good Thing (Score:3, Insightful)
But, chances are they'll need to find that cable ANYWAY when it comes tine to charge the device.
Right now, I plug my iPod|Cell phone|PDA|Camera into the USB port and...it does it. No messing with settings, no trying to get them to pair. Everything automatic (or at least as automatic as I can stand).
And, check this out (this is the best part): After it's done transferring, I can simply leave the device connected and...the battery recharges! It just does it. Automatically. By itself.
One step.
Amazing, isn't it?
"standards war" is in the eye of the beholder (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:PS3 Blu-Ray (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:So, someone explain to me (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:3cm?! (Score:3, Insightful)
Pish - IrDA will at least work across most conference tables, it just requires line-of-sight and having the transmitter and receiver roughly pointed at one another.
This sounds more like Vista - Fixing something that doesn't need fixing (W-USB) by adding features almost no one wants (a mere 8% speed boost), at the expense of core functionality (not needing physical contact).
Re:Sony obviously.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Funny, what used to be called competition... (Score:5, Insightful)
When companies compete and the consumer wins, it's competition.
When companies compete and the consumer losers, it's a standards war.
For instance: Tech X is created. Company A and B compete to create the best and cheapest device that uses Tech X, including interface, style, functionality, etc. This is competition.
Tech Y and Tech Z are created and basically do the same thing, but a little differently. Company A works on devices for Tech X, but B works on devices for Tech Z. The consumer is stuck with one company after they buy the initial product. There's no way for them to use Z's new accessory with Y's original product. Worse, the price competition isn't as sharp since the companies can leverage the accessories to garner sales, instead of using how good and cheap the product actually is.
As far as HDDVD and Bluray, though... I don't think there's a need to have a 'standard' at all. Let them both exist, and movie producers can create discs in all formats. For the number of movies produced, there won't be any real difference in cost to do it that way. The only reason it makes any difference to the consumer is that they are signing everyone to exclusive contracts and screwing the consumer.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)