Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Wireless Networking Hardware

Ultrawideband Soon To Be Legal In Europe 109

Posted by kdawson from the wires-begone dept.
ukhackster writes "ZDNet UK is reporting that ultrawideband will be legalized in Europe within 6 months, but with tougher controls than in America — the only place where it is legal now. Ultrawideband offers wireless connectivity at speeds up to 1Gbps, and is meant to supersede USB and clear our desks of wires. In Europe, fears that UWB might interfere with other technologies have kept it out of the market. Opening up the European market could give manufacturers a powerful incentive to push UWB." From the article: "[S]ources confirmed to ZDNet UK that the restrictions put forward by the EC would indeed be more rigorous than those imposed in the US, although they would not be so restrictive as to make it impossible for some global harmonization of UWB devices... It is understood that the committee decision to allow UWB was based on a far from unanimous majority, with some Scandinavian countries and France opposing the proposal."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ultrawideband Soon To Be Legal In Europe More

Ultrawideband Soon To Be Legal In Europe

Comments Filter:

  • Charging (Score:2, Insightful)

    by 7macaw ( 933316 )
    So, does "clear desks of wires" include life-time battery for my camera/cell phone/zune (:p), or we'll still have to have those gross wires (but won't admit it even to ourselves, of course).
    • "Wireless Desk Area Networking" is pointless until the desk incorporates a form of wireless recharger (e.g., inductive, or that dot arrangement thing, etc) and devices can be recharged via that mechanism. And that requires people to care about a few cables popping up behind the desk to their rechargers and peripherals. Note that a few ties can organise wires into looking quite tidy too.

      UWB is far more useful for high-speed in-house wireless networking between non-close systems, with applications such as HD

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by itlurksbeneath ( 952654 )

      Don't forget your keyboard, mouse, flash devices, external hard drives (driven by a 12 volt car battery, I'd guess), scanners, cable and dsl modems, et al.

      I had a wireless keyboard and mouse for a while. After a while, I figured it was easier to put up with a cord on the desk than having to dig through a drawer at 2 AM only to find out you're out of batteries. Granted, they don't need batteries often, but when they do, you're stuck if you don't have spares.

      Maybe if they resurrected Tesla's research [wikipedia.org] an

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by R2.0 ( 532027 )
        "I figured it was easier to put up with a cord on the desk than having to dig through a drawer at 2 AM only to find out you're out of batteries"

        Thus the continuing sales of the Hitachi Magic Wand.

        (Just google it - I post in text only)

  • Err, testing?? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Reality Master 101 ( 179095 ) <`moc.liamg' `ta' `101retsaMytilaeR'> on Monday December 11, 2006 @01:38PM (#17197618) Homepage Journal

    fears that UWB might interfere with other technologies has kept it out of the market

    I've been hearing about these fears for like five years now. Why the hell doesn't anyone just test the damn thing? Is this question really that hard to settle? Am I missing something here?

    • Re:Err, testing?? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Dr. Zowie ( 109983 ) <slashdot@@@deforest...org> on Monday December 11, 2006 @01:45PM (#17197698)
      The problem is the "death of a million cuts" -- by the time you've tested for it, it's too late. Each UWB device slightly degrades the radio spectrum around it for more conventional narrowband devices. One or two or even a thousand such devices in a square mile might be OK -- but by the time you've got a hundred thousand or a million of these things deployed in an urban core, it's too late to back out.

      You can see the effect of progressive RF contamination by testing the range of (say) a CB rig in San Jose, California versus Tracy, California. Both have similar topography but vastly different levels of background RF noise in the 20-30 MHz band. (for what it's worth, a pair of car-mount Radio Schlock CB rigs with 1/4-wave antennae will work at up to about 35 miles in the California Central Valley, but only up to about 3 miles in Silicon Valley).

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AK Marc ( 707885 )
        The problem is the "death of a million cuts" -- by the time you've tested for it, it's too late.

        That's an error in testing, not the technology. The instruments are sensitive enough to determine the noise change from a single unit. Toss in an amplifier to raise the level to that which it would be with a million people with it, and then check the interference again.

    • Re:Err, testing?? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by InsaneGeek ( 175763 ) <slashdot AT insanegeeks DOT com> on Monday December 11, 2006 @01:51PM (#17197788) Homepage
      FTA:

      It is understood that the committee decision to allow UWB was based on a far from unanimous majority, with some Scandinavian countries and France opposing the proposal. UWB opponents are mostly established band users who claim that high densities of UWB usage will raise the interference level enough to affect their existing and future services. However, tests in the US have not found any plausible scenarios where such interference is a significant factor.

      I believe there is some concern in Europe about interfering with GPS & GNSS equipment around airports. I believe a second GPS test in the US was done that showed it wasn't as bad as first thought, but I haven't read it.

      • Re:Err, testing?? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by topham ( 32406 ) on Monday December 11, 2006 @02:00PM (#17197918) Homepage
        The initial tested used devices that were damn near on top of each other.

        I can show you a GPS unit failing when near a computer, or PocketPC under a similar configuration, with no other intentional radio signals present.

        I wouldn't want a large amount of UWB equipment on an airplane, but I wouldn't worry about my GPS unit not working because of equipment in use near me. The alternator in a car generates more interference.

  • Question is (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Daishiman ( 698845 ) on Monday December 11, 2006 @01:46PM (#17197708)

    The question is whether UWB will actually be as useful as it's being touted. I certainly know that I have no need or desire to have a home AP that whose signal goes beyond 100 meters. I'm sure most of us won't be using it for that either.

    I can see a very practical use for this for quickly deploying an internet infrastructure under an emergency situation, as this would be perfect for creating relays to maintain connectivity to a distant area while covering a huge surface. I'm sure that as time goes on other more inventive applications will come to mind.

    Las quejas de un sysadmin argentino: http://aosinski.phpnet.us/ [phpnet.us]

    • UWB is not WiMax (Score:5, Informative)

      by Kadin2048 ( 468275 ) <slashdot@kadin.xoxy@net> on Monday December 11, 2006 @02:22PM (#17198228) Homepage Journal
      I think you are confusing Ultra-wideband and WiMax.

      WiMax is like conventional 802.11 "WiFi," but optimized for higher data rates and much longer distances. It's like Wifi on 'roids, emphasis on coverage area and distance.

      UWB is different; it's a very short-range protocol for 'desktop' use. Basically, as a way to get devices that are near each other anyway, to communicate with each other without wires. Think of it as Bluetooth on 'roids, but hopefully without all the obnoxiousness.

      UWB would definitely not be good for creating point-to-point internet relays/backhaul, or any application that involved distances of more than a few feet. It uses way too much RF spectrum; the idea is that it transmits on a whole load of frequencies at once, but since the power is very low, it doesn't interfere with other things (too badly). This way you get ridiculous data rates, comparable to high-bandwidth wired protocols (so say UWB's promoters) but without having to have wires all over your desk. In a UWB-ed world, you wouldn't have to have a cable going from your scanner to your PC, because it could just pass the data wirelessly.

      You might be interested in reading:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-wideband#Applic ations [wikipedia.org]
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_area_network [wikipedia.org]

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by rockola ( 240707 )

        It's like Wifi on 'roids
        Asteroids? Polaroids? Thyroids? Hemorrhoids? I'm confused.
      • Think of it as Bluetooth on 'roids, but hopefully without all the obnoxiousness.
        What's so bad about Bluetooth? Seriously, it seems to work well here in the UK for things like headphones or transferring mobile phone photos to a computer.

  • Clear our desk of wires? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Chabil Ha' ( 875116 ) on Monday December 11, 2006 @02:05PM (#17198002)
    Taking a peek behind my desktop PC, I see mostly wires for the following:

    2 VGA cables to my dual monitors
    2 Power cords to those monitors
    1 power cable for the PC
    1 RF antenna for my FM tuner
    1 Coax for my cable TV
    1 cord for USB mouse
    1 cord for USB keyboard
    1 cord for power to my speakers
    1 cord to connect speakers to PC

    Let's do the math. 2/11 of those cords can be fixed with UWB. Unless wireless power is part of the spec, I'm quite sceptical of its desk clearing ability...

    • Re:Clear our desk of wires? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Belial6 ( 794905 ) on Monday December 11, 2006 @02:36PM (#17198440)
      I could be all wrong about UWB, but I believe that they want to clear 7 of those.

      2 VGA cables to my dual monitors 1 Coax for my cable TV (would only count if you had a desktop case) 1 cord for USB mouse 1 cord for USB keyboard 1 cord to connect speakers to PC

      The RF antenna and PC power cords are not on your desk. (given that you don't have a desktop case)

      That leaves 3 power cords out of the 8 I would have counted. That is a pretty good improvement. Good enough to warrant more RF noise? That is another story...
    • Technological advances sometimes seem silly when they are first introduced. But you have to remember that new devices and applications will be developed to utilize the technology. I think people will find a lot of uses for UWB, especially in syncing portable devices like cell phones and MP3 players. Maybe you don't see a need for it, but there is also a lot of potential in wireless speakers, displays, and printers. The point of UWB isn't just to clear your desk of wires. It is also to make life more co
    • Power cords will remain, but you can probably see alternatives to some of the other devices:

      1 RF antenna for my FM tuner
      Why not use a USB device that would work wirelessly and allow you to place in a better position to actually place an antenna? Which leads us to...

      1 Coax for my cable TV
      I'm assuming this is cable to the TV itself (tho I'm unsure to what percentage of the average business desktop this would be found), but this could be a USB tuner/capture device as well (better if it includes FM!),
    • While your example does bring an interesting point that we'll never do away with cables as long as we need power ( unless... [thinkgeek.com]), I don't think your example is typical, but not unreasonable either though, but I'll try and make a point anyway.

      Most people don't have dual monitors. Most don't have FM tuners or TV tuners, and UWB would be capable of providing reasonable alternatives (internet radio, streaming video). UWB would be capable of streaming audio directly to the speakers just like a bluetooth headset, bu

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Lumpy ( 12016 )
      Exactly, Unless Superwideband induces voltage along with it, we will either still have wires and therefore ignore superwideband or replace batteries in everything every 45 minutes so we can be free of wires.

      I always get a kick out of the claims "...is meant to supersede USB and clear our desks of wires."

      Yeah, right.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by NickeZ ( 921522 )
      I'd say you could remove the cord between the pc and the speakers too. (Did you mean the two VGA cords?)

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by DrSkwid ( 118965 )

      Wireless DVI

      http://www.alibaba.com/catalog/11146180/Wireless_D VI_Dongle.html [alibaba.com]

      As far as I can tell, only the 3 power cords in your setup cannot be replaced by wireless.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Tacvek ( 948259 )
        Umm... I question that Wireless DVI dongle. It sounds like the dongle is only used on the screen, and on the compueter end is software that basicly captures the screen image and tramsits it over Wifi to the dongle. If it is simply screen scraping, generally loose any 3d acelleration, and in some cases you lose video playback. So that particular dongle is worthless. What would work fine is a pair of dongles that work over UWB, Appearing to both sides as though it were a standard cable. But there could be lat
    • Hmm. I actually quite like some of the wires. They're effective tethers to prevent my young children running off with aforementioned mouse, keyboard etc.

  • Wireless peripherals mean more batteries (Score:5, Insightful)

    by HockeyPuck ( 141947 ) on Monday December 11, 2006 @02:28PM (#17198336)
    I have a logitech trackball.. it's unfortunately wireless. So every 2months I have to hunt down a pack of AA batteries from the office supply closet. Which during the holidays is impossible as everyone steals AA batteries to take home instead of buying them for their kids toys.

    So, now I'll need another set for my keyboard, speakers etc...

    • Has the call of rechargeables ever reached your (undoubtedly american) home?

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Pyramid ( 57001 )
        Rechargeable batteries are inefficient for low current, long term storage applications in items like remote controls and wireless mice as they lose a far greater percentage of their charge just sitting around than the venerable alkaline.

        We (undoubtedly) Americans know this.

        Pyramid

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Rakishi ( 759894 )
      ...just buy some rechargeable and plug them into the charger every so often.
    • Costco sells this Samsung rechargeable battery kit with the charger, 4 AA batteries, and 2 AAA batteries for USD15-20. Rechargeable are are cheap and also good for the environment :-)

      ]{

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by tokul ( 682258 )
      So every 2months I have to hunt down a pack of AA batteries from the office supply closet.
      Get rechargeable ones.

  • americans (Score:3, Funny)

    by minus_273 ( 174041 ) <aaaaa&SPAM,yahoo,com> on Monday December 11, 2006 @02:39PM (#17198488) Journal
    yeah those backwards Americans, good thing I live in the forward thinking EU.. oh wait..
  • First thing when I saw this title "Nice I will maybe become something better than this DSL" then I saw it was for wireless crap... Yes I still use RJ45 and proud of it !
  • Last time i checked, Europe was not a nation. I suppose the article means the European Union, but isn't it better to keep the meanings intact? Also, aren't EU bills only a recommendation for the EU states, which have to accept it one by one as well?

    • Re:In Europe? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Per Abrahamsen ( 1397 ) on Monday December 11, 2006 @04:48PM (#17200288) Homepage
      > Last time i checked, Europe was not a nation. I suppose the article means the European Union, but
      > isn't it better to keep the meanings intact?

      Most non-EU nations in Europe tend to follow EU regulation as well. They just don't get a say in it.

      > Also, aren't EU bills only a recommendation for the EU states, which have to accept it one by
      > one as well?

      They have to be implemented in national law, which the EU countries are legally obliged to do.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by mabinogi ( 74033 )
      If you want to be like that, then America isn't a nation either.

      I'm not sure which bothers me the most, the fact that you took the time to post that, or that I'm actually replying.
      • Except, of course, the defining characteristic of a state is a unified system of defence. The US definitely has this, the EU does not. If you ever need to see where real political power lies, just follow the chain of command.
  • First, the usual disclaimer:
    I'm sure that wireless technology can be useful for people with thousands of wires, especially in companies, but I wish they'd keep it there and stop assaulting the home user with it.

    I'm tired of all this wireless hype that pushes many wireless products into the store, pushing away the wired, cheaper and equally adequate products. I don't have a use for a wireless mouse and/or keyboard that I have to buy batteries for. I have no use for exposing my network to everyone. Etc.

    I'm al

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by LWATCDR ( 28044 )
      "I'm also concerned over all this radio activity in the air, even though people say it's alright, which I don't believe."
      Well unless you live in a giant Faraday cage then it really doesn't matter. BTW even your cables and PC emit RF.
      Have a nice day.
    • Who says? Last time I looked, the cable and connectors were the big expense item. Wireless is just a chip, and potentially a wee little antenna.

      Of course it is PRICED higher. But the wireless is cheaper, in most cases.

      Ratboy
      • Please forgive me. I cannot be reading this right.
        Wireless is priced higher, but it is cheaper? I am imagining expensive wireless items that, because they are cheap, promptly self-destruct...
        • Cheaper -- as in costs less to manufacture. Priced higher -- as in retailer takes more money.
          • Thanks for the explanation. Cheaper to make, more expensive to buy: I do understand that business model. (I don't always approve, but I do understand.)
      • Yes, I was talking about the price in the stores.

        Of course, that price doesn't factor in all the batteries you're going to use when it's a keyboard, mouse or other thing that doesn't have its own power source. And batteries are expensive.
    • And no, I don't have mobile phone, and proud of it.
      And I don't use no stinking interweb computer either. You rock!
      • What the hell does that have to do with it?

        I was saying that in case someone pointed out that mobile phones are also wireless.
  • Are there presently any UWB / USB-IF devices on the marker? If so, could anyone share some links

    ]{
  • I think the UWB idea is simply horrendous. First, privacy. Has anyone thought of this? Do you REALLY want the chance of someone being able to eavesdrop on every keyboard press or mouse click you make, or all other communications to your peripherals, perhaps what you are printing out? Another concern is the exposure to the EMF fields. This will surely just increase the nasty soup of RF fields that pollute our environment already. I have heard from many people who come down with all sorts of symptoms being ne
  • It is understood that the committee decision to allow UWB was based on a far from unanimous majority, with some Scandinavian countries and France opposing the proposal
    France has a long tradition of objetcing to things on spurious technical, moral or other grounds - but usually the real basis is a little simpler. If UWB were owned/invented/marketed by a French company (preferably a state-backed one) then it'd be not only legal by now, but probably compulsory. As a protectionist government, they usually en

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by gzunk ( 242371 )
      Not everything the French do is bad, take SCART for example. It was mandated in France and caught on in the rest of Europe because it was useful.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jonwil ( 467024 )
      Just ask anyone in the television industry about SECAM.
      It started out as a french standard that was created because the french wanted to prevent imports of (cheaper) foriegn PAL TVs and protect the domestic industry.

      Although later on the Soviets adopted it for a bunch of iron curtain countries so that only state controled SECAM TV could be recieved and not PAL TV comming in from over the border in the west.

  • This is going to be great for the information security industry.
  • ... from my cold dead hands.
  • Is this the same UK that is systematically removing ALL wireless networks from public schools because of an irrational fear of RF poisoning? I wonder how much more (fake) damage UWB will do to the children? Can't we just think of the children!
  • step 1. plug your desk into the usb port of your PC (s)
    step 2. plug your desk into the mains
    step 3. plonk monitors, mice, keyboards, ipods, digital cameras, possibly even laptops on desk

    everything can talk to everything else, including any usb-connected devices, and everything gets power too. all it would take is a couple of induction layers and you can still have a few mm of laminated wood-effect on top. the RF communication would work pretty much like bluetooth or UWB but would induct via a plate at the b

Slashdot Top Deals

The best defense against logic is ignorance.

Close