Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Networking Wireless Networking Displays Intel Upgrades Hardware

Intel Demos 7Gpbs Wireless Docking 52

Lucas123 writes "Intel for the first time demonstrated the Wireless Gigabit (WiGig) docking specification using an Ultrabook, which was able to achieve 7Gbps performance, ten times the fastest Wi-Fi networks based on the IEEE 802.11n standard. The WiGig medium access control (MAC) and physical (PHY) control specification operates in the unlicensed 60GHz frequency band, which has more spectrum available than the 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands used by existing Wi-Fi products. According to Ali Sadri, chairman of the WiGig Alliance, the specification also supports wireless implementations of HDMI and DisplayPort interfaces, as well as the High-Bandwidth Digital Content Protection (HDCP) scheme used to protect digital content transmitted over those interfaces. It scales to allow transmission of both compressed and uncompressed video."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel Demos 7Gpbs Wireless Docking

Comments Filter:
  • 7 Gpbs (Score:2, Funny)

    by rossdee ( 243626 )

    WTF is a Gpbs ?

    Giga Public Broadcasting Service ?
    Global Positioning buzz saw?

  • HDCP... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by runeghost ( 2509522 ) on Saturday September 15, 2012 @04:10AM (#41344537)

    Making pirated media superior to purchased media since 1999!

    • by freman ( 843586 )

      yeh now imagine how much more awsome it'd be if it didn't have to waste time and power encrypting, signing and verifying that you can do what you paid to do (be it play games, or watch movies)

      All pirated content just works all the time, sure some times you get a dodgy release but for $0 down, it's still not a bad investment for a night in - I'm not a piracy advocate but on more than one occasion I just have. (Recent purchase of the STNG bluray that I can't watch for example... I should have just downloaded

    • by fa2k ( 881632 )

      You know, HDCP could actually have a use here if the display data are not otherwise encrypted. I don't know how well it would actually protect against eavesdroppers. At the very least it would remove any repeating patterns which eavesdroppers could use for statistical analysis.

      It would be silly if it wasn't encrypted, but there are often some flaws in new standards like this one. (I assume it's easier to eavesdrop on a 60 GHz signal than on actual wires, but there may not be that huge a difference.)

  • Why in the world would bandwidth need to "scale"? It's either fast enough for the highest required bit-rate or it isn't, slowing it down for lower amounts of traffic is pointless.
  • by Areyoukiddingme ( 1289470 ) on Saturday September 15, 2012 @04:34AM (#41344663)

    For those wondering who are too lazy to Google, 60 GHz is right in the middle of the resonance range of the oxygen molecule (O2), so it's attenuated by nothing but air. That limits its range to just a few kilometers at reasonable (read, unlicensed) power levels.

    Of more practical interest, 60 GHz won't go through anything more solid than cloth. In particular interior walls block it. So this a in-the-same-room technology, and without some very fancy processing of multi-path bounce signals, it's basically a line of sight technology. In other words, a 60 GHz transmitter attached to your tower under your desk is going to have a hard time driving a monitor sitting on top of your desk. That's why the article waxes lyrical about laptops, which are usually set on top of the desk. Sadly, we're likely to be stuck with video cable for many years to come.

    Of course silicon is dirt cheap (sand cheap?) these days, so possibly chips can be designed that can do that processing. I don't know what the latencies might be like though. It might be intolerable for controlling a mouse. You'd have to ask a radio guy.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Put a little receiver/transmitter on top of the table and connect it with a cable to the computer. Or make it go around the edge of the table and connect using this technology in both directions. Yes, latency could be a problem, but I suspect that this link wouldn't have to add much latency compared to the latency that could be removed from optimizing other parts of the chain from input to screen output for lower latency.

    • by AK Marc ( 707885 )
      People rarely use mice more than a few feet from the computer, unless you were thinking about putting your computer downstairs and having wireless up to the screen and mouse and keyboard.
      • I wasn't referring to mouse movement data being transmitted at 60 GHz. I was referring to the cursor showing up on the screen over a wireless connection. Latency of the 60 GHz connection matters there. Exceed some minimum threshold and your cursor will appear to lag behind the mouse, an intolerable circumstance.

        • by AK Marc ( 707885 )

          I wasn't referring to mouse movement data being transmitted at 60 GHz. I was referring to the cursor showing up on the screen over a wireless connection.

          I don't understand the distinction. You seem to be talking about transmission latency (including error correction), which is transmission latency, regardless of whether it's distance created, or horribly designed power savings.

          Wireless works fine for me for the crowded and interference-prone 2.4 GHz. If you've ever use wireless mice extensively, you'd have noticed that power savings on optical mice kills performance (delay, lag, etc.) any more than any wireless delay could.

          • Wireless doesn't work fine for me in the crowded and interference-prone 2.4 GHz band. That was one of my points. My laptop, with its rather poor radio, can see as many as 14 different access points, and the number of timeouts and connection drops it experiences with my own access point in consequence is astronomical. Streaming video is completely out of the question and even Windows filesharing is intolerably bad. Simply receiving a directory list can take upwards of 30 seconds, with all of the timeouts

            • by AK Marc ( 707885 )
              I've never had any such trouble. I've never heard of any widespread problem. I think that there are some problems some people see. I did some troubleshooting at a friend's house where a wireless printer would knock the whole block off their wireless networks. But this is the first time I've ever heard a person complain about latency from a wired mouse. I think you talk to too many professional FPS gamers. My current wireless mouse appears to me to have zero latency. And I've never had a mouse with any
    • by fa2k ( 881632 )

      Sadly, we're likely to be stuck with video cable for many years to come.

      I really see no benefit at all of wireless displays in desktops. There may be some aesthetic benefit in living room setups, but it's not that hard to hide wires. And the screen would need a power cable anyway. For mice and stuff like that, we've had wireless for ages

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Say a projector setup in a meeting room. Wiring a 20+' heavy gauge VGA cable in say an existing meeting room isn't just plug and play (unless you're going half pass and running it on the floor or taped to a wall rather than in the wall and ceiling).
        That'd be a perfect setup for this (and yes, these rooms are used for more just power point slides)

        • by jedidiah ( 1196 )

          Any commercial wiring installation should be a little more flexible and more robust than your average cut-rate tract home. Plus you have the likelihood that a corporation isn't quite as cheap as a consumer. That's why companies have wired interfaces already.

          Sometimes you just have to pony up.

        • Epson makes great wifi projectors. My office has ~20 rooms set up this way and it's awesome. No cables, no adaptors. Just works.

          I think they use a custom VNC setup to mirror the display from the laptop.

      • I don't either, but this mania for portable devices and the proliferation of walled garden software distribution meaning vendors are pushing for more appliance-like behavior rather than desktop behavior means the specter of a display with no physical connectors at all becomes an actual possibility in the next decade. In truth, that's exactly the sort of thing Apple is even likely to do, purely in the interest of aesthetics (plus they care damn all about backwards compatibility and product lifespans).

        Have y

    • I doubt 60 GHz multipath is much different from 2.4GHz multipath conceptually. If they can build a 60 GHz front-end (and they can) they can build whatever processing they need.

To do two things at once is to do neither. -- Publilius Syrus