backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 23 comment(s) - last by Oscarine.. on Oct 4 at 4:57 PM
Nokia promises that its Wibree wireless connectivity standard is 10 times more energy efficient than Bluetooth

We've got Bluetooth, we will soon have Wireless USB and it now looks as though we may have another wireless standard vying to connect our wireless peripherals in the form of "Wibree." Wibree is Nokia's short-range wireless connection that is seen as a cheaper, more efficient alternative to Bluetooth in some situations.

Wibree would provide a connection link with speeds up to 1 Mbps at a distance of up to 30 feet. According to Nokia, Wibree can be implemented as a standalone solution or as a Bluetooth-Wibree module. Nokia see Wibree as a perfect fit for mobile phones, watches, wireless keyboards, sports and medical equipment as well as children’s toys.

"Wibree technology is an important development that opens up new market opportunities and a whole new range of possibilities for mobile users. Our aim is to establish an industry standard faster than ever before by offering an interoperable solution that can be commercialized and incorporated into products quickly," said Dr. Bob Iannucci, head of the Nokia Research Center.

Nokia is working together to produce the first commercial interoperability specification by the second quarter of 2007 with the help of Broadcom Corporation, CSR, Epson and Nordic Semiconductor.

Update: 10/3/2006: We got this response from the Bluetooth SIG regarding Wibree:

It’s important to note that this isn’t an alternative for the majority of Bluetooth use cases that include the voice, printing, transfer and music scenarios.  As the Nokia release points out, they are focused on sensor applications like the watch.  However, like most technologies there is some overlap such as the mention of HID devices in the announcement.  There are talks between the Bluetooth SIG and Nokia regarding the future of Wibree but at this point there is nothing concrete to say publicly. 

Ultra low power Bluetooth technology is definitely part of our roadmap and the Bluetooth SIG is evaluating Wibree for possible inclusion into the SIG.  Just like we are working with the WiMedia Alliance to combine Bluetooth and Ultra Wideband technologies and create a high speed Bluetooth channel, we will work to do the same at the ultra low power level.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Do we need another standard?
By Zirconium on 10/3/2006 11:55:40 AM , Rating: 2
The problem with all these different standards is that they don't work with each other, usually. Granted, you may get some combination units, but the fact of the matter is that you already have a lot of telephones, PDAs, keyboards, mice, etc. with bluetooth, and people aren't going to throw them out. My guess is that the companies creating new standards are banking on being less expensive than bluetooth and they are hoping many people don't have anything bluetooth so they won't have to switch.




RE: Do we need another standard?
By othercents on 10/3/2006 12:12:28 PM , Rating: 2
Right not is the best time to introduce another standard especially since bluetooth is not widely used. Personally I would give up my bluetooth wireless headset if there was something else that performed better. It is very possible that Nokia is working on making a package deal with headset and phone together. They are one of the few companies that would be able to produce a new standard and be quickly accepted in the cell phone market.

Other


RE: Do we need another standard?
By Tegeril on 10/3/2006 12:27:17 PM , Rating: 2
Not widely used? Under which rock have you been living? Suddenly the question in the above post to you makes more sense. What doesn't perform well about your bluetooth headset? Which phones that are coming out now don't have bluetooth, which new laptops being made don't have bluetooth?

Not many.


RE: Do we need another standard?
By othercents on 10/3/2006 3:53:15 PM , Rating: 3
Not widely used is correct. The technology is widely available, but there is a small segment of people who actually use it. I figure about 1% of cell phone users actually use a bluetooth headset. Just because it is available and all your friends use it doesn't mean that everyone uses it or even 50% of the cell phone users use it.

I have people who are tech savy tell me all the time that everyone has a computer and knows how to use one, but this isn't the case either. Just because it is available doesn't mean everyone uses it. I have employees in my office that have a hard time using their computer and would rather stick with the pen and paper (God's gift).

My biggest gripe about my Bluetooth headset is that the battery lasts at the most 24 hours and when I use it my cell phone lasts half as long.

BTW not many laptops come with bluetooth as a standard option. Even if you look at the Dell website you will see that most of the laptops have an option to upgrade to having bluetooth, but not usually part of the standard build.

Other


RE: Do we need another standard?
By Oscarine on 10/4/2006 4:54:13 PM , Rating: 3
1% is way to low, I own a cellular franchise and I'd say of the bluetooth capable phones wel sell (Thats most now, even the basic camera phones have bluetooth as of this quarter), rougly 1 in 3 buy the bluetooth headset. As headset prices have dropped below 40 dollars, they are now only 10-20 dollars more than our wired headsets.

Besides Cases, and Car Chargers, Bluetooth headsets sell the best.

So yeah Bluetooth definatly has market penetration, work the industry before making broad sweeping comments with no facts to base them on.


bt2.0
By Wwhat on 10/3/2006 1:01:29 PM , Rating: 2
Didn't bluetooth v2.0 address the issues with powerconsumption already? and also up the speed a great deal.
So do they compare this standard to old or current bluetooth if they say it's so much better?

And now that we have 2 or 3 kinds of bluetooth, 12 or so wifi and 2 or 3 USB-W standards do we really need a new standard yet again, they should just call it YAWS (yet another wireless standard).
Perhaps while they have the momentum they should introduce a new standard for flashram cards too!




RE: bt2.0
By QueBert on 10/3/2006 2:13:00 PM , Rating: 2
BT 2.0 was supposed to address power issues. My phone is BT 2 (I believe?) I have a Motorola Q. My Nokia headset is definitely 2.0

my phone dies within 24 hours without a charge. My headset, 5 hours, which really isn't bad. The pairing seems faster then other phones & headsets I've used. But BT varries so much device to device I can't say the 2.0 is what's making it faster.

I like BT, but I would like something with better range, better sound and better battery life.


RE: bt2.0
By Oscarine on 10/4/2006 4:57:32 PM , Rating: 3
Its more the phone than your headset, I assume the 5 hour quote is usage time which is within advertised range for most headsets.

The Motorola Q even with the extended battery and no bluetooth enabled will rarely get you more than 2 days of usage. Sometimes only 1.

This is terrible compared to most other PDA/Smartphones like the Treo series which can generally operate for much longer, or the Blackberries which operate seemingly indefinatly.


Same BS, different day
By mindless1 on 10/3/2006 2:24:11 PM , Rating: 3
Nokia, we aren't looking for another proprietary standard that will not be able to save power relative to other current-gen technologies unless it cuts transmission power- inherantly reducing range.

What we do not need is another short range standard that cites best case speed as if we could expect that. Anybody getting 108 Mbps out of their 8802.11g?

Open standards are your friend and key towards getting the kind of interoperability we will demand in the future.




RE: Same BS, different day
By Wwhat on 10/3/2006 3:22:34 PM , Rating: 2
11g is 54Mb not 108, but point taken nonetheless


RE: Same BS, different day
By akugami on 10/3/2006 4:12:17 PM , Rating: 2
108 Mbps = roughly 13 MBps (8 bits in one byte, so 108 megabits divided by 8). Of course, these are theoretical maximum speeds. Best case scenario should leave you with about 10 megabytes per sec on an 802.11g network but most real world usage will see maybe 5-7 megabytes per second at best. I definitely get in the 5+ megabyte range when sending files over my wireless network and in the same room. Signal degrades pretty rapidly when there are walls and past distances of about 30 feet. It's not that the signal is unreliable a couple of rooms away, it's just that the signal is much slower.

Hope I got all my numbers right, don't castrate me if I don't. Regardless, the point is that theoretical max speed never equals real world speed and that companies use tricks to make their products seem better/faster. A lower case letter (Mb = megabit) and an upper case (MB = megabyte) one in this case is a difference of 8 times in speed throughput.


hmmm
By TheDoc9 on 10/3/2006 12:17:01 PM , Rating: 1
10x less power usage my ass.




RE: hmmm
By OrSin on 10/3/2006 12:59:16 PM , Rating: 3
Really I would like to see something other then bluetooth in my phones. And it is power hog. with blue tooth on my Raz have the healf the battery time. Thats even when its not being used. Not sure how great this new thing is, but I tihnk a wirless standard should be very low in power since chances are one side will not be plugged in.



RE: hmmm
By MobileZone on 10/4/2006 3:45:07 AM , Rating: 2
mine too!!!


Licensing
By Alphafox78 on 10/3/06, Rating: -1
RE: Licensing
By othercents on 10/3/2006 12:16:06 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
In the dual mode implementation the Wibree functionality is an add-on feature inside Bluetooth circuitry sharing a great deal of existing functionality resulting in a minimal cost increase compared to existing products.
quote:
Wibree radio specification enables dual-mode implementations to reuse Bluetooth RF part but also to guarantee ultra low power consumption for devices with embedded stand-alone implementation of the Wibree specification.

Based on the Wibree website this looks like an addition to Bluetooth not a replacement for Bluetooth. They are just making Bluetooth more efficient and reducing the power consumption.

Other


RE: Licensing
By Alphafox78 on 10/3/06, Rating: -1
RE: Licensing
By mezrah on 10/3/2006 12:48:45 PM , Rating: 1
Does Samsung pay you to be an arrogant ass?

Just because Other can read the article, you have to make smartass comments. Other didn't applaud Nokia, condemn Nokia, or anyway show affiliation with Nokia.

Cliffs: Stop trolling


RE: Licensing
By Alphafox78 on 10/3/06, Rating: 0
RE: Licensing
By RogueSpear on 10/3/2006 2:10:47 PM , Rating: 3
This sounds like it has all the potential to become a wireless "Memory Stick". Having been a user of Bluetooth products for around five years now, I'm glad to see that it's finally becoming useful, stable, and common. Whoever claims that it's not widely used should do a little research. Annual shipments of Bluetooth enabled devices is in the billions (yes with a "B").

Bluetooth sure didn't get off to a great start and devices from different vendors may or may not have worked with each other. But that was a long time ago. It's come a long way and I would rather see further development and investment in Bluetooth than some new wet dream from Nokia.


RE: Licensing
By lemonadesoda on 10/3/2006 7:14:33 PM , Rating: 2
Bluetooth is still terrible when it comes to PC or PDA integration. Just answer me this simple one:

Where to get bluetooth drivers/utilities for you PC or PDA?

Aweful aweful aweful proprietary format that requires "licensed" software and drivers that are rarely if never updated or disappear . Widcomm out of business, etc. Red-M access points not longer supported, etc. I wish I never wasted the money on bluetooth for the PC and PDA.

(But I'm happy with my Nokia phone to headset is OK though!)


RE: Licensing
By AlexWade on 10/3/06, Rating: -1
RE: Licensing
By Zandros on 10/3/2006 4:23:10 PM , Rating: 2
There is still an Ericsson. The Sony Ericsson company is just a joint venture for mobile phones.


"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments









botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki