Comments on: Sony, Philips to Create New Wireless Standard

Sony make an open standard my ass! This company is out to corner the consumer market of everything. The new SONY dream: "We make everything, and if we didn't, we will make it again but different enough to be ours."

you havent got it, right? its no wireless network standard. its not meant to rival bluetooth. it serves a completely different purpose. you cant do the above effortless with bluetooth. how do you think you can pay your ski-pass with a bluetooth connection??

with this nfc it would be easy. hold the phone close to the cardchecker, *beep* and you got credited.

------
berny.
www.berny.at

chill out, it is not to replace bluetooth. Remember it is for a range of 20cm. It is for different purpose at all. If not for Sony and Philips, we would not have the benefit of CDs. How do you expect the world to advance when new standards do not surface? Compare the standards that you have now and 10 years ago, you would a lot of them are new.

Sony doen't want to use Bluetooth??? They have built bluetooth already in their laptops and video cams and created a bluetooth stick for the Clie.

Now, if you were ale to watch the Sony - FEEL video before, you'll see when and how they used short distance networking.

Well at least there is one company who is focused enough to integrate all these things!

It's only the US who's not using Bluetooth. Ever thought why small devices don't come out with integrated 802.11?

I don't care if Wi-Fi or Bluetooth wins or they figure out a way to share the same spectrum. I don't want companies saying, "We were going to release a line of wireless networking products in early 2003 but we've decided to wait until 2004 and see what Sony comes out with." I want practical, cheap wireless networking !now! and half the companies waiting until 2004 won't accomplish that.

And both of those are not Americanfirm, and this is a site flooded with American, so it's just normal for them to get jealous ..

American jealousy? Who invented short range wireless networking? hmm.. I think it may have been that big European company named Ericson perhaps. Get your facts right before you bash.

It's not Ericsson now... It's Sony-Ericsson. Here's the link: http://www.sonyericsson.com

SONY-ERICSSON
So it is true, Sony is trying to take over the consumer electronics market. Just like Microsoft but the CEO is a shorter gates look alike dork.

> if they are positioning it as a competition I think the acceptable range
> should be at lease 200cm.

No-one said it was going to be a good competitor but it sure looks like a competitor to me. If you read the press release (link at the end of the article) they talk a little bit about using NFC devices as digital IDs but they also say it is "set to greatly improve the way consumers access data and services wirelessly." NFC will "allow for the transfer of any kind of data between NFC enabled devices such as mobile phones, digital cameras and PDA's as well as to PC's, laptops, game consoles or PC Peripherals, ... aiming at speeds fast enough to transfer high quality images." You don't need to transfer high-quality images to identify yourself to a credit card machine, but you do need to if you want to replace Bluetooth.

I think they are trying to out-Bluetooth Bluetooth. These short-range NFC chipsets will be very low cost and use very little power, even compared to Bluetooth.

Do you people even know how short 20cm is? It's not going to compete with BT at that range and only 1/5th the speed. It's even too short to use for wireless headset to mobile phone connections. In other words, everything that makes BT useful, it can't do.

What it does do is use a wireless keys and payment methods. A lot of companies already use those "wave keys" and many places are using this technology for payment. In HongKong, you can get a transit pass that you just wave to get in. You don't even have to take it out of your wallet.

This is what NFC is supposed to compete with, NOT Bluetooth. And Bluetooth isn't made to compete with WiFi either... but that's a whole new can of worms.

Sony Ericsson is only a joint mobile handset venture. Ericsson is still it's own company, just like Sony is.

are you saying Compact Disc, Floppy is junk ??

You haven't seen how it works yet, just by reading an article you came to the conclusion that this is junk .. bravo ..

all of you out there bitching and moaning about companies making proprietary technology, here's a dose of reality: companies are in the business to make money. PERIOD.

And to make money, they need to create products and technologies that are different (proprietary) from others. You think that the CD was created by a global consortium? You think that airbag was created by all the car manufacturers sitting together in a room?

Those technologies are widely pervasive now because some company decided to make a proprietary product. So shut the hell up and let the grown ups talk.

"I only hope that Bluetooth is so dominant before 2004 that Sony and Philips drop this very very bad idea."

:-) Not likely. They only 'just' put Betamax to bed.

www.startribune.com/stories/789/3192620.html

-Craig Bowers

"It's not Ericsson now... It's Sony-Ericsson. "
Maybe, for a little while longer. They've been quoted by CNet as breaking out of the partnership and doing no more joint products if the current ones don't get profitable shortly.

What if it's 1980, and this is PCinfocenter, and the title is Sony to create new 3.5" Floppy Disk, I bet you guys will be like who needs a 3.5" floppy Disk !!, it's thick and ugly, my 5.25" is thin and sex and it works, I bet 3.5" floppy will suck !!

"My question was 'who created the CD?'"

Your question was a red herring. Creating a device does not make it pervasive or a standard. CDs did not become widely adopted until after they were standardized and people knew that they could buy a player from anyone and play any CD.

"Your comment about CDs being a standard by ISO is after the fact."

No, the comment about CDs is the fact that matters. A business creating a format doesn't make it pervasive or a standard.

"It took a company (or in this case Philips and Sony) to create it. It was then widelyl adopted. Again, creation first, adoption second."

Again, follow your own advice. Learn to read and think a little deeper.

"Again, airbags were first created and widely implemented by Mercedes Benz, who then made it available to other car manufacturers."

Again, it doesn't matter. They're pervasive because of government mandate. So pervasive, in fact, that government had to tone down one of the mandates so that passenger-side airbags could be left out or turned off easily. Remove the mandate, and see how many people stop getting airbags.

"Soon, other companies realized (prior to government mandate) that it made good business sense to provide that as an option."

And until they were mandated, very few people were willing to pay the $1000+ on most low-end cars to get them. Again, if your argument is pervasiveness, then you can't say that the market created this pervasiveness.

"Only after that did the government mandate it."

Which is why it became pervasive, not because it was available as an option which few took. If everyone was taking the option, then government would have never had to mandate it 'for the public good.'

"So the point (again) is the the product was first created by a company, then widely adopted. Mercedes Benz's airbag first, then government mandate."

And the point that evades you is that wide adoption was not causally related to creation. Wide adoption _is_ causally related to mandate, hence wide adoption is a function of _government_ not market.

"While your parents and friends may be glad that you finally got your G.E.D., it really doesn't cut it when you're playing with the big boys."

This is priceless.

"Take those community classes that you've always been thinking about and maybe you'll attain that ever-elusive associates degree."

Actually, I've got a degree in business, which would be why I've a much better understanding of how market economics and government intervention work.

Memory Stick all over again...

"because they still got CD on the head. ...except for the Walkman, that was a good idea, but the rest of them aren't that impacting... I think...
Note: Nintendo made the PSX. Don't go into this crap with me, Sony cheated their way into the system. Long story."

Except CD Sony also made MD (which is a success in anywhere except US because ppl like Tape here) Floppy Disk.

Sony and nintendo made PSX, but Nintendo want to use a 8MB cartridge because they know anything could be cracked and privated, the only way to prvent it is to go proprietary, so they left the PSX project.

"Sony is the first computer maker to ever make bluetooth built-in on their laptop computers"

which model? just curious.

The CD System was already made, Sony just wanted 100% game licensing ability. Since Sony also made the Sound DSP chip for the SNES, they blackmailed Nintendo far into the project with it. Nintendo found some way to break the contract, but lost all rights to the device.

As for the floppy comment, reverse it. The new "floppy" would be only in a few computers, work at a shorter distance and transfer slower.

I never understood MiniDisc, I fear it, of course, I fear and loathe much of Sony and their giant consortium of products.

"Short range is strangely, a good thing because you can 'filter' which machines you want to make a payment to physically by where the handheld/phone/wristwatch/mp3player/whatever is, instead of bringing out the stylus to select from a dropdown box. I can see the real-world equivalent of spammers putting little boxes that are e-cash enabled next to vending machines, hoping people will select the wrong counterparty and make a $100 payment when you really just wanted to buy a coke.
"

I think this is it really. Despite what some have said here, Bluetooth was very much intended to be able to do these sorts of transactions. But - security and spam issues involved with the long range is a potential problem. It seems to me that what Sony and Phillips are proposing is a kind of 'baby' bluetooth. I have no details about how this works, but if i was them, i would not have any sophisticated network management in this standard at all. A device using this standard should simply be able to see the first device that came into range and that is all - the next device in range (while the first 2 are 'talking') would be invisible until one of the others went out of range. This is - of course - just my thoughts on what this should be in order to avoid conflicting with Bluetooth AND find a niche of its own. Really simple, ultra low power wireless for basic transactions.

With a range of only 20cm, this seems like a competitior for IrDA and RFID, not Bluetooth. 20cm is very short, and wouldn't even allow my PDA to communicate with my cell phone in my pocket in most cases. The payment application sounds a lot like RFID, and the data transfer from within 20cm sounds like IrDA.

I think we should concentrate on bluetooth.

People are missing the point.... 20cm is around 8 inches... Tommy Lee can't stand this close to someone with out touching... IR is not a option as it transmits a through light... encription would still have to convert to flashes of light... taking lots of time... with RF you could set it to contain a "MAC Address" to confirm users. I don't see the point for bluetooth as anything more then wireless headphones or phones. Wi-Fi is the need for palm units. Being able to access the net just about anywhere in a major city (Chicago is good for this) to get stock quotes, then paying with my palm at the "Speed pass" station at MickyD's before going into the office... Theres the real problem there replacing the speed pass at Moble... but then again Moble and MickyD's are the only people using it....

Hmm, you're right. I wonder why an layer was implemented for IR like this.

"the only way for someone to intercept your communication would be to stand between you and the receiver"

I'm not very fammiliar with IR, but there are IR remotes where direct line-of-sight isn't required, but can 'bounce' off of one or two walls. that would negate the security offered by the line-of-sight requirement. I was told this was a matter of frequency, and since handhelds can apparently tune the output (hence the programmable remote apps), this might not be a problem though. Just select a frequency that doesn't bounce as much?

But then, another problem might be the transmission arc. A 90degree arc might be a little wide for security.

"(with this Sony/Phillips standard, however, the person would be a little too close for comfort, perhaps, at 20 cm)."

An hi-tech pick-pocket might be able to bump you on the street, so it's not exactly secure. But having to actually confirm the transaction by pressing a button would negate that. Then again, if you are stading there with your hand-held out at a comfortable distance from your body to make the payment, then any would-be theving devices would be almost definitely in your field of view, so I guess it's secure.

IrDA spec calls for transmission distance of up to one metre, and an arc of 30 degrees. Lower the output of the transmitter, and you have less of a chance of the "bounced" signal being readable.

I'm not sure what the specs for the new IrDA layer for financial transactions are, though.

Remote controls generally aren't IrDA compliant, and tend to be higher-output (makes sense, if you want to be able to control your TV from across a room).

rgds,

K. Tran

I was close - SUN had the JVM enabled iButton launched in 1998 (soooo 20th Century) ...

A Java Ring is a finger ring that contains a small microprocessor with built-in capabilities for the user, a sort of smart card that is wearable on a finger. Sun Microsystem's Java Ring was introduced at their JavaOne Conference in 1998 and, instead of a gemstone, contained an inexpensive microprocessor in a stainless-steel iButton running a Java Virtual Machine and preloaded with applets (little application programs). The rings were built by Dallas Semiconductor.

Workstations at the conference had "ring readers" installed on them that downloaded information about the user from the conference registration system. This information was then used to enable a number of personalized services. For example, a robotic machine made coffee according to user preferences, which it downloaded when they snapped the ring into another "ring reader."

Although Java Rings aren't widely used yet, such rings or similar devices could have a number of real-world applications, such as starting your car and having all your vehicle's components (such as the seat, mirrors, and radio selections) automatically adjust to your preferences.

I've used this when I was vacationing in Hong Kong. Really neat actually. It works like my office wireless key. I just wave at the lcok and it opens. I don't even need to remove it from my wallet.

In Hong Kong I was amazed that not only can I use it for the subway (MTR), bus, train, minibus, boats, and tram, but I can also use it on a coke machine to buy a coke, or at fast food places like MacDonalds to pay. I only wished that we could have this much efficiency in North America.

The concept of small values on the cards make sense, I doubt you'd just want to "swipe your card", in order to buy a $30000 car or something...