We at Mahana (www.getmahana.com) have used the Qualcomm beacons and find their offering intriguing and their build quality really nice. They go above and beyond the iBeacon standard, so I would call them "iBeacon-like." The biggest challenge with these and most beacons is the battery life. I wonder if MLB is using the small CR2032 battery ones or the 4 AA ones. Either way in either 3 months or a year, they will have to change the batteries on thousands of devices.
I cannot wait for solar and/or A/C powered devices.
There are many kinds of iBeacon. Some last longer battery-wise, but they may have less features.
In fact, devices like iPhone and Android phone can be iBeacons too.
Sure, they included Do Not Track in their browser, just as Safari and Chrome and Firefox now offer too. Bing still ignores it last I knew, even tho they're a MS product. Just do a search for "Bing ignores Do Not Track".
Sure, they included Do Not Track in their browser, just as Safari and Chrome and Firefox now offer too. Bing still ignores it last I knew, even tho they're a MS product. Just do a search for "Bing ignores Do Not Track".
They obey DNT. Otherwise people will be kicking MS' ass right now.
What gets ignored may be IE's DNT "default on" policy. Advertisers agreed to the entire DNT framework provided the DNT flag is off by default. But IE defaults it to on, pissing off the advertisers.
MLB is using Qualcomm beacons. I have several Qualcomm beacons on my desk right now. They are not true iBeacons (just take the BLE Explorer down to the Apple store to see the difference in what they broadcast). MLB will not be using iOS or Android devices because a sub-$20 beacon is much cheaper than a bulky iPod Touch, iPhone, or Andoird device. My quoted times of 3 months and 1 year come directly from my contact at Qualcomm. I have the pleasure of leading our beacon team at Mahana, so I am living and breathing this stuff daily.
BTW, if you are in Austin for SXSWi, come to the beacon meetup. Find it at http://btle.eventbrite.com and I will see you there
MLB is using Qualcomm beacons. I have several Qualcomm beacons on my desk right now. They are not true iBeacons (just take the BLE Explorer down to the Apple store to see the difference in what they broadcast). MLB will not be using iOS or Android devices because a sub-$20 beacon is much cheaper than a bulky iPod Touch, iPhone, or Andoird device. My quoted times of 3 months and 1 year come directly from my contact at Qualcomm. I have the pleasure of leading our beacon team at Mahana, so I am living and breathing this stuff daily.
BTW, if you are in Austin for SXSWi, come to the beacon meetup. Find it at http://btle.eventbrite.com and I will see you there
Yes, it depends on your use cases of course. Some iBeacon claims longer battery life perhaps because they emit less ?
As for MLB not using straight iBeacons.... that's in the stadium side. Every iOS7 device is an iBeacon. That's what's driving the iBeacon economy today.
Yes, it depends on your use cases of course. Some iBeacon claims longer battery life perhaps because they emit less ?
As for MLB not using iBeacons.... that's in the stadium side. Every iOS7 device is an iBeacon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbagdonas
MLB is using Qualcomm beacons. I have several Qualcomm beacons on my desk right now. They are not true iBeacons (just take the BLE Explorer down to the Apple store to see the difference in what they broadcast). MLB will not be using iOS or Android devices because a sub-$20 beacon is much cheaper than a bulky iPod Touch, iPhone, or Andoird device. My quoted times of 3 months and 1 year come directly from my contact at Qualcomm. I have the pleasure of leading our beacon team at Mahana, so I am living and breathing this stuff daily.
BTW, if you are in Austin for SXSWi, come to the beacon meetup. Find it at http://btle.eventbrite.com and I will see you there
Beacons can be tuned for transmission power and transmission interval. Most default to 10 times a second which is overkill unless you are running in background mode in iOS because it takes longer to pick up and process the signal. Every iOS device is not an iBeacon. Only those that are turned into transmitters are iBeacons. Every iOS device is iBeacon-capable.
Every iOS device is not an iBeacon. Only those that are turned into transmitters are iBeacons. Every iOS device is iBeacon-capable.
Any iOS7 app can send and receive iBeacon signals if it wants to. So every iOS7 device is effectively an iBeacon in the context of iBeacon-like solutions. Naturally if the device is off, or if the app is not running, then it's just a phone.
You may not understand this. You may NEVER understand this. But I trust Apple. Granted, I trust them as I would trust any mega-corporation, but I trust them.
Think of it this way. Apple already has my money. When I spend $2,500 on a new iMac or $5 on a movie rental from iTunes or however much on a new iPad Air or iPhone ... etc., they have my money. They don't need to get more from me. They sell hardware, and a little bit (it's hilarious that billions is considered a "little bit" at this point) from stuff like iTunes. They don't need to sell my information to make a profit -- they made a profit when they sold me my iMac or iPhone or iPad or whatever.
So, I don't trust Apple because I think they are magically good (though I do think that Tim Cook is a legitimately good person). I trust Apple because it's not really in their interest to screw me over. If they want my money, come out with a cool product. I'll give it to them.
That's fine that you trust them. I only wonder why people would trust Apple to collect their data, but not Google. They're both large, regulated corporations. Why is one inherently better than the other? Once Apple sells data to one third party, it's out there. I doubt there's any clause in the contract that limits what the third party can do with your data, so they can very well sell it to someone else. So my question would be do you believe Apple doesn't sell *any* data at all? I find that highly unlikely.
I only wonder why people would trust Apple to collect their data, but not Google. They're both large, regulated corporations. Why is one inherently better than the other?
Because one company’s business model exists solely to take people’s information and whore it out to the highest bidder… and the other one sells products.
Because one company’s business model exists solely to take people’s information and whore it out to the highest bidder primarily to handle on-line ad placement for other companies with a smaller emphasis on hardware… and the other one primarily sells hardware with a smaller emphasis on ad placement.
Difference? I don't get paid for this either. You're claiming I do? Just want to be totally clear on what you're saying. I think we've had this conversation before.
iBeacons are awesome: if you want to know even more about this technology, feel free to download my white-paper titled "iBeacon Bible" from http://www.gaia-matrix.com
Difference? I don't get paid for this either. You're claiming I do? Just want to be totally clear on what you're saying. I think we’ve had this conversation before.
Sorry, I was looking for an animated gif of a chain being yanked, but there’s apparently a lot that isn’t on the Internet.
That's fine that you trust them. I only wonder why people would trust Apple to collect their data, but not Google. They're both large, regulated corporations. Why is one inherently better than the other? Once Apple sells data to one third party, it's out there. I doubt there's any clause in the contract that limits what the third party can do with your data, so they can very well sell it to someone else. So my question would be do you believe Apple doesn't sell *any* data at all? I find that highly unlikely.
I trust Apple over Google because Google's entire business is predicated on advertising and information collection. While Apple's business is based on selling hardware, and some small amount of income from stuff like iTunes.
As I said, what's Apple's business reason to sell my information when I just gave them $2,700 for a new iMac? Apple's margins are pretty darned high, as we all know. I have an iMac 27", an iPhone 5S, an iPad Air, an older MacBook, and have spent many thousands on iTunes purchases. I can't see what their motivation would be.
Comments
It’s almost as though that doesn’t matter.
We at Mahana (www.getmahana.com) have used the Qualcomm beacons and find their offering intriguing and their build quality really nice. They go above and beyond the iBeacon standard, so I would call them "iBeacon-like." The biggest challenge with these and most beacons is the battery life. I wonder if MLB is using the small CR2032 battery ones or the 4 AA ones. Either way in either 3 months or a year, they will have to change the batteries on thousands of devices.
I cannot wait for solar and/or A/C powered devices.
There are many kinds of iBeacon. Some last longer battery-wise, but they may have less features.
In fact, devices like iPhone and Android phone can be iBeacons too.
Sure, they included Do Not Track in their browser, just as Safari and Chrome and Firefox now offer too. Bing still ignores it last I knew, even tho they're a MS product. Just do a search for "Bing ignores Do Not Track".
Sure, they included Do Not Track in their browser, just as Safari and Chrome and Firefox now offer too. Bing still ignores it last I knew, even tho they're a MS product. Just do a search for "Bing ignores Do Not Track".
They obey DNT. Otherwise people will be kicking MS' ass right now.
What gets ignored may be IE's DNT "default on" policy. Advertisers agreed to the entire DNT framework provided the DNT flag is off by default. But IE defaults it to on, pissing off the advertisers.
MLB is using Qualcomm beacons. I have several Qualcomm beacons on my desk right now. They are not true iBeacons (just take the BLE Explorer down to the Apple store to see the difference in what they broadcast). MLB will not be using iOS or Android devices because a sub-$20 beacon is much cheaper than a bulky iPod Touch, iPhone, or Andoird device. My quoted times of 3 months and 1 year come directly from my contact at Qualcomm. I have the pleasure of leading our beacon team at Mahana, so I am living and breathing this stuff daily.
BTW, if you are in Austin for SXSWi, come to the beacon meetup. Find it at http://btle.eventbrite.com and I will see you there
MLB is using Qualcomm beacons. I have several Qualcomm beacons on my desk right now. They are not true iBeacons (just take the BLE Explorer down to the Apple store to see the difference in what they broadcast). MLB will not be using iOS or Android devices because a sub-$20 beacon is much cheaper than a bulky iPod Touch, iPhone, or Andoird device. My quoted times of 3 months and 1 year come directly from my contact at Qualcomm. I have the pleasure of leading our beacon team at Mahana, so I am living and breathing this stuff daily.
BTW, if you are in Austin for SXSWi, come to the beacon meetup. Find it at http://btle.eventbrite.com and I will see you there
Yes, it depends on your use cases of course. Some iBeacon claims longer battery life perhaps because they emit less ?
As for MLB not using straight iBeacons.... that's in the stadium side. Every iOS7 device is an iBeacon. That's what's driving the iBeacon economy today.
Yes, it depends on your use cases of course. Some iBeacon claims longer battery life perhaps because they emit less ?
As for MLB not using iBeacons.... that's in the stadium side. Every iOS7 device is an iBeacon.
MLB is using Qualcomm beacons. I have several Qualcomm beacons on my desk right now. They are not true iBeacons (just take the BLE Explorer down to the Apple store to see the difference in what they broadcast). MLB will not be using iOS or Android devices because a sub-$20 beacon is much cheaper than a bulky iPod Touch, iPhone, or Andoird device. My quoted times of 3 months and 1 year come directly from my contact at Qualcomm. I have the pleasure of leading our beacon team at Mahana, so I am living and breathing this stuff daily.
BTW, if you are in Austin for SXSWi, come to the beacon meetup. Find it at http://btle.eventbrite.com and I will see you there
Beacons can be tuned for transmission power and transmission interval. Most default to 10 times a second which is overkill unless you are running in background mode in iOS because it takes longer to pick up and process the signal. Every iOS device is not an iBeacon. Only those that are turned into transmitters are iBeacons. Every iOS device is iBeacon-capable.
Back to work on Mahana....
Every iOS device is not an iBeacon. Only those that are turned into transmitters are iBeacons. Every iOS device is iBeacon-capable.
Any iOS7 app can send and receive iBeacon signals if it wants to. So every iOS7 device is effectively an iBeacon in the context of iBeacon-like solutions. Naturally if the device is off, or if the app is not running, then it's just a phone.
You may not understand this. You may NEVER understand this. But I trust Apple. Granted, I trust them as I would trust any mega-corporation, but I trust them.
Think of it this way. Apple already has my money. When I spend $2,500 on a new iMac or $5 on a movie rental from iTunes or however much on a new iPad Air or iPhone ... etc., they have my money. They don't need to get more from me. They sell hardware, and a little bit (it's hilarious that billions is considered a "little bit" at this point) from stuff like iTunes. They don't need to sell my information to make a profit -- they made a profit when they sold me my iMac or iPhone or iPad or whatever.
So, I don't trust Apple because I think they are magically good (though I do think that Tim Cook is a legitimately good person). I trust Apple because it's not really in their interest to screw me over. If they want my money, come out with a cool product. I'll give it to them.
That's fine that you trust them. I only wonder why people would trust Apple to collect their data, but not Google. They're both large, regulated corporations. Why is one inherently better than the other? Once Apple sells data to one third party, it's out there. I doubt there's any clause in the contract that limits what the third party can do with your data, so they can very well sell it to someone else. So my question would be do you believe Apple doesn't sell *any* data at all? I find that highly unlikely.
I only wonder why people would trust Apple to collect their data, but not Google. They're both large, regulated corporations. Why is one inherently better than the other?
Because one company’s business model exists solely to take people’s information and whore it out to the highest bidder… and the other one sells products.
You make a tidy little living, don’t you.
I manage to get by. You?
Difference is I don’t get paid for this.
Difference? I don't get paid for this either. You're claiming I do? Just want to be totally clear on what you're saying. I think we've had this conversation before.
Andy Cavallini
Sorry, I was looking for an animated gif of a chain being yanked, but there’s apparently a lot that isn’t on the Internet.
That's fine that you trust them. I only wonder why people would trust Apple to collect their data, but not Google. They're both large, regulated corporations. Why is one inherently better than the other? Once Apple sells data to one third party, it's out there. I doubt there's any clause in the contract that limits what the third party can do with your data, so they can very well sell it to someone else. So my question would be do you believe Apple doesn't sell *any* data at all? I find that highly unlikely.
I trust Apple over Google because Google's entire business is predicated on advertising and information collection. While Apple's business is based on selling hardware, and some small amount of income from stuff like iTunes.
As I said, what's Apple's business reason to sell my information when I just gave them $2,700 for a new iMac? Apple's margins are pretty darned high, as we all know. I have an iMac 27", an iPhone 5S, an iPad Air, an older MacBook, and have spent many thousands on iTunes purchases. I can't see what their motivation would be.
Like I said, they already have my money.