MLB to reportedly have thousands of iBeacons ready for game day

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 38
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

    Huh? I asked if you had tried it. I already knew I hadn't. image

     

    It’s almost as though that doesn’t matter.

  • Reply 22 of 38
    patsupatsu Posts: 430member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rbagdonas View Post



    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.

  • Reply 23 of 38
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,363member
    patsu wrote: »
    As for MS:
    http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/07/technology/do-not-track/index.htm
    I believe FireFox and IE were the first 2 browsers to support DNT.

    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".
  • Reply 24 of 38
    patsupatsu Posts: 430member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    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.

  • Reply 25 of 38

    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

  • Reply 26 of 38
    patsupatsu Posts: 430member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rbagdonas View Post

     

    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.

  • Reply 27 of 38
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by patsu View Post

     

     

    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 View Post

     

    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....

  • Reply 28 of 38
    patsupatsu Posts: 430member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rbagdonas View Post

     

     

     

    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.

  • Reply 29 of 38
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

     

     

    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.

  • Reply 30 of 38
    Originally Posted by mistercow View Post

    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.

  • Reply 31 of 38
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,363member
    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.
  • Reply 32 of 38
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post



     

     

    You make a tidy little living, don’t you.

  • Reply 33 of 38
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,363member
    You make a tidy little living, don’t you.

    I manage to get by. You?
  • Reply 34 of 38
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

    I manage to get by. You?

     

    Difference is I don’t get paid for this.

  • Reply 35 of 38
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,363member
    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.
  • Reply 36 of 38
    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

    Andy Cavallini
  • Reply 37 of 38
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

    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.

  • Reply 38 of 38
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mistercow View Post

     

     

    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. :)

Sign In or Register to comment.