Freescale Ultra Wide Band approved by FCC
Is this the Fire Wireless that we have been hearing about and is it soon enough to get onto the new imac?
Read on:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1634014,00.asp
Read on:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1634014,00.asp
Comments
Originally posted by TednDi
is it soon enough to get onto the new imac?
Read on:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1634014,00.asp
Your joking right?
Oh yeah sure it's be in there. They have not started a motherboard or anything yet.
EDIT: This actually makes some sense the more I read into it.
More reading on the subject here.
One interesting quote:
Freescale's existing XtremeSpectrum chipset can support short-range wireless UWB connections up to 114Mbit/s. Samples are available to hardware makers, and it will be commercially available in the third quarter, the company said. At least one PC vendor has already committed to adopt it.
And from this page , comes an actual pic of the MSI solution of HD streaming:
However, seeing as Apple is not a member of the UWB Forum, I am not sure this will be in an Apple product soon.
Originally posted by onlooker
Your joking right?
Oh yeah sure it's be in there. They have not started a motherboard or anything yet.
Yea, you're toally right and what about that 3ghz g5 powermac we were promised by summer.
Apple has been an early adopter of technologies such as wifi.
What I am merely conjecturing oh wise one is that perhaps they were waiting for FCC approval for some component of the G5 imac. Apple is privi to prototype and uncertified hardware. Streaming video would be something that apple would be interested in.
Now unless you were the guy sitting next to steve J in the recovery room asking him questions while he was still sedated. consider the fact that you might be as clueless as the rest of us.
Pizza box and digital hub
wireless video ? Airport Express v.2?
According to Adams, XS110-powered devices will both transmit the highest number of bits per hour and outperform its competition in terms of power efficiency. The first generation of the products support throughput of 100 Mbps to 110 Mbps and the company's road map aims for speeds of 220 Mbps by the end of the year. A year from now Freescale hopes to deliver 480 Mbps and possibly even a 1-Gbps UWB chip sets, Adams said.
Initially, the technology will likely be used to transmit high-definition video signals, Adams said, followed by wireless connections between external media servers and hard drives.
"For me to put up a large display with a set-top box connected to it, I want the best quality, so I use DVI digital interface cables," Adams said. "But a 5-meter DVI cable costs $140 or so. It's quite an expensive piece of wire. If I actually want to have flexibility in positioning my display, with a better wire, I'm constrained by the high cost of cabling."
Securing that content will likely be a layered affair, requiring more work, said Stephen Wood, a marketing manager for UWB at Intel, in Santa Clara, Calif. a member of the MBOA camp. The IEEE has mandated some simple AES 128-bit security provisions for UWB, but that's it, Adams said
Apple may or may not use this technology. There will be competing formats to consider(ieee 802.11e and I think 802.11n). In the end consumers will benefit from fast wireless connections.
Originally posted by TednDi
What I am merely conjecturing oh wise one is that perhaps they were waiting for FCC approval for some component of the G5 imac. Apple is privi to prototype and uncertified hardware. Streaming video would be something that apple would be interested in.
Good point. I didn't read the article either. (I still haven't)
Although the way you said it - it appeared like "if they" also found out today - was there time? I had to scoff at that. It seemed like a completely unreasonable question.
Originally posted by onlooker
Good point. I didn't read the article either. (I still haven't)
Although the way you said it - it appeared like "if they" also found out today - was there time? I had to scoff at that. It seemed like a completely unreasonable question.
oh I see, That sometimes is the problem with the short reply and the format of the boards, Nuance and inflection sometimes go out the window.
on topic:
But isn't this cool?
Can you see the 2 TB hardcards with this technology (see other thread)?
wow!
Originally posted by TednDi
on topic:
But isn't this cool?
Sure is. I remember an article from a year-and-a-half ago on Digitimes talking about a wireless system (New New iMac). I don't think Apple is quite there yet, but it sure would be nice. With the UWB technology, you are limited (without any type of additional equipment) to a distance of 10m, but that is still not bad, considering all viewing is usually done within that distance.
My hazy memory tells me that the times when Apple adopted new tech first are very limited: Most PowerPCs, WiFi, Firewire, Liquid-cooling (actually not first but close enough). BTW, Apple developed firewire so maybe that shouldn't count.
OTOH, Apple often gets to new tech last: ATA66/133, CD-RW, DDR RAM, OS support for multi-button mouse/scroll wheel, optical mice, PCI bus, AGP bus, PCI extreme bus, almost all graphics cards.
Anyway, my point: Although Apple is known as an innovator, most of their innovations are in software, not hardware. IMO, expecting Apple to be the first to adopt bleeding edge hardware is asking too much.
Originally posted by BeigeUser
Anyway, my point: Although Apple is known as an innovator, most of their innovations are in software, not hardware. IMO, expecting Apple to be the first to adopt bleeding edge hardware is asking too much.
You are probably so right on this one.
Bummer.
Originally posted by hmurchison
Apple may or may not use this technology. There will be competing formats to consider(ieee 802.11e and I think 802.11n). In the end consumers will benefit from fast wireless connections.
You may want to look up just what exactly 802.11e is first.
Originally posted by Eugene
You may want to look up just what exactly 802.11e is first.
Been there done that. 802.11e has Quality of Service. All this talk about speed means nothing if I can't guarantee that my video or audio plays without choking
QoS and multimedia support are critical to wireless home networks where voice, video and audio will be delivered. Broadband service providers view QoS and multimedia-capable home networks as an essential ingredient to offering residential customers video on demand, audio on demand, voice over IP and high-speed Internet access.
802.11n seen leapfrogging UWB??
Ultra wideband will be first (define) to super-charge wireless personal area networks in homes with its blazing throughput speeds. But it won't last. One of Wi-Fi's latest flavors, 802.11n , will hop right over the protocol in the digitally networked home as the preferred method of shooting media from one device to another...Although the UWB standard will offer theoretical speeds up to 480 Mbps, the first generation of UWB chipsets won't hit store shelves until 2006 or 2007. And even then, the chipsets and hardware will only offer 100-200 Mbps (define), he said, which doesn't even take required overhead into account...That may spell trouble for UWB, because 802.11n will offer actual throughput of 100 Mbps, after wireless overhead is accounted for. That's quite enough throughput for multiple high-definition video streams. "UWB will wind up being faster in the end. And the chipsets will be cheaper," he added. "But if it's going to compete with Wi-Fi in home entertainment networking, it will probably be in non-real-time data transfer, such as moving video from a camera or camcorder to a PC, where distance is not an issue."
I've added emphasis to important points. I think Apple stays Wifi since the roadmap is good and legacy support is there.
Originally posted by hmurchison
Been there done that. 802.11e has Quality of Service. All this talk about speed means nothing if I can't guarantee that my video or audio plays without choking.
That's not the point. 802.11e is not a competing technology on its own. Quality of Service is basically fancy talk for traffic shaping.
802.11e is not analogous to UWB.
Originally posted by Eugene
That's not the point. 802.11e is not a competing technology on its own. Quality of Service is basically fancy talk for traffic shaping.
802.11e is not analogous to UWB.
Oh that's what you meant. No 11e isn't in the same league as UWB in speed, 11n versus UWB will be the interesting battle.