Wireless Firewire

[MacRumors]

The 1394 Trade Association has approved (http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB20040511S0001) a specification which would allow the development of wireless Firewire devices.
The new Protocol Adaptation Layer (PAL) for IEEE 1394 over IEEE 802.15.3 was approved Monday. In a statement, the trade association said: “The PAL is designed as a standard convergence layer between the 802.15.3 MAC and applications developed for wired 1394. It builds upon the 1394 infrastructure--for example, data formats, connection-management schemes, and time synchronization procedures--and takes advantage of the excellent quality of service available in 802.15.3.”

Examples of new products with the new specification include wireless connections to DVD players and hard drives from set top boxes. Prototype products are expected before the end of the year.

Apple has been an early adopter of Firewire, so adoption of this technology could be expected.

[JFreak]

this might be cool :)

[BakedBeans]

PUT ME DOWN FOR ONE PLEASE

[gola]

This sure opens up a lot of possibilities!

[Diatribe]

Awsome. Put me down for a wireless iSight. That would be neat.

[BakedBeans]

This sure opens up a lot of possibilities!


wont everything have to have its own power supply though??? limiting its possibilities??

[yossele]

what speed can we expect, if FireWire is 400MBs then it should better be closer then farther, otherwise it can be called wireless USB :)

[BakedBeans]

what seepd can we expect, if FireWire is 400MBs then it should better bo closer the farther, otherwise it can bo called wireless USB :)


how about firewireless

[stoid]

I don't see this being AS useful as you might think since you can't transmit power wirelessly, but perhaps you'll be able to get a small power pack that plugs into the device's FireWire port to supply the power. It would be killer for home networks though... and LAN parties!

[blueBomber]

Why is this being called wireless Firewire? Isn't that kind of an oxy-moron? Why don't they call it "Bluetooth - the useful version" :D

[aussiemac86]

I think this has massive potential for stuff like wireless displays and as someone before said wireless i sights.

Also that would be a decent enough speed to stream music over a network wouldnt it, video even. So options to move into "media centres" connecting stereos and TV's etc to computers wirelessly would be very useful

[the061]

Firewireless iPod on the way then?

Put me down for one thanks :D

[Nutzoids]

Kinda makes you think back to that Apple pizza box rumor from last year. You know the one that connects to your TV and records you TV shows and holds all your MP3s. And connect wirelessly. Ummm dreams :rolleyes:

[whooleytoo]

Isn't Wireless FireWire just... "Fire"?

[KC9AIC]

A firewireless iPod is unlikely, because, as others have noted, no power can be given to the iPod. Instead of charging the battery while connecting to your Mac, you're depleting the battery by using a radio transmitter. The possibilities are limited, but still fun to think about.

[thatwendigo]

The point of 1394 over wireless is to speed A/V streaming transmission over a connection without a physical link. Unlike what most people here are thinking, 1394 is a protocol, not a cable and port, that can be applied to more than one medium. Rather than using a packet-driven system like TCP/IP, it streams uncompressed audio and video across the wire. At the moment, the wired. 6-pin connector that Apple sells as FireWire is a 400Mbit/s wired connection, and the and FireWire 800 is just the extension of that to 800Mbit/s.

The wireless format that they're working to reconcile this with, 802.15.3, is supposedly going to move the bandwidth up significantly. However, contrary to what those who are lusting after wireless displays might hope, it's far from being manufactured at this point and might not even have the capacity then. The only "smart displays" on the market can't display video, have their own embedded RAM and processror (just likeI said they would), and are limited to things like text processing, web browsing, and other non-strenuous tasks.

[Wash!!]

I don't see this being AS useful as you might think since you can't transmit power wirelessly, but perhaps you'll be able to get a small power pack that plugs into the device's FireWire port to supply the power. It would be killer for home networks though... and LAN parties!

Transmitting power over the air is been around since the late 1800's Nikola Tesla discovered and it was one of his inventions a wireless electric generator all you have to do was put out an antenna and you got power, he die before e could finished.

Tesla also worked with radio-frequency electromagnetic waves, and despite the claims made by Marconi, actually did invent the idea of Radio as we know it today. (There are numerous patents which bear this out.) In working with radio waves, Tesla created the Tesla coil as a means to generate and receive this form of energy.

Tesla went on to experiment with actual wireless transmission of electrical power. In Colorado Springs, Colorado, he built a laboratory to develop this. The Colorado Springs lab contained the largest Tesla Coil ever built, even today. Called the 'Magnifying Transmitter', it was capable of generating some 300,000 watts of power, and (reportedly) could produce a bolt of lightning 130 feet long. According to local acounts, Tesla actually managed to successfully transmit about 30 to 50 thousand watts of power without wires using the 'Transmitter'.


Transmitting such low power to run appliances like dvd's should not be too difficult...

[whooleytoo]

A firewireless iPod is unlikely, because, as others have noted, no power can be given to the iPod. Instead of charging the battery while connecting to your Mac, you're depleting the battery by using a radio transmitter. The possibilities are limited, but still fun to think about.

You're right there; an iPod with both might be feasible (i.e. the iPod acting as the source for other wireless Firewire (Wi-- WiFi? :D ) devices nearby), but there's still the problem of the additional battery drain of the antenna, and is unlikely unless/until Apple significently improves the iPod's battery life.

[gekko513]

Isn't Wireless FireWire just... "Fire"?
:D Nice one. How about FireWave(s)

[Stella]

Tesla had all his research taken away by the government... today could be slightly different if he was allowed to continue.

Wireless FW would be great. Imagine: sitting outside on my patio with my iBook.. and still be able to use my FW hard discs via wireless FW.

Transmitting power over the air is been around since the late 1800's Nikola Tesla discovered and it was one of his inventions a wireless electric generator all you have to do was put out an antenna and you got power, he die before e could finished.


Tesla also worked with radio-frequency electromagnetic waves, and despite the claims made by Marconi, actually did invent the idea of Radio as we know it today. (There are numerous patents which bear this out.) In working with radio waves, Tesla created the Tesla coil as a means to generate and receive this form of energy.

Tesla went on to experiment with actual wireless transmission of electrical power. In Colorado Springs, Colorado, he built a laboratory to develop this. The Colorado Springs lab contained the largest Tesla Coil ever built, even today. Called the 'Magnifying Transmitter', it was capable of generating some 300,000 watts of power, and (reportedly) could produce a bolt of lightning 130 feet long. According to local acounts, Tesla actually managed to successfully transmit about 30 to 50 thousand watts of power without wires using the 'Transmitter'.


Transmitting such low power to run appliances like dvd's should not be too difficult...

[ClimbingTheLog]

wont everything have to have its own power supply though??? limiting its possibilities??

Whether it makes sense or not, the consumer mentality is that power cords are easy, anything else is hard.

We know that bus-powered firewire devices are as easy as you can get, but firewireless will appeal to the mass market.

Besides, if the range is good you might get to go further than 1394, and most people aren't up to stringing 1394b optical cable around the house.

[Wash!!]

Tesla had all his research taken away by the government... today could be slightly different if he was allowed to continue.

Wireless FW would be great. Imagine: sitting outside on my patio with my iBook.. and still be able to use my FW hard discs via wireless FW.

HE also invented the laser cannon or the high intensity particle bean that the US military has been experimenting since the "Star Wars" program began en the mid 80's . Tesla was as brilliant as Einstein was and possible more..

[ClimbingTheLog]

Apple has been an early adopter of Firewire

Good thing since they invented it. :)

[Pedro Estarque]

Apple has been an early adopter of Firewire, so adoption of this technology could be expected.

I thought Apple was the original developer and not a first adopter :confused:

[Pedro Estarque]

Good thing since they invented it. :)

you were faster then I was...
did they invented it or not after all ?

[filipp]

Great!
I've always wanted to remove as many cables as possible from my powerbook. So now.. lets see what we can get rid off with that WirelessFW..

Starting with AC-adaptor, still there, just as the earphones-cable.

On the other side, the ethernet cable is gone thanks to Wi-Fi - Check.
The FW800 cable connecting the lacie-drive will be gone - Check.
The iPod dock can act standalone, just like the above - Check.
No more monitor cable - Check.
Having a BT-mouse keeps the USB slot empty - Check.

I must say I like the idea! Now, if we only could get over some amperes wirelessly =D

/ filipp

[macridah]

how about firewireless

that's cool. i like that.

[BakedBeans]

Whether it makes sense or not, the consumer mentality is that power cords are easy, anything else is hard.

We know that bus-powered firewire devices are as easy as you can get, but firewireless will appeal to the mass market.

Besides, if the range is good you might get to go further than 1394, and most people aren't up to stringing 1394b optical cable around the house.

yeah but its still not going to make anythin trely wirless ie speakers ect they will need to have batts or powercords....but its still great i agree because as soon as we get wirless power of somekind then bombs away,

[pjkelnhofer]

I thought Apple was the original developer and not a first adopter :confused:

They did invent it. It was originally designed to replace SCSI. They even won an Emmy award for it. IEEE simply adopted it as a standard later on.

For a name, to me the obvious is WiFiWi.

ps. I know it is off topic but it is good to see people giving Tesla his due. I once sent an angry letter to "Beakman's World" for mis-stating that Marconi invented the radio. I like to think that if he were alive today, Tesla would be using a Dual G5.
(Tesla:Apple as Edison:MicroSoft)

[kedward1901]

As many others have said, Apple weren't early adopters. They invented FireWire.

From 1394 Trade Association (http://www.1394ta.org/):

"The 1394 digital link standard was conceived in 1986 by technologists at Apple Computer, who chose the trademark 'FireWire', in reference to its speeds of operation. The first specification for this link was completed in 1987. It was adopted in 1995 as the IEEE 1394 standard. A number of IEEE 1394 products are now available including digital camcorders with the IEEE 1394 link, IEEE 1394 digital video editing equipment, digital VCRs, digital cameras, digital audio players, 1394 IC's and a wealth of other infrastructure products such as connectors, cables, test equipment, software toolkits, and emulation models.

"The 1394 Trade Association was founded in 1994 to support the development of computer and consumer electronics systems that can be easily connected with each other via a single serial multimedia link. The IEEE 1394 multimedia connection enables simple, low cost, high bandwidth isochronous (real time) data interfacing between computers, peripherals, and consumer electronics products such as camcorders, VCRs, printers, PCs, TVs, and digital cameras. With IEEE 1394 compatible products and systems, users can transfer video or still images from a camera or camcorder to a printer, PC, or television, with no image degradation. The 1394 Trade Association includes more than 170 companies and continues to grow."

[dongmin]

Am I missing something here? What's the point of doing firewire over a wireless network if the network maxes out at 11 Mbps??? What's this 802.15.3 standard about? Don't products like digital cameras (high-end) and TiVos already do wireless transmission of data via 802.11g?

This fi-wi-fi-seems impractical until the wireless network standard changes...

[pjkelnhofer]

Am I missing something here? What's the point of doing firewire over a wireless network if the network maxes out at 11 Mbps??? What's this 802.15.3 standard about? Don't products like digital cameras (high-end) and TiVos already do wireless transmission of data via 802.11g?

This fi-wi-fi-seems impractical until the wireless network standard changes...

Maybe it will change was the wireless network standard is. There is room for more than one wireless protocol in the word. One would hope that eventually one would win out, but look at how many ways there still are to connect a hard drive (SCSI, ATA, SATA, etc.)

My guess is that the goal of this is to have faster wireless transmission of data while following the 1394 protocol.

[arsa]

Am I missing something here? What's the point of doing firewire over a wireless network if the network maxes out at 11 Mbps??? changes...

802.15 is a UWB standard. Same idea (Ultra Wide Band) is used for Wireless USB by the way. The speeds will start with 100Mbit and be able to go to 200 and 400 quite easily. It works over much shorter distances (10 feet max), since UWB is not radio in classic sense, it's alot of noise, so FCC had to limit the power output of those devices alot.

[dho]

Am I missing something here? What's the point of doing firewire over a wireless network if the network maxes out at 11 Mbps??? What's this 802.15.3 standard about? Don't products like digital cameras (high-end) and TiVos already do wireless transmission of data via 802.11g?

This fi-wi-fi-seems impractical until the wireless network standard changes...

Who said the network maxed out at 11Mbps? This is NOT 802.11ANYTHING. It is just a way to use the 1394 protocol without wires. You would be more likely to get 400Mbps, not 11 :)

This has quite a different purpose then the 802.11 standard. Instead of connecting tivos or computers together, this will likely be used to add storage to them individually.

Sure 802.11g is faster then b, but its by no means fast. Despite that the bandwidth for 802.11g was said to be 54, it is really more around the twenties. 20 Mbps can get gobled up pretty quick.


BTW, i would like to take credit for sending this to arn over aim last night :)

[sinisterdesign]

Am I missing something here? What's the point of doing firewire over a wireless network if the network maxes out at 11 Mbps??? What's this 802.15.3 standard about? Don't products like digital cameras (high-end) and TiVos already do wireless transmission of data via 802.11g?

This fi-wi-fi-seems impractical until the wireless network standard changes...

i think people mentioning "wi-fi" have confused you. if i'm reading this correctly, wi-fi (as we know it currently) is not in the picture. this is a wireless transmission of data itself, not relying on 802.11. this would be 802.15.3, an all new standard.

i don't care if my monitor has a cable hanging off the back of it, but give me a streaming media server btw my Mac, Tivo, tv, iPod, etc. and you've got me salivating...

[IBSNOWEDIN]

Come on Wireless ipod...

[Steven1621]

wireless ipod here we come!

[Penman]

wireless ipod here we come!

Apple have been hiring people to work on this (and Internet access for the iPod) for a while. It's coming with 100% certainty. I think it might get WiFi or similar before wireless FW though.

[kylos]

Ok, 802.15.3 and 802.11 are wireless protocols. 802.15.3 likely works on a different frequency and bandwidth rate than 802.11. That's why they're named differently. 802.15.3 would likely have much more capability since it is being suggested for WI--FI.

Firewire (IEEE 1394) is a communications protocol. It defines how a communication is to be sent and recieved so that a signal, transmitted through whatever medium, is given a meaning or significance other than being some electromagnetic series of pulses.

So firewire can be implemented through various media, wireless or wired. It is essentially a wrapper for a raw transmittal protocol that provides a level of abstraction with which software can communicate. This means that applications that communicate with firewire should be able to use wired or wireless versions without any change to application code.

[tjwett]

anyone else here remember a year or two ago when those weird box shots popped up for something called "Pal"? well, this is called PAL. remember, green lightbulb on the box? maybe this is it.

[tjwett]

PAL:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=28469

[Chappers]

Called the 'Magnifying Transmitter', it was capable of generating some 300,000 watts of power, and (reportedly) could produce a bolt of lightning 130 feet long.

I think I prefer the power cable than getting zapped by one of these. Probably help with mosquitoes though.

[jcshas]

Sounds cool, we'll have to wait and see if/how they decide to implement this new technology. One thing for sure, Apple's about the only company out there with enough imagination to come up with a product that would benefit from this.

[nagromme]

Wireless power transmission sounds neat. Just don't expect me to stand in the middle!

[SiliconAddict]

Wireless power transmission sounds neat. Just don't expect me to stand in the middle!

Ditto. :eek: Then again maybe this will be the next evolution to the coffee warmer. You know. Those little electric plates some people have to put on their desk at work. Instead just put your coffee between your laptop and your mouse and bam. Instant hot coffee. Lunch? Not a problem. Drop a Stovetop meal between your laptop and your external hard drive. 5 minutes and you've got lunch. Apple innovation at its finest. :)

Seriously though. A few years back I read on news.com of a tech that allows electricity to flow through surface contact. So say your entire desktop is one big recharger. You wouldn't need wires. The kicker? Touching the surface won't electrocute you. Something with the materials used. I think it’s the same principle used for those Sonic care toothbrushes. Couple that with wireless Firewire and you get some very cool options. Drop your PDA, iPod, camera, external hard drive on your desk and they all start charging and all automatically link to your puter via wireless Firewire. Coolness. :cool:

[virividox]

that will interesting if they get it to work!!! how will it work im really curious

[zelman]

Transmitting power over the air is been around since the late 1800's Nikola Tesla discovered and it was one of his inventions a wireless electric generator all you have to do was put out an antenna and you got power, he die before e could finished.

but, every speaker in your house would make an insane amount of noise, every CRT on the block would be useless, and you'd give your neighborhood cancer.

[Lanbrown]

Ok, 802.15.3 and 802.11 are wireless protocols. 802.15.3 likely works on a different frequency and bandwidth rate than 802.11.

They just cannot pick their spectrum, they either have to buy it or use one of the unlicensed spectrums, which are 900Mhz, 2.4GHz and 5GHz. 802.11b/g and Bluetooth are all on 2.4GHz. 802.11a is on 5.7GHz, cordless phone are at 900MHz, 2.4 and 5.8GHz.

[JoE950]

all we really need is a wireless (secure) super high quality video transmission equal or close to dvi, so we could have a wireless monitor.

but taking that idea further, apple could remove the guts out of a power book, insert a huge battery, and include wireless devices (that wont interfere with the video feed) and have the thing linked to your PowerMac "base station".

what you get is a laptop with the full power of the G5, with nothing to run but an lcd and a wireless receiver.. the battery would take up the space, and weight, of the traditional laptop guts, and would use very little power since the powermac on the desk would be doing all the processing and disk spinning... the only real drawback is that youd have to be near the power mac (in the same building/house) until we get a wireless network capable of transmitting all these signals across the country so you can get to your powermac from wherever.

perhaps it could even include a wireless optical drive since you would need access to that from the laptop, but that could cause issues with signal usage and might require its own receiver and transmitter from laptop to powermac..

i dont know, if apple had this idea, im sure the could make it work, and work well. i just think tablet pcs are a dumb idea, and this would be a much wiser solution. the same could go for pdas. super pdas with computer back ends doing all the work so they are thinner than ever.. wow i could just keep ranting but ill stop here. sorry :rolleyes:

[dizastor]

well, I'm surrounded by my Airport, Cell Phone, Bluetooth, Firewireless Hard drives, and my Wireless Power supply... anyone else notice the giant tumor growing on my back? and... why is my cat having a seizure?


[/sarcasm]

[Lanbrown]

Seriously though. A few years back I read on news.com of a tech that allows electricity to flow through surface contact. So say your entire desktop is one big recharger. You wouldn't need wires. The kicker? Touching the surface won't electrocute you. Something with the materials used. I think it?s the same principle used for those Sonic care toothbrushes. Couple that with wireless Firewire and you get some very cool options. Drop your PDA, iPod, camera, external hard drive on your desk and they all start charging and all automatically link to your puter via wireless Firewire. Coolness. :cool:

Actually the principle is different. The mat that you are talking about has a lot of contacts that provide DC power and they are turned on and off depending on if there is a device touching it. The reason why you can't be electrocuted or even feel it is that the amps and voltage are both too low. You can go and grab the positive and negative of a 12 volt car battery and it will do nothing. Why? There isn't enough voltage to overcome the resistance in your body, so you feel nothing. Ever dealt with a bad PS plugged into a outlet? You feel it and that's about it, it won't kill you. 220 is going to hurt though. Add water into the mix and now it's lethal. If you spill something on the mat, those contacts will not have any power going to them.

The sonic care toothbrushes use a differnt sceheme. There are no contacts like the mat.

[Lanbrown]

all we really need is a wireless (secure) super high quality video transmission equal or close to dvi, so we could have a wireless monitor.

If it's wireless it will never be totally secure.

[JoE950]

If it's wireless it will never be totally secure.

yeah its a bad idea if your doing dumb stuff and making yourself a target. but if your just doing normal things and not hosting a kiddy porn ring, you should be fine.

is it ok to say kiddy porn here?

[ingenious]

Am I missing something here? What's the point of doing firewire over a wireless network if the network maxes out at 11 Mbps??? What's this 802.15.3 standard about? Don't products like digital cameras (high-end) and TiVos already do wireless transmission of data via 802.11g?

This fi-wi-fi-seems impractical until the wireless network standard changes...

its a completely diff standard. it wouldnt transport over airport (802.11b) or airport extreme (802.11g). It would transport over its own wireless network, at speeds higher than fw.

[JoE950]

Federal Agents are on their way to your home as we speak... thanks to the Freedom of Information Act... or something related to Homeland Security

haha, anyways just adding some encryption (like with airport) will make it possible for vendors to say its "secure" and thats all the consumer needs to hear until we all die of cancer. if you have stuff that really needs to be hush hush, then you really shouldnt be on any kind of network to begin with.

[Wonder Boy]

wireless firewire, eh? perhaps for video transmissions to the rumored apple box?

[Wash!!]

but, every speaker in your house would make an insane amount of noise, every CRT on the block would be useless, and you'd give your neighborhood cancer.

it's all about finding the right frequency to transmit the power. And it was all experimental in the 1800's and it was done with 1800's tech. Today it is more probable to make work, as of today we have cell phones that according to some groups also give you cancer, the radiation from your toaster give you cancer, anything give you cancer, who's to say that using wi-fi give you cancer...

The US government took all his research and experiments who knows what it can do today...

[Trowaman]

I'm likning this, but I'm still waiting for wireless speakers. 2 cords have really bugged me on my "wireless" iMac. Mouse and speaker cords. I got the mouse taken care of byt speakers . . . it could be so cooooolll . . . .

But let's see, we could also give me wireless hook up to my video camera and iPod. I really like where this is going.

[jackieonasses]

I'm likning this, but I'm still waiting for wireless speakers. 2 cords have really bugged me on my "wireless" iMac. Mouse and speaker cords. I got the mouse taken care of byt speakers . . . it could be so cooooolll . . . .

But let's see, we could also give me wireless hook up to my video camera and iPod. I really like where this is going.
well there are wireless speakers..but it uses radio frequencies...and is compressed...i think...

[X_Entity]

I love wireless stuff.

One of my neighbours ( don't know which one ) has just installed a wireless network which means I now have another link to the net doubling my effective bandwidth. With the advent of wireless storage as well I'll be laughing. Now all I need is for him to get a wireless display adapter to go with his wireless keyboard and mouse and before you know it I'll have hijacked his computer completely.

Is it really so hard to plug in a cable ?

Would you really want to sacrifice your data security for the sake of a second of convenience ?

Air is not a good transmission medium and transfer speeds will still be affected by atmospheric pressure, RF interference, wet leaves etc. etc. etc.

Wifi-FiWi a great toy to play with but I'd rather have a wired FireWire 1600 than a crippled Wireless version.

[gwangung]

What? Nobody's come up with WiFire?

[Hattig]

No more monitor cable - Check.

NO!

When will people realise that transmitting a display wirelessly is near impossible, unless it is reasonably basic, reasonably static or small.

A 1280x1024 display takes up 5MB of memory. Lets assume a 60Hz refresh rate. That is 300MB per second of data that has to be streamed 100% reliably. Easy over a cable, even though that is approaching the limits of the current DVI standard for digital video interconnect.

Firewire, even in its best wired incarnation is 800Mbps. You might be able to show a 640x480 display over that.

Wireless Firewire will undoubtably be slower - probably around 100Mbps. Not even enough for a 480x320 256-colour display to be updated at 60Hz. Maybe a whole new era of dumb PDAs and tablet PCs could be made using this technology - no local processing power except a screen, control circuitry and a WiFire chip - maybe some display cache memory to reduce bandwidth use on mainly static displays. Might as well add a processor to manage this all ... oh wait!

[Hattig]

I'm likning this, but I'm still waiting for wireless speakers. 2 cords have really bugged me on my "wireless" iMac. Mouse and speaker cords. I got the mouse taken care of byt speakers . . . it could be so cooooolll . . . .

Now this is a useful use.

A 6 speaker system at 24-bit resolution and 96kHz sampling rate is only 1.7MBps of data, or 14Mbps - a fraction of the bandwidth that even 100Mbps WiFire would provide.

Of course, now I'd need to power my speakers individually, and each speaker (or at least each group of speakers) would need its own amplification circuit ... but at least I won't have speaker cable limiting where I can place my speakers.

[Omad0n]

2 things, first the things that could come from a wire less fire wire could be really cool. Though as someone pointed out it will be a while. The other is that I wanted to thank you guys for talking a bunch about tesla. It's made me want to go read up some on this man. :)

[denm316]

I wireleass iPod dock would be nice, the iPod would not need to be modified, just the actual dock.

[appleface]

wireless imac monitors.

[PopularEthics]

NO!

When will people realise that transmitting a display wirelessly is near impossible, unless it is reasonably basic, reasonably static or small.

A 1280x1024 display takes up 5MB of memory. Lets assume a 60Hz refresh rate. That is 300MB per second of data that has to be streamed 100% reliably. Easy over a cable, even though that is approaching the limits of the current DVI standard for digital video interconnect. Firewire, even in its best wired incarnation is 800Mbps. You might be able to show a 640x480 display over that.


Hold up. Why so powerful a monitor? a 1024 x 768 LCD at 24bit colour at 20 hz (You wouldn't need the crazy refresh speed that CRTs do because LCDs refresh the whole screen at once, not just one pixel at a time) would need only 400Mb/s AT MOST. A lossless compression scheme (ie many pixels on the desktop don't change from second to second) could halve that for all but full screen videos.


Wireless Firewire will undoubtbly be slower - probably around 100Mbps. Not even enough for a 480x320 256-colour display to be updated at 60Hz. Maybe a whole new era of dumb PDAs and tablet PCs could be made using this technology - no local processing power except a screen, control circuitry and a WiFire chip - maybe some display cache memory to reduce bandwidth use on mainly static displays. Might as well add a processor to manage this all ... oh wait!

No processor necessary, as long as the wireless protocol gets the same speed that the wired-firewire gets, I think you could work a great little display. (The 802.13 specs are talking about only 55Mbps, so I'm not too confident that it will match). Imagine a 2lb 1/2" thick pad you can carry anywhere in the house or office, but still have a cheap, upgradeable desktop in the closet somewhere.

I like! :cool:

[BrianKonarsMac]

shouldn't we be calling this "wireless firewire" WiFi? after all it does run off the 802.11 standard if i'm not mistaken, so isn't it just another extension of it? someone please explain!

[Hattig]

Hold up. Why so powerful a monitor? a 1024 x 768 LCD at 24bit colour at 20 hz (You wouldn't need the crazy refresh speed that CRTs do because LCDs refresh the whole screen at once, not just one pixel at a time) would need only 400Mb/s AT MOST. A lossless compression scheme (ie many pixels on the desktop don't change from second to second) could halve that for all but full screen videos.


People are talking about connecting their system monitors up using this!
I assure you that they will expect more than 1024x768, or to be able to watch a video in more than 1/4 of the screen.

Lossless compression of displays works well when the display is reasonably static. MacOS X is not reasonably static.

You won't see Apple sell wireless displays for computers because people will expect it to work like a wired display, and that just isn't possible.


No processor necessary, as long as the wireless protocol gets the same speed that the wired-firewire gets, I think you could work a great little display. (The 802.13 specs are talking about only 55Mbps, so I'm not too confident that it will match). Imagine a 2lb 1/2" thick pad you can carry anywhere in the house or office, but still have a cheap, upgradeable desktop in the closet somewhere.

I like! :cool:

That's a mightly large assumption there about wireless speeds. Leading edge Firewire speed at the moment is 800Mbps. Leading edge wireless speeds are around 100Mbps, but what is achieved is usually a lot less.

Anyway, processors are cheap when they aren't leading edge performers. Not having a processor in there would be a false economy. I like my PDAs to be usable out of the range of my system!

I'd rather have a system cost $50 more and be usable on its own, and simply use WiFire to access content, data, network, etc on a server machine than actually run itself on that machine. It would be nice to remove expensive costly PDA/mobile data storage solutions from the equation. WiFire would be able to handle streaming a DivX/QT/etc video without a problem, and hopefully the processor in the portable system will be powerful enough to decode and play it. Such an "iSlate" could run on a 4xx series processor from IBM, or even a clocked down 750 or similar.

[javabear90]

Seriously though. A few years back I read on news.com of a tech that allows electricity to flow through surface contact. So say your entire desktop is one big recharger. You wouldn't need wires. The kicker? Touching the surface won't electrocute you. Something with the materials used. I think it’s the same principle used for those Sonic care toothbrushes. Couple that with wireless Firewire and you get some very cool options. Drop your PDA, iPod, camera, external hard drive on your desk and they all start charging and all automatically link to your puter via wireless Firewire. Coolness. :cool:


I've heard about this. My dream world: Every table top has one of these and gigabit free wireless every where. Of course with my G6 8.0 ghz laptop :D

[arsa]

They just cannot pick their spectrum

UWB is very wide spectrum, blasts whole spectrum. It's basicaly a fast sequence of electric sparks. It doesn't use radio waves to transmit and modulate the data. The actual spark "bits" and timing between them are used to transmit data. That's why it's very limited by FCC in power output and hence range.

[ebunton]

Isn't Wireless FireWire just... "Fire"?

That's the funniest thing I've read today.
What exactly is the main difference between "Fire" and Wifi? Just speed? I'm assuming this "Fire" is faster right?

If so then wouldn't it be a natural evolution of the Wifi standard?

After Airport Extreme (802.11g)? Maybe it'll be called Airport Extremer?

Or am I completely clueless about this?

[jtquick2001]

wireless firewire, eh? perhaps for video transmissions to the rumored apple box?


That would rock!

[pjkelnhofer]

Now this is a useful use.

A 6 speaker system at 24-bit resolution and 96kHz sampling rate is only 1.7MBps of data, or 14Mbps - a fraction of the bandwidth that even 100Mbps WiFire would provide.

Of course, now I'd need to power my speakers individually, and each speaker (or at least each group of speakers) would need its own amplification circuit ... but at least I won't have speaker cable limiting where I can place my speakers.

So why is the speaker cable more limiting than the power cable?

For a laptop, I can see why wireless is a good thing, but for a desktop, I don't get it. A Bluetooth mouse and keyboard maybe convienient. Although at my work, some one walked of one of the wireless mice. At least with my wired one I always know where it is. What good would a wireless drive do you? Especially if it still needs to get power somewhere. A hot swappable drive would be much easier. Or maybe you could always just use the front ports on you computer.

Remember all these wireless gadgets don't send the data unidirectionally. For example if you live in an apartment building and your neighbor puts his BlueTooth, WiFi, Firewireless G5 against the same wall you do. That would be fun.

Is no one concern with the ever increasing amount of E-fields that we have to deal with on any give day. I feel like this is going to be the next "light pollution" people will realize that filling every availible bit RF bandwidth with crap is going to lead to other problems.

[Brian Haworth]

Isn't Wireless FireWire just... "Fire"?

I'd prefer to call it FireWireless or maybe Wi-FW.

[Hattig]

So why is the speaker cable more limiting than the power cable?
I have plug sockets all around the room, so power is easy to source.

However I'd have to take up the carpet to run speaker cable underneath, and that would create a bump in the carpet, even with the flat-grade cable.

[kylos]

They just cannot pick their spectrum, they either have to buy it or use one of the unlicensed spectrums, which are 900Mhz, 2.4GHz and 5GHz. 802.11b/g and Bluetooth are all on 2.4GHz. 802.11a is on 5.7GHz, cordless phone are at 900MHz, 2.4 and 5.8GHz.

Okayyy? Not sure what that has to do with what I said. I was saying that 802.15.3 and 802.11 would likely (should, actually, since fire() uses an ultrawide band) use a different spectrum, nothing about picking a spectrum.

[kylos]

That's the funniest thing I've read today.
What exactly is the main difference between "Fire" and Wifi? Just speed? I'm assuming this "Fire" is faster right?

If so then wouldn't it be a natural evolution of the Wifi standard?

After Airport Extreme (802.11g)? Maybe it'll be called Airport Extremer?

Or am I completely clueless about this?

Nope, pretty clueless. :D Actually, it's understandable where you're coming from. Read my post on page 2. (I hope it does a good job, :)) It explains the differences.

[ginoledesma]

Neat!

If Wireless Firewire comes out, and Mac OS X by then supports IP over Firewire, we'd have IP over wireless WiFi! :D Now all we need left is a device that has a standard 4-port 10/100Mbps switch with wireless wifi. :D

Seriously though, I'd like this very much for my external firewire hard drive. How far does the specifications allow for distance?

[Colonel Panik]

Isn't Wireless FireWire just... "Fire"?

Maybe they'll call it Prometheus

[sinisterdesign]

Seriously though. A few years back I read on news.com of a tech that allows electricity to flow through surface contact. So say your entire desktop is one big recharger. You wouldn't need wires.

the company that you're referring to is MobileWise (http://www.mobilewise.com/). it sounds pretty sweet, i remember reading about it in T3 last year. the only snag is that the gadget needs one of their chips embedded in it to draw power. the chips sound cheap ($5 for laptops, $2 for cells), it's just getting the manufacturer to embed them. we'll see if it takes off. hope so, i'm sick of all these stupid AC wires getting tangled around my feet.

and for the guy that was tired of running speaker wire up his walls, check out DeWire (http://www.decorpeurope.com/dewire.htm). you can spray mount this stuff to the wall, spread some sheatrock compound over it & paint. poof, no more wires! of course, no more $$ in the wallet, that stuff isn't cheap.

[uzombie]

Dyslexic:

FiWi


Does this mean Flame War Driving? (firewire snoops)

"I don't mind cables. Its the mess they make when I yank one out and they all seem to disagree!" -EdSki

[geeyesgee]

A great name for wireless FireWire could be: "HeatWave" or "HotWave"

[whooleytoo]

Maybe they'll call it Prometheus

;) I think that's too high-brow for these forums!

Still, it would be funny to see Apple trying to patent Fire.
Or hear Steve Jobs how Apple's Fire is 'Hotter than anything else out there'!
Or say "PC's won't have Fire until Hell freezes over.."

[appleface]

FiWi



i like that one.

[twalkabout]

http://www.crazyapplerumors.com/2002_11_24_archive.htm

Tuesday, November 26, 2002 *

Apple Working On Wireless Power.

Reports from Cupertino indicate that Apple is preparing to shock the technology industry yet again. Sources within the company claim that the next round of PowerBooks and iBooks will make laptop users fully mobile through the introduction of wireless power.

Speaking on the condition of anonymity, a senior Apple hardware engineer said the technology would work similarly to Airport. A base station placed in a central location within a home or business would beam concentrated microwaves to receptors on any Apple laptop within 50 yards, providing a continuous stream of power.

One serious drawback to the technology is that intense microwave beams of this nature have been known to incinerate objects.

Asked what kind of objects, the engineer said "Uh, well, lamps. Books. Glasses."

"Pets."

"Family members and other loved ones."

Apple is confident that it can mitigate this drawback and make the technology feasible for mass distribution provided it can come up with a catchy enough name to market it under.

"Internally we've been calling it the Death Ray," CARS' source said, "ever since it got Jenkins. Poor sap. Walked right into the beam. Poof!

"And him just two weeks away from retirement. It's a damn shame.

"But that name's obviously a non-starter in the marketing department. Right now they're leaning toward Airpower, but people are concerned that lacks pizazz and is too derivative of Airport.

"I said, how about the Killer Beam That's Claimed Six Lives Already?! They all just looked at me like I was losing it. I dunno, maybe I am. You watch six people get vaporized and see how you handle it."

Sources indicate the technology is being pushed by Apple CEO Steve Jobs who wants it ready for announcement at Macworld in July.

"I better get back to work," the engineer said. "See if anyone else bought it.

"'Don't go inside the orange cones!' I tell them," he added, shaking his head sadly. "I spent all day Thursday sweeping up an intern. They just don't listen."

[SyndicateX]

AAAHAHAHAHHA! Im still getting a kick out of the possibility of it being called what it truly is....
Wireless = WiFi
FireWire = FiWi

So, we have WiFi-FiWi

Aaaaahhhh...my tummy hurts! :D

[ClimbingTheLog]

Apple Working On Wireless Power.

You do realize that Wireless Power isn't fiction, right? Nikoli Tesla spent many years working on it, and light up part of a rural town, Colorado maybe, before the farmer where the tower was located got sick of his cows getting zapped.

[ClimbingTheLog]

AAAHAHAHAHHA! Im still getting a kick out of the possibility of it being called what it truly is....
Wireless = WiFi
FireWire = FiWi

So, we have WiFi-FiWi

Aaaaahhhh...my tummy hurts! :D

You'd better start setting up the knowledge base for it:

The WiFi-FiWi WikiWiki.

(I think that means something in the Conehead language)

[Wash!!]

You do realize that Wireless Power isn't fiction, right? Nikoli Tesla spent many years working on it, and light up part of a rural town, Colorado maybe, before the farmer where the tower was located got sick of his cows getting zapped.

I brought this up a couple of pages back... ;)

[kettle]

After Airport Extreme (802.11g)? Maybe it'll be called Airport Extremer?

Or am I completely clueless about this?

Airport Tingly Extremities?

[HiRez]

Transmitting such low power to run appliances like dvd's should not be too difficult...Perhaps, except I doubt the government is going to allow devices to transmit power through people's brains. That's a health risk and it's doubtful we'll see it anytime soon regardless of the technology. Even if a device were created, it would take years or decades to prove it safe enough for use. Not to mention all the electromagnetic interference issues.

[ClimbingTheLog]

Perhaps, except I doubt the government is going to allow devices to transmit power through people's brains. That's a health risk

How do you know that? The local AM station is pumping 50000 Watts of power through your brain right now.

[TheYeti]

Ultra wide band varies from all other spectrum devices that we have available for public use. The main civilian spectrum which is unlicensed is 49mhz, 900mhz, 2.4gz, 5.7, and 5.8 gz these are all minute slices of spectrum, whose power output is up to about a watt. At a watt, if no one else is using the spectrum, it is not inconceivable to get a mile. The problem comes with high density. every 30-90 feet in a city there is a 2.4gz device. You can't hear from the bedroom to the kitchen, because all of your neighbors are broadcasting very loudly on the same spectrum.

This is where ultra wide band comes in. The ultra wide band specification is written such that signal can not be differentiated from background radiation at 30 feet. The power output is extremely low, but for that reason, the signal clarity at short distances is very high. The maximum range is expected to be about 4 feet.

This would be for instance far enough to reach from your ipod to your computer, and from your computer to the hard drives stacked on top of it. But it may not be far enough to reach from your computer to your monitor, and definitely not far enough for a wireless monitor that you could take across the room.

The anticipated initial use of this is from your dvd player, to your vcr, to your receiver, to your tape deck, and if it was sitting on top of the stack, your TV, but that maybe too far away.