4 ms·
A small nit: proposed UWB (ultra wide band) schemes at 5GHz and 60GHz are considered EHF (extremely high frequency) or millimeter-wave; IR is generally consider
by sparky 17y ago
A small nit: proposed UWB (ultra wide band) schemes at 5GHz and 60GHz are considered EHF (extremely high frequency) or millimeter-wave; IR is generally considered to start at at least 300GHz.
There isn't a heck of a lot of interference per se at 60GHz, but it is very hard to design a transmitter that is not highly directional and line-of-sight sensitive. My feeling is that the low range and line of sight requirements mostly limit current incarnations of this technology to situations that are already amenable to HDMI cables.
There's a good writeup from earlier this year on Ars Technica ( http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2009/02/cutting-the-cord-the-state-of-wireless-hd-video-links.ars http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2009/02/cutting-the-cord... ) that goes through some of the commercial offerings around that time. No idea if any of them are still around, or in what form.
- jacquesm 17y agoGP is not talking about UWB but about IR: http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS117678+16-Apr-2009+MW20090416 http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS117678+16-Ap...
- sparky 17y agoSorry about that, it didn't register that GP's question was tangential to GGP's UWB-focused links. Regarding IR, I agree that interference is the biggest issue. The electronics also get harder as you approach THz frequencies, but that could be worked around if IR radiation weren't so pervasive. Interference is probably the reason you can only get up to 1Gbps or so, even in a lab (and you'd need 10.2Gbps to transmit HDMI 1.3, for instance).