What is Digg?51 Comments
- Hypersapien, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9How is this an advantage over RFID? Is is a definite DISadvantage. If I have to carry an RFID chip around with me, I WANT to be able to block it from being read.
- trialofmiles, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10And no more tin-foil hats.
- jboi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8the story is a bit off, this one is a bit better
http://www.wirelessiq.com/content/newsfeed/7439.html - JQP123, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I have to disagree. Wal-Mart and the DOD are about the only large deployments and they're only using it to track shipping pallets, not individual items. And they're only showing a 70-80 percent successful read rate. This means that based on their experience, if you try to use RFID for inventory, you're going to miss 20-30 percent of the product on hand. This is unacceptable, not exactly a winning formula.
- santiago1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8 Sorry, but that name just reminds me of RuBee Rhod, Chris Tucker's character on Fifth Element!
multipass... - JQP123, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9The article is rather contradictory.
"RuBee is an active transceiver."
"... there is no significant price difference between RuBee and traditional RFID approaches."
"... a proven battery life of 10 years or more using low-cost, coin-size lithium batteries.
Sorry, my BS alarm just went off. There is no way that a battery powered active transceiver can ever be as cheap as a passive RFID antenna etched on thin plastic film. The hype machine is running in high gear ... they're on track to over-promise and under-deliver ... again. - imtigger2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Well.. you can't eliminate them completely. I use my tinfoil hat often so the government can't read my thoughts... works perfectly. I have yet to be contacted by them.
- ThrasherC, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Bzzzzz! Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!
Only applies if you remember the Fifth Element...I know I'll get modded down for my annoying use of the letter Z, but oh well. - ThrasherC, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I can see it now..."Do you know where widget 1236 is in our warehouse?" "No, but I can ping it -- its gotta be there somewhere."
- 0siris, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3A traditional 900MHz RFID approach "is 99.99 percent radio signal and 0.01 magnetic/inductive. What [RuBee] is doing is 99.99 percent magnetic. There is no radio signal in these tags at all,"
These are Magnetic, making them different then Radio Frequency ID's
Coming to Supermarkets near you? - zeroreality, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I work for a large, multi business organization and have to agree. RFID is in no way mainstream for shipments of pallets let along shipments of items. With all the interference presented by a pallet's environment the success rate that walmart has reach is pretty amazing. In order for RFID to work for tracking individual items in a pallet it would have to be completely rethought.
- Philbert, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"multipass..."
That's always a fun joke in the 3D industry, thanks to multi-pass renderiing. - Avogadro65, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'm sure this type of tag won't see the same use as a regular RFID tag. It's more designed for hostile EM environments. For a while, at least, RFID tags will be MUCH cheaper and easier to obtain. These RuBee tags are designed more for shippers, or for people like me (track internal inventory of massive cast iron pipes).
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I would have awarded extra points for "RuBee does what RFIDon't."
- Seidoger, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Then they could put those new tags on rails! :-O
- BLu3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3It's the mark of the beaaaaaast!!!!!!!!!
- masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2No more tin foil? Looks like I'll have to start microwaving all of my merchandise.
...On a second read, "A traditional 900MHz RFID approach "is 99.99 percent radio signal and 0.01 magnetic/inductive. What [RuBee] is doing is 99.99 percent magnetic. There is no radio signal in these tags at all," Stevens said."
Does that mean someone can just take a large magnet to one of these things to screw them up? - Avogadro65, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The main reason you don't want to make it "WiFi Compliant" is a power source. With a passive RFID tag, the current generated by the reader irradiating the tag supplies enough power to return a signal. Also, a limited range is sometimes also a benefit. You don't want to scan one tag and read everything within 100 feet.
- lilzaphod, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Any chance that a microwave would scramble these?
I'm waiting on my new passport. I would hate for it to slip and fall into a running microwave. - technique, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's pronounced "mooooltee paass" :-)
- Philodox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I worked at an RFID middleware provider for awhile... and I can tell you that RFID's inability to go through certain materials is a big limiting factor for the technology. If the IEEE can figure out away around that then I can see a big market for this technology.
- Avogadro65, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I agree. I work at a cast iron pipe manufacturer, and we've been trying to use RFID internally for inventory for a while now, but we've had huge problems reading the tags on metal without thick spacers. This could be exactly what we need.
- johndi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It is better, thanks. I was looking for a better article, but was it was time for sleep (might be why I wasn't having any luck).
@Hypersapien, it is better for stores trying to reduce shoplifters, or people trying to track a person. Much worse for privacy. - mrpackrat42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well, if you're the one carrying the marked goods around, you're not the customer. You're the commodity.
- crawf061, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2so much for the shake n bake RFID's
- zweben, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1So... it's like a long-range credit card strip.
- ThrasherC, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Damn...I mean three.
- zone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm just thinking out loud here..
how hard is to get a bunch of those RFID tags that make the stores go beep crazy? I'd like to stick some of them in papers and throw them out very near to the store.. and let the wind do the rest... - eclectro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If you RTFA, RuBee requires a battery and a circuit. I don't see how that can be inexpensive. But the tags should be bigger and easier to find rather than an RFID.
- toomuchgreentea, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1No ... but I bet a strong magnet can permanently alter these little bug with a snap.
- mogwaininja, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1With all this talk of using RFID tags or RuBee tags for inventory of valuable items, what are they doing to prevent people from ripping off the tag and taking the merchandise, then leaving the tag in the box/crate/whatever. If we rely on scanning tags in closed boxes instead of actually counting inventory, doesn't this just increase the possibility that a theft might go unnoticed because we relied on scanning a closed box instead of actually opening the thing and counting the merchandise?
- Phoenyx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Tinfoil hats make it *easier* for the government to read your thoughts!
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/3906c0f98d07b010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html - johndi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think you skipped a line, though as jboi pointed out this article is better
http://www.wirelessiq.com/content/newsfeed/7439.html
"The RuBee protocol works with both active radio tags and passive tags that have no battery." - catastrophee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Would a hard drive magnet work?
- imtigger2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1JQP... i agree. The main hesitance with the retail industry (of which I'm part of at www.stores.org) is the cost of implementation. It's easy to say that you can add the nickel cost of an RFID tag to your cost, and charge the consumer, but it's not that easy when the retailers dig the manufacturers down to pennies, then, like WallyMart, demand that the RFID program be added at no cost to them.
In addition to the cost, I know their "coin size lithium" proposed is already too big, without even having to see it. RFID just needs to be fine-tuned, and mass produced. This RuBee idea will only work with passive tags (as they mention) and cost lower than RFID. The manufacturers of these technologies need to take a loss on the tags, and make money on the equipment. I feel it's the only way to see mass acceptance and compliance. - taotehue, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1they didn't mention Gen2 RFID tags. fully rewritable tags.
http://www.industryweek.com/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=9622 - gmerin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1nope. you'll have to start making them from some ferrous metal. I wonder how the RuBee tags will perform when covered by a charged iron screen.
I love new corporate tech panaceas - means another new toy to hack ;) - toomuchgreentea, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Not a large magnet ... a strong magnet. You can find those in most decent size electric motors. Go to the junk yard and they're a dime a dozen.
- eclectro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"protocol" is not the same as "implementation." Wouldn't the passive be the same as an RFID transmitting characteristics?
Also, if metal interferes with an RFID, it's going to interefere with a transponder, though probably to a lesser degree. - SobyOne, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Oh! Oh! What about "Laser Tags". You know... those vests kids wear so they can play euphorian paint-ball.
- straylightghost, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The acousto-magnetic anti-shoplifting tags (little white or black rectangles) can be blocked by foil. Not as easily as RF, but magnetic tags can still be blocked by those types of metals.
- Phoenyx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Tinfoil hats make it *easier* for the government to read your thoughts!
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/3906c0f98d07b010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html - JQP123, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"The manufacturers of these technologies need to take a loss on the tags, and make money on the equipment."
I don't think they can afford to do that. The tags are potentially very high volume, the equipment is extremely low volume. To make up for the ongoing losses, the equipment would have to be outrageously overpriced which opens the door for 3rd parties to market just the equipment. You can shift it around but there is no avoiding the overall cost.
- jkmstevens, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Hi I am the Chair of P1902.1 Workgroup and thought would reply
First: let me emphasize RuBee is not a replacement for RFID - RuBee and RFID are complementary - Gen2 tags are quit impressive - designers have done an amazing job - very smart capable group – my company uses 13.56 tags for something’s internally - they too are very neat. RuBee is great for Visibility systems on shelves in rooms for high valued assets and in livestock feed lots –
All of this debate is kinda like passing a law - “all bolts will be metric and 1/4 20 thread” - different nuts for different bolts.. Rubee is fantastic in some applications and RFID is fantastic in others – some overlap but not much .....
Second: Visibility is not really about tag cost - in most applications tag cost is inconsequential because the visibility ROI (savings and new topline) based on data and inventory reduction, product pedigree, IT costs reduction for certified audit trails for SEC and FDA is what it is all about – the ROI is so high that the cost of gadgets and hardware shrinks. If you leave a wrench (steel) inside of a Lockheed C-5 Galaxy engine it crashes and you lost $100 million dollars – so how much is a tag worth for that wrench or all wrenches that are used in C5’s ?
Key is you have deliver a working visibility network to customer that provides that ROI - not sell just collection of body parts (tags readers middleware applicationware). – RuBee is focused on that integrated value.
Let’s talk about body parts - RF-ID tags have the potential to be very low cost, but they are not today -- many reasons but P1902.1 is not focused on the 5 cents target RFID has set - P1902.1 is focused on high content, high asset value applications that require local memory and in many cases local smarts - if a passive RFID tag has memory it uses EEPROM. E Squared increases chip real-estate and ads extra process steps and at least to cost limits memory in passive systems – It also costs lot of extra power to write and slows down write time (7 tags per second) - If you built an RF-ID tag with same memory as a RuBee tag (typical 256 - 512 bytes not bits, with some as high as 5Kbytes ) - Rubee will always be lower cost - Look in your laptop or desk top most still use a Li battery (CR2525) and sRAM combo for date time bios etc. for storage - reason it is less expensive compared to EEPROM. When you purchase batteries in volume they are not expensive.
Third: RuBee tags may also be passive (no battery) – that is part of 1902.1 these tags are powered by a separate carrier (not same as communication frequency). These tags have less range than active Rubee tags, but are cost competitive re most features with current RF-ID, including costs. But again we do not think they will displace RFID tags – many applications for the battery less RuBee tags within RuBee networks.
Finally, because RuBee is peer-to-peer – a tag may be reader – that means we can create low cost readers connected to things like locks ATM’s even cell phones. Plus the existing long range network readers are in the same cost range as a good Wi-Fi router.
Privacy, issues are real and P1902.1 will eventually address those just like 802.11 has. Our view is that privacy protection is not going to come from aluminum foil – it is going to come from an open specification that guarantees encryption and ability to protect data and information. The WWW and 802.11 has many years of experience and we think has addressed issues well --- 1902.1 will take that lead.
This Visibility stuff as new and an industry has enormous potential – can increase efficiency and make life easier – its next big thing in “search”. But visibility is still young and vulnerable – right now it requires everyone’s enthusiastic partnership and support to develop – it is not just about tag cost or frequency or privacy – key is too make visibility work well now for real applications and provide actual ROI’s that are real – this will take lot of time and maybe even some more failure –failure is requirement for technological progress – Our bet is in end will many different nuts and bolts and we hope IEEE P1902.1 will be one of those nuts/bolts in your chest along with others that will contribute to visibility success.
I am always available …
John K. Stevens
Chair IEEE P1902.1 Workgroup
617-395-7601 - kocasian, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Actually these RuBee tags are active and the capacitors discharge on the transistor based on an incoming signal diode antenna[an RF pulse inductively generated by an ocsillating magentic pule which is generated by AC]. So these are no different that far field active RFID tags. And yes you can diminish the transmitting signal by metallic contact. The signal even drops when residing on a metallic surface[direct contact]. These tags are no big deal and nothing to wink at, so lets just pump out better RFID tags!
- Phoenyx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1that was really weird, it posted this comment as a reply and at the bottom of the comment list and wouldn't let me edit either one.
- ThrasherC, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Or combine 4 of them in a Horadric Cube to make a Flawless RuBee.
/Diablo II reference - SobyOne, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0RFID has too many limitations... like 'Drill a frigg'n hole in your metal product X to allow the tag to transmit out and be secure from being ripped off the device'. We have a wielding supplier who wants to use it... I had to recommend against direct use of RFID for this reason: Too much metal blocking the signals. What about just making everything WiFi compliant? Think about it... if every device had a MAC address broadcast, we would all be happy... right?
The coolest thing about RFID is the 128k tags... You can store an entire truck manifest in one of those things! - pseudojd, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3drug companies use it to track teh drugas
- pope7, on 10/12/2007, -10/+1RFID is already semi-popular, though. Why mess with a winning formula...
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is