Ozmo apparently is trying to leverage the ubiquity of Wi-Fi, the market reach of Intel (which has invested in the firm and is pushing its technology), and the dissatisfaction with Bluetooth device association and throughput to stick a wedge into Bluetooth's market domination. Well over a billion Bluetooth chipsets have shipped--CSR alone has shipped over a billion--and estimates put half a billion this year into cell phones alone. So there's a large embedded market to overcome.

This new technology, so far unnamed but apparently part of Intel's Cliffside research program, is trying to reduce complexity by reducing the number of standards needed to drive a computer, while increasing the flexibility of those standards. Ozmo and Intel's system would, for instance, allow a simultaneous WLAN connection and a PAN network of up to 8 devices using a single radio on a computer.

The press releases and articles make it quite unclear whether a new Wi-Fi chip would be needed; that chip would almost certainly not conform to today's Wi-Fi standards except in a compatibility mode, given that Wi-Fi has no capacity for PAN-style connections. Ad hoc mode isn't quite the same thing. In the past, extensions to the 802.11 standards that are the basis of the Wi-Fi certification and service mark were allowed as long as basic 802.11 worked as expected.

Bluetooth and Wi-Fi have been complementary technologies for several years. There were early conflicts--I wrote an article about the severe problems in using Bluetooth 1.1 and 802.11b back in 2001! But those interference and coordination issues were resolved, and Blueooth and Wi-Fi marched forward hand in hand, without any close association between the two trade groups behind the standards and branding, but with a lot of technology acquisitions and mergers on the part of companies that make Wi-Fi gear.

The Bluetooth SIG has been working for years to put Bluetooth on top of ultrawideband (UWB), which is still not readily available in the marketplace. UWB is always next year's big technology, and may be passed by except for applications like high-definition video streaming among a/v electronics. The SIG also announced support in Oct. 2007 for Bluetooth + 802.11, where a Bluetooth device could initiate high-speed transfers using 802.11 (yes, Wi-Fi, but not by that name; no partnership there). Bluetooth plus UWB is likely not available until 2009 at this point; BT and Wi-Fi, not until perhaps 2010. (See my article, "Bluetooth to Add Wi-Fi with UWB Delays in Mind," 2007-10-31.)

It's hard to see how Ozmo builds a place in this infrastructure, even with higher bandwidth, and what Ozmo says is lower power use and a lower cost for their chips, because laptop and desktop makers will need to buy into the Intel/Ozmo ecosystem. The demand for this kind of technology is typically driven by users who buy one component and need their computer to interface with it.

With Ozmo and Intel apparently planning to debut the Wi-Fi chips and driver support next year, it seems like a multi-year process to figure out whether Ozmo can evolve a competitive position to Bluetooth, even as Bluetooth is estimated to be embedded in over 1.2b cell phones by 2012.

During the first intermission, I spoke with a Post journalist who covered the business section about my perspective on the reasonably horrible job the Post has done in delivering interesting stories and company profiles regarding emerging companies in the local technology community. I really think that filling the Post Business section with lots of AP stories (that I have already read online the night before the paper arrives) and stories about emerging technology companies outside of the region is a big mistake.

Given that the DC Metro region is the 2nd largest region of technology professionals in the United States, only trailing the San Francisco, CA Region, we have a huge number of fascinating start-ups that have great stories to tell about their business ideas and the new entrepreneurs in the region that are succeeding.

Is this sour grapes? In the interest of full disclosure, we have had several good discussions with Post journalists, but the stories died after the individual was moved to another “beat” and the response was, “yes that has become quite common.” But beyond the reorganizations (just today the Post announced it was reducing the newsroom staff by 10%), the Washington Post’s business section simply does not focus on a critical section of the local business community – emerging technology companies. From a business perspective, these companies are the source of innovation, ideas on “what will happen next”, and contribute greatly to a thriving (despite the economic downturn) and successful local business community.

In the past, if I did a web search about a new technology and the results were from an unknown blogger, the Mercury News or the Post, I would select the story by the Mercury News because of their great reputation for business and technology coverage. Sadly, for the Mercury News, the paper is fast losing that reputation and the key reporters that helped to build it.

The Washington Post has a unique opportunity to create a great reputation in covering this space, and my assertion is that the local business community would rally around the Post. Local coverage is so key to business leaders as you work to network at local events and learn about companies working on complementary initiatives, but today we have a real void in our regional coverage, which has a direct connection to why I recently discontinued my Post daily delivery.

Dear Katharine, some of your journalists and advertising executives agree with me. Please consider a renewed investment in the Business Section. The Post has a unique opportunity and even something I’ll call “first dibs” to tap into and become part of a thriving, vibrant technology business community that extends far beyond just a print/online newspaper. Why isn’t the paper taking advantage of this?

ShareThis

During the first intermission, I spoke with a Post journalist who covered the business section about my perspective on the reasonably horrible job the Post has done in delivering interesting stories and company profiles regarding emerging companies in the local technology community. I really think that filling the Post Business section with lots of AP stories (that I have already read online the night before the paper arrives) and stories about emerging technology companies outside of the region is a big mistake.

Given that the DC Metro region is the 2nd largest region of technology professionals in the United States, only trailing the San Francisco, CA Region, we have a huge number of fascinating start-ups that have great stories to tell about their business ideas and the new entrepreneurs in the region that are succeeding.

Is this sour grapes? In the interest of full disclosure, we have had several good discussions with Post journalists, but the stories died after the individual was moved to another “beat” and the response was, “yes that has become quite common.” But beyond the reorganizations (just today the Post announced it was reducing the newsroom staff by 10%), the Washington Post’s business section simply does not focus on a critical section of the local business community – emerging technology companies. From a business perspective, these companies are the source of innovation, ideas on “what will happen next”, and contribute greatly to a thriving (despite the economic downturn) and successful local business community.

In the past, if I did a web search about a new technology and the results were from an unknown blogger, the Mercury News or the Post, I would select the story by the Mercury News because of their great reputation for business and technology coverage. Sadly, for the Mercury News, the paper is fast losing that reputation and the key reporters that helped to build it.

The Washington Post has a unique opportunity to create a great reputation in covering this space, and my assertion is that the local business community would rally around the Post. Local coverage is so key to business leaders as you work to network at local events and learn about companies working on complementary initiatives, but today we have a real void in our regional coverage, which has a direct connection to why I recently discontinued my Post daily delivery.

Dear Katharine, some of your journalists and advertising executives agree with me. Please consider a renewed investment in the Business Section. The Post has a unique opportunity and even something I’ll call “first dibs” to tap into and become part of a thriving, vibrant technology business community that extends far beyond just a print/online newspaper. Why isn’t the paper taking advantage of this?

ShareThis

During the first intermission, I spoke with a Post journalist who covered the business section about my perspective on the reasonably horrible job the Post has done in delivering interesting stories and company profiles regarding emerging companies in the local technology community. I really think that filling the Post Business section with lots of AP stories (that I have already read online the night before the paper arrives) and stories about emerging technology companies outside of the region is a big mistake.

Given that the DC Metro region is the 2nd largest region of technology professionals in the United States, only trailing the San Francisco, CA Region, we have a huge number of fascinating start-ups that have great stories to tell about their business ideas and the new entrepreneurs in the region that are succeeding.

Is this sour grapes? In the interest of full disclosure, we have had several good discussions with Post journalists, but the stories died after the individual was moved to another “beat” and the response was, “yes that has become quite common.” But beyond the reorganizations (just today the Post announced it was reducing the newsroom staff by 10%), the Washington Post’s business section simply does not focus on a critical section of the local business community – emerging technology companies. From a business perspective, these companies are the source of innovation, ideas on “what will happen next”, and contribute greatly to a thriving (despite the economic downturn) and successful local business community.

In the past, if I did a web search about a new technology and the results were from an unknown blogger, the Mercury News or the Post, I would select the story by the Mercury News because of their great reputation for business and technology coverage. Sadly, for the Mercury News, the paper is fast losing that reputation and the key reporters that helped to build it.

The Washington Post has a unique opportunity to create a great reputation in covering this space, and my assertion is that the local business community would rally around the Post. Local coverage is so key to business leaders as you work to network at local events and learn about companies working on complementary initiatives, but today we have a real void in our regional coverage, which has a direct connection to why I recently discontinued my Post daily delivery.

Dear Katharine, some of your journalists and advertising executives agree with me. Please consider a renewed investment in the Business Section. The Post has a unique opportunity and even something I’ll call “first dibs” to tap into and become part of a thriving, vibrant technology business community that extends far beyond just a print/online newspaper. Why isn’t the paper taking advantage of this?

ShareThis

Wi-Fi over Ethernet combines electromagnetic resonance--the ability of a EMF to excite signals in wires--with excess wired capacity in a manner similar to how broadband over powerline works. Where properly equipped 802.11af Ethernet switches and adapters are available, coupled with WOE-capable Wi-Fi systems, the Wi-Fi signals will simply be picked up and carried by the Ethernet network. Switching and transmission then become limited to the extent of the wired network--which will improve throughput and range. (A future standard might allow passive powering of lightweight devices from Ethernet, which is a neat reversal.)

This is in the same category of new convergent standards such as Bluetooth over 802.11 and FireWire (IEEE 1394) over IEEE 741-2007: ways to provide better specs on one standard by combining it with another that has a complementary purpose.

Now, of course, modern computing systems tend to include gigabit Ethernet and Wi-Fi, so why do we need a third modality that combines the two? Partly because of new devices like the MacBook Air and smartphones like BlackBerrys with Wi-Fi built in. Without an Ethernet adapter, the range of these devices can be limited, and throughput restricted.

You were waiting for the magic number: How fast is WoE? Nearly 1600 Mbps raw speed, and about 30 Mbps of raw throughput. Before you scoff, remember that you might be able to use WoE over hundreds of meters across a switched Ethernet network, where a Wi-Fi signal might stretch just a hundred or two hundred feet. If Wi-Fi beats WoE, a computer will use Wi-F.

The Wi-Fi Alliance hasn't set the date of their certification yet, but I'm told it will happen any day. The mark will be added to the list of A, B, G, Draft N, WMM Power Save, and other symbols, as AF. The industry is considering a campaign around the phrase, "WoE is me(tm)!" trying to capture the excitement of the new synergy. Again, unfortunate acronym.

The IEEE has finalized and approved a draft, but final ratification isn't expected until 1 April 2009.

Today I noticed that SL Corporation has revamped their website with a new page, Solutions for CEP Engine Users.    The page is well written, reinforcing some of my earlier posts on the value proposition for CEP; so I hope the folks at SL don’t mind if I repost their excellent thoughts on BAM and CEP here. 

Solutions for CEP Engine Users by SL Corporation

© 1999-2008 Sherrill-Lubinski Corporation. All rights reserved.

Complex Event Processing (CEP) is a relatively new technology that is used to help companies detect both opportunities and threats in real-time with minimal coding and reusable key performance indicators (KPIs) and business models. Just as services are shared and reused in a SOA, CEP permits the sharing and reuse of KPIs in business activity monitoring while efficiently processing events so businesses can act on situations that impact business and take advantage of real-time processing.

Business activity monitoring, often referred to as BAM, is the capability that Gartner and other distinguished analysts use to describe this visualization capability in the business world. BAM introduces a human element to CEP. It is well-established that the human mind is, today and for the foreseeable future, far superior to machine intelligence in making sense out of complicated situations and events. Therefore, BAM is critical to the success of any complex event processing (CEP) solution.

Depending on an organization’s mission, BAM can be used in various levels within an event processing solution to help users visualize and understand the dynamics behind rapidly changing situations and critical business events. In other words, BAM plays a key role wherever there is a need for better insight into the myriad events that effect your business operations.

BAM provides real-time visualization and alerting capabilities for users to better understand how business events impact their organization. BAM software permits users to quickly prototype, build and deploy event processing business solutions. For example, a telecommunications company would find BAM useful to achieve event-driven SLA monitoring and management; and a large retailer would find BAM important as they stay on top of business-critical events in their supply chain.

Insight gained from BAM, in concert with event processing solutions, enable organizations to make better and faster business decisions so they can rapidly sense and respond to threats, problems and opportunities. BAM solutions permit applications to be designed, deployed and modified rapidly with minimal or no coding resulting in significantly lower development costs. Therefore, a key benefit of BAM in real-time event processing solutions is that KPIs can be deployed, monitored, revised, reused and utilized, economically and rapidly.

Depending on the business application, BAM-enabled visualization is required at numerous levels in an event processing architecture. For example, events from across the enterprise are typically processed by a CEP software platforms from companies such as TIBCO, BEA (soon to be Oracle), Progress Apama, StreamBase, Aleri, and Coral8.

Long before KPIs are displayed to the business users, BAM tools can be configured to assist application developers to monitor and visualize the raw event stream. For the developer, their business is developing applications, and BAM can be very useful when designing KPIs for event processing applications.

Fine-tuned KPIs that have been derived from an event processing application are displayed to the business user. These KPIs can indicate risks, threats, problems, opportunities and other emerging business situations that impact the business.

BAM, in concert with state-of-the-art event processing software, provides the framework for a complete sense-and-respond capability for businesses. Processing raw events and event streams for business opportunities and threats requires robust and rapidly deployable visualization solutions. This is the reason that many distinguished analysts believe that BAM and CEP are complementary and critically interdependent core business capabilities. We at SL Corporation agree, and are pleased to be the leading BAM visualization platform in the event processing/CEP ecosystem today.

© 1999-2008 Sherrill-Lubinski Corporation. All rights reserved.