Helsinki University of Technology Telecommunications and Multimedia Laboratory

UWB Communications

– A Standards War

12.4.2004 Eino Kivisaari

MAIN GOAL



What is UWB (Ultra Wideband) all about



A Standards War at IEEE:



Motorola

(Freescale Semiconductor) vs.



MBOA Alliance

(Multi-Band OFDM Alliance)

INTRO TO UWB



Ultra Wideband Impulse Radio:

Radio transmission without RF carrier on a several GHz wide band  Sub-nanosecond pulses, very accurate timing & positioning  Theoretically Gigabit data rate over short distances  Interference with narrowband RF traffic can be avoided by using very low transmission power

UWB PROS



Very high connection speeds, up to 1 Gb/s



Spectrum reuse



Low power consumption



Enabler of new services and functions

 Cable replacement  Wireless USB, Wireless Firewire

UWB Compared to Cellular, WLAN, Bluetooth and Ethernet

Mobilit y Bit rat e Coverage GSM UMTS WLAN UWB Bluetooth LAN

FCC Regulations for UWB

The

Commission on February 14, 2002 adopted a First Report and Order

in ET Docket No. 98-153 to amend Part 15 of the FCC Rules

to permit the marketing and operation of certain types of new products incorporating ultra-wideband technology. UWB devices operate by employing very narrow or short duration pulses that result in very large or wideband transmission bandwidths. UWB technology holds great promise for a vast array of new applications that will provide significant benefits for public safety, businesses and consumers

.

These applications include imaging systems that can detect objects beneath the surface of the earth or within and behind walls; vehicle radar systems for collision avoidance; and

high-speed data communications devices

.

 February 2002  Available spectrum: 3.10 GHz – 10.6 GHz  Low transmission powers  Indoor usage, outdoors only peer-to-peer

Standards War

 A War over an IEEE standard for UWB PHY (Physical Layer) specification, 802.15.3a

 War started after the FCC rules had been out for 6 months  Two counterparts:  Motorola & Xtreme Spectrum (now acquired by Motorola)  MBOA Alliance (Multi-Band OFDM Alliance)  Intel, Texas Instruments, Microsoft, Nokia, Samsung, Philips, Panasonic, Hewlett-Packard, Toshiba, NEC, Fujitsu, Sharp, Mitsubishi, Olympus, TDK, Realtek, VIA etc. (90 companies as of April 2004 and growing)  MBOA was created when Multi-Band Coalition (MBC) approved Texas Instruments’ OFDM-based proposal (June 2003)

Technical differences

 Motorola & Xtreme Spectrum  Direct Sequence-CDMA  MBOA Alliance  Multi-Band-OFDM  multiple +500 MHz wide bands  OFDM (Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing)  bands can be switched on and off (

dynamical spectrum usage

)  can be implemented with simpler CMOS technology than impulse radio UWB

IEEE Process

 Despite numerous attemps, the final decision has not been achieved  MBOA majority many times, but not 75%  Process has been stalled for months  Alternative:

”Forget IEEE, form a Special Interest Group of your own!”



MBOA has done this



Will Motorola follow?

Oct 02

Four UWB developers discuss Multi-Band approaches

Mar 03

Majority of IEEE proposals based on Multi-Band Texas Instruments presents MB-OFDM Motorola and Xtreme Spectrum team on UWB

Jul 03

IEEE down-selects to MB-OFDM, which obtains 60 % of votes

Jan 04

MBOA forms a new SIG (Special Interest Group) outside IEEE

Mar 04

90 companies in MBOA Motorola: a compromise proposal including both PHYs

Jan 03

Six UWB developers form Multi-Band Coalition (MBC)

Jun 03

MBC, TI, Sony, Samsung and others merge: MB OFDM Alliance (MBOA) is formed

Nov 03

35 companies in MBOA Motorola buys Xtreme Spectrum Xtreme promises royalty-free IPR IEEE voting: again no result

Feb 04

Intel backs up MBOA-based UWB for Wireless USB

Classification of Standards Wars

(Shapiro and Varian, 1999)

Your Technology Rival Technology

Compatible Incompatible Compatible Incompatible

Rival evolutions Evolution versus revolution Revolution versus evolution

Rival revolutions

Key assets in a standards war

(Shapiro and Varian, 1999)        Control over an installed base of customers Intellectual property rights Ability to innovate First-mover advantages Manufacturing abilities Strength in complements Reputation and brand name

Control over an installed base of customers

 Not Motorola, not MBOA

Intellectual property rights

 Key IPR are owned respectively by both parties, no decisive differences

Ability to innovate

 Both Motorola and MBOA members have a good track record in making innovative products  However, MBOA wins 6-0 due to its sheer megnitude

First-mover advantages

 Motorola & Xtreme Spectrum have had a time advantage  Motorola’s strategy in IEEE has been seen as a way to delay MBOA and strike first  MBOA has progressed rapidly  As a 90-company alliance, MBOA may not be as agile as Motorola

Manufacturing abilities

 MBOA wins 6-0

Strength in complements

 MBOA wins 6-0  consumer electronics: Nokia, Samsung, Philips, Panasonic, HP, TDK, Sharp, NEC, Toshiba, Olympus  motherboards: Intel, Via, Realtek  operating systems: Microsoft

Reputation and brand name

 Motorola is alone  MBOA wins 6-0

Conclusion (Confusion..??)

 Regardless of IEEE process, MBOA UWB will emerge as the next big wireless thing   Wireless USB Wireless Firewire  However, Motorola UWB may not die out:   Recent demo: 1.3 Gb/s over 2 m distance Can survive, if becomes branded and aimed to different usage scenarios than MBOA UWB  Aside the duel between Motorola and MBOA, the overall industry seems to have learned from past failures: a jolly good spirit of co-operation floats around the MBOA standard –

a bigger cake for everyone

 Products in 2005?