As the saying goes, the great thing about standards is that we have so many to choose from. Enter
TransferJet, as much as we'd like to ignore it, it won't go away. In fact, today the nascent close (
real close, as in 3-cm or less) proximity wireless technology just snowballed itself into a proper consortium which lists a who's who of consumer electronics and camera manufacturers including Sony, Canon, Panasonic, Nikon, Samsung, Kodak, and interestingly enough, Sony Ericsson. Sony will lead the effort to develop the specs, guidelines, and licensing schemes required to interconnect TransferJet-compliant products offering a 375Mbps data transfer rate (560Mbps theoretical) without requiring any complex setup (just touch the devices together). Right, they're looking directly at your
NFC and
Wibree shortcomings
Bluetooth SIG. Full list of TransferJet members after the break.
Sony Corporation ("TransferJet Consortium" Administration)
Canon Inc.
Eastman Kodak Company
Hitachi Ltd.,
Victor Company of Japan
KDDI Corporation
Kenwood Corporation
Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd (Panasonic)
Nikon Corporation
Olympus Imaging Corporation
Pioneer Corporation
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.
Seiko Epson Corporation
Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications
Toshiba Corporation
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Kizorblade @ Jul 17th 2008 5:24AM
Guaranteed to transfer your porn, 100 times faster!
Alex @ Jul 17th 2008 7:44AM
Pr0n - "Transforming the interwebz since 1995"
thedesolate1 @ Jul 17th 2008 10:08AM
Pr0n BBS FTW!
Shawn @ Jul 17th 2008 5:31PM
LOL WTF Dairy Queen BBQ
L @ Jul 17th 2008 5:38AM
Let's see:
Wibree: ultra-low energy, slower Bluetooth variant for stuff that needs to go on next to forever, range up to 10m, 1MBit/s max.
TransferJet: way fast, range of 3cm, not meant for long-term connections.
Please explain why those technologies are pitted as competitors here, Engadget? I don't see them solving the same problems...
Marcus @ Jul 17th 2008 6:00AM
Headline typo :) Sorry. but I have to!
dreamscape86 @ Jul 17th 2008 7:00AM
This seems great. Not as a wireless protocol in the conventional sense, but more as a replacement for wired syncing connections that need to transfer large amounts of data, like digital cameras and MP3 players. Imagine if you could have a universal wireless "dock" that you could just set any portable device on to sync it to your computer. That'd be cool, right?
dreamscape86 @ Jul 17th 2008 7:01AM
Whoops, that wasn't supposed to be a reply. Sorry!
Rory Gamble @ Jul 17th 2008 6:22AM
Surely something like 50Mb/s and 2 metres would be a lot more useful? I can't think of many situations that would warrant such huge speeds combined with such restrictive distances, except maybe putting my digital camera/ipod etc on a pad to download pics or sync my music up.
Freakin Ijit @ Jul 17th 2008 7:54AM
Fast theft is prevented by 3cm distance requirement - or at least made real difficult.
2 meters is handing your data to the bad guy.
Remember, this method is supposed to be REAL easy to do..like no setup almost - http://www.transferjet.org/en/tj/tj02.html
Grey Acumen @ Jul 17th 2008 8:07AM
Actually, this makes perfect sense, given it's very specific applications:
People keep varying amounts of personal information on their phone. If someone is going to be able to access the information on my phone, they damn well better be close enough to me that I can identify and recognize that they're doing it, so that if it's a connection I'm objecting to, I can smack them upside the head/move my phone so they can't access it anymore..
On the other hand, if there is a person I WANT to have access my information, and if that person wants my information, we both will likely be willing to stand at least close enough for a handshake, which means we can hold out our phones(or whatever) to bring them within the 3cm distance to each other.
At this point, you realize just how important that super high transmission rate is. If you do have to get that close to transfer data, you don't want to have to stay that way for an hour and a half. From what my calculations bring out, this setup would let a 46MB (70MB theoretical) file be transfered in 1 second, not much long than a typical handshake would require. I don't even have files that large except for a few high quality video files.
Provided it works, and provided it becomes a standard, this could be the best method of secure information transfer, simply out of the fact that the distance limitation allows(and practically requires) you to able to physically verify the people accessing your information.
Paul Dullford @ Jul 17th 2008 7:49AM
Let the format wars begin all over again!
Michael de la Morena @ Jul 17th 2008 7:51AM
Wow, now I would be afraid of anyone touching my phone.
neofolklore @ Jul 17th 2008 7:53AM
3cm!? jeez we've regressed back to infrared!
oh well i guess "transfer-jacking" at a crowded cafeteria will be out of the question.
Here's a few other hacking terms for the inevitable first generation of devices that have the protocol implemented poorly (looking directly at Nokia on this one)
"jetlining"
"jetsniping"
"jetsploit"
"TJmax"
you heard it here first.
DSeaver @ Jul 17th 2008 7:59AM
Great, if Sony is leading, we'll see all kinds of rootkits and DRM.
So you'll have to be hip to hip with someone to hack them via TransferJet? Things may become a bit awkward!
Poom @ Jul 17th 2008 8:10AM
I think this may actually be useful. Like... You want to transfer files but you don't need to bring a cable with you. Leave the devices next to each other as they share files really fast. :/ Unless you're going to use the device during transfer, it shouldn't bother you that much.
Eric Windham @ Jul 17th 2008 8:28AM
Why is that device talking to a toilet?
Ed @ Jul 17th 2008 9:18AM
I assumed it was being thrown out, but that's much more likely.
guerilla779 @ Jul 17th 2008 8:33AM
the ONLY reason why engadget thinks transferjet sucks its cuz its been made by SONY NOT APPLE.
man i wish apple had made this atleast we could have read a WELL DESERVED ARTICLE on it.
computer.dude.28 @ Jul 17th 2008 9:14AM
3cm range?! You'd never have to worry about security.
thedesolate1 @ Jul 17th 2008 10:10AM
And P2P will never be the same.... watch the major carriers cripple this feature so no1 can share their legally downloaded ringtones or mp3's.....
I
retro77 @ Jul 17th 2008 10:57AM
They forgot one symbol:
http://thinkpenguin.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/metal-lock.jpg
What happens if you leave your device laying around and someone snags all your data or worse, uploads data to you. Also if you have this in your coat pocket and your on a crowded train or bus, bam, data gone!
kevmando @ Jul 17th 2008 11:14AM
I think it's very useful. Stop thinking about phone or camera and start thinking about TV or Audio which always will stay in same place. If you could just stack them up and no need to wire them, imagine how clean your living room would be. (Of course some serious listeners will complain of quality of sound. But they always do any type of wire.)
John @ Jul 17th 2008 12:39PM
4 years ago I read about a technology that would offer 150Mbit at a maximum range of 3 meter. When I first saw this post I read 3M instead of 3cm ;)
I have no idea what happened to that technology. Maybe it turned into Bluetooth 3?
bjay @ Jul 17th 2008 8:13PM
Infrared makes a grand re-entry into the technological stage. Keeping my fingers cross till more info comes along
SoloSalsa @ Jul 17th 2008 9:55PM
I know no one is going to see this way at the end of the comments...
Here is a video demonstration of it, at CES 2008. It is /definitely/ fast.
http://crackle.com/c/Blogs_and_Podcasts/Transfer_Jet_technology/2145310
Oinquer @ Jul 18th 2008 5:15AM
this could be nice if a standard like USB could be achieved...
but make it 5 or 10 cms ..i dont mind if speeds goes down to 100Mbits
srilyk @ Jul 18th 2008 1:40PM
So, I can immediately think of several ways to "eavesdrop" (although one is particularly theoretical).
First and easiest: put a reciever under the table, planted on the person, etc.
With a fast transfer speed, it shouldn't be a big deal. And with 4 or 8 gb mini SD cards... well, you shouldn't have to worry about running out of space.
The other, more theoretical practice would be to find some spectrum that can pick up interference, specifically on the band that transferjet uses. Then you just have to have two people on either side.
eydryan @ Jul 20th 2008 6:17AM
kind of takes me back to the days of infrared and standing like a moron for the devices to sync up while holding them close together... although perhaps with the high speed the idea would be just get them next to each other and in one swoosh it syncs up. unlikely though, and how utterly useless.