computerwoche.de

Archiv

Warning: This is only a draft

02.05.2006
I would never throw cold water on a revolution -- that's just not my style. I really do thrive on chaos, and that's wireless. But there are times one just needs to draw the line in the interests of the truth, a.k.a. reality. I was for some time a marketing guy, having sold out when I was an engineer at least in part because the food was better in marketing, and marketing is full of subtleties and innuendo -- a truly remarkable game that's full of possibilities for creativity and downright fun. But, above all, marketing, like all other worthy human activities, must be based in reality, a.k.a. the truth.

Marketing is about creating awareness and demand for a product or service. At its essence, it's about communication -- getting the facts out. "Marketing spin" is OK provided one never strays from the facts. Stretching, sure. Carefully crafting a message, OK. But what happens when marketing butts up against reality? Which one wins?

Case in point: the plethora of wireless LAN products now being announced as "compliant" with IEEE 802.11n Draft Release 1.0. I was a little suspicious that I would end up writing this column when, quite literally within minutes of the announcement of the approval of Draft 1.0, the chip company Marvell International Ltd. announced the first "draft compliant" chip set.

Now, I've heard about quick-turn semiconductor engineering, but, well, you get my drift. Lots of politics and positioning are associated with .11n. This is one very important standard and will largely determine the future of Wi-Fi. I appreciate enthusiasm, especially in this case.

Anyway, it would be only a matter of a few more moments before we see the first "Draft n-compliant" WLAN systems on the market. Now, I must caution here, I have no idea what it means to be compliant with a draft. 802.11n is not a finished standard. I estimate that eight months to a year of additional work required before it is a standard worthy of being called one. The Wi-Fi Alliance will then develop an interoperability specification, and once this work is complete, then and only then, will we have something we can base products on.

Moreover, The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc. (IEEE), of which I am a member, warns on the cover page of the .11n draft not to use the draft for compliance purposes. To do so is misleading at best, in my opinion. Would anyone go see a movie based on the first draft of The DaVinci Code? I don't think so. Great works take time. Would you go see the draft movie if they gave you a free pass to the final film when it's released? That's kind of what the vendors offering "Draft n" products are dangling in front of us with claims of software upgradeability to the final standard. But is that feasible, or even possible? I'm skeptical. And regardless, you won't get your money back if the products ultimately can't be upgraded.