UWB is one of the most exciting technologies in the wireless world today, but it's
been fraught with controversy since its inception. First, there were issues over its possible
interference with other key technologies such as GPS. The FCC rulemaking was a long and torturous
process which finally ended in March 2003, and potential changes to these rules are still under discussion.
Then, there was a major controversy over standardization, with proponents lining up behind two
different proposals and eventually agreeing to disagree. On this series of pages, we provide you
with complete historical and current information on UWB, divided into 3 sections. This first page
keeps up to date on the newest developments in UWB and the current and historical issues on the standardization
front. Our second page provides various UWB resources,
and the third page covers complete information on FCC's UWB rulemaking.
This table lists the complete contents of all three of our UWB pages. For information on
Ground Penetrating Radar, one of the interesting applications of UWB technology that is
already up and running, see our GPR Page.
As of August 13, 2007, the British standards body, Ofcom, finally approved the use of ultra-wideband wireless
technology without a license for use in the UK. See
ZDNet's article for more details. The European Commission had previously approved it for use beginning in February 2007. For information
on the European Commission's approval, see InfoWorld's
December 6, 2006 article.
March 2007: WiMedia UWB Platform Published as ISO/IEC Standard
On March 22, 2007, international standards based on the Wi-Media UWB Common Radio Platform were approved for release by the
International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) and will be numbered as
ISO/IEC 26907 and ISO/IEC 26908.
"ISO/IEC's approval of WiMedia-based ultra-wideband technology as an international standard, coupled with the recent UWB
approval by the European Commission, enables consumers and business entities throughout Europe and other countries to benefit
from the use of PC, CE and mobile devices powered with UWB technology," said Stephen Wood, president of the WiMedia Alliance.
Following the failure of the standards process in the US, members of the WiMedia Alliance submitted the WiMedia UWB platform
specifications to the European Commission for standards development. For more details, see
IHS Electronics article, based on the Wi-Media Alliance's press release.
Motorola and Freescale Semiconductor have pulled out of the UWB Forum which it co-founded with Motorola and Pulse-Link.
This forum was an industry group founded in 2004 in an effort to rally support around Freescale's direct-sequence flavor of wireless ultrawideband signaling.
This technology was in direct competition with the multiband orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (MB-OFDM) approach favored by the WiMedia Alliance
(which includes Intel and Philips and a host of startups).
Freescale's decision to pull out was to focus completely on Cable Free USB, its wireless USB application, as well as wireless 1394
for home networking and also HDMI (High Definition Multimedia Interface). (The WiMedia Alliance's version
is called Wireless USB.)
Pulse-Link is staying in the UWB forum, saying that it and the other 100+ companies that comprised the forum would continue to promote the virtues of
impulse-based UWB technology. For more details, see the April 6, 2006 article by Patrick Mannion of EE Times
here.
Pulse Link has a third flavor of UWB which is closer to WLAN. For more details, see the blog entry
dated February 21, 2005 by EDN Editorial Director Maury Wright. This technology is called CWave UWB (Continuous Wave UWB). Pulse-Link claims that the
CWave technology will offer significantly higher data rates than either the Multiband or the pulse-based UWB alternatives.
After nearly three years of wrangling over which approach should form the basis of an IEEE standard, the
parties have given up. At a meeting in Hawaii on January 19, 2006, the IEEE committee 802.15.3a,
which was tasked with developing a standard, voted unanimously to disband.
The two opposing groups - direct-sequence-UWB proponent UWB Forum, and the Multiband group WiMedia
Alliance - issued a joint statement on January 20. Both groups pledged to continue to develop their own approaches and
let the marketplace decide which one will become the de facto standard.
It had long been apparent that neither camp was prepared to move off their own position. The committee was
made up almost exclusively of members from both groups, which made consensus impossible. UWB Forum members
members are pursuing a personal-computer-centered approach which is touted to be
a replacement for USB cables that connect computers with their peripherals. Their Cable-Free USB standard is
designed to work with existing computers and peripherals without requiring upgrades or new software. A dongle that
connects a laptop wirelessly to a USB hub was demonstrated at the Consumer Electronics Show earlier in January, and
are expected to go on sale in a few months. They anticipate the technology will be extended later to work with
consumer electronics, including TVs and stereos.
Wi-Media supporters, on the other hand, are not expected to reach the marketplace before the end of 2006. They have
had a number of important backstage successes, however, with its approach already approved by the European standards body
and the USB Forum. It also has a large number of powerful industry backers in their camp, including Intel, Sony, Nokia,
HP, Microsoft, and Nokia. Their products will be marketed as "Certified Wireless". Sadly, Certified Wireless USB
products and Cable-Free USB products will not be able to communicate, and may interfere with one another.
For more details on this situation, read the articles linked below:
"Format war looms for new wireless standard" By PETER SVENSSON, AP Technology Writer
(Updated Friday, January 20, 2006, 2:27 PM). This article analyzes the end of the IEEE standards attempt,
and outlines the battle to come in the marketplace.
"UWB Forum
Continues to Grow," Digital Science Daily News, September 13, 2004. This article provides details
on the recent growth of the UWB Forum, the group backing the Motorola/Freescale DS UWB approach.
September 2004: Direct Sequence UWB Takes the Lead
This has been a good summer for the DS UWB camp.
The UWB Forum, the industry group that supports
this approach over the Multiband (MBOA) approach, has grown from 30 members in May to 76 members by
mid-September. A large part of this increase is because the DS approach is way ahead in the
race to market -- two years, according to forum leader Freescale. In August, the FCC granted
modular certification to Freescale's XS110 chipset, which means commercial shipments can begin
immediately. Additionally, three Taiwanese companies -- Universal Scientific Industrial, Gemtek,
and GlobalSun Technology -- have closed deals to incorporate Freescale's UWB chipset in Mini-PCI
modules for TVs, media servers, and storage devices. These companies anticipate having products
ready for the consumer market by early 2005.
In contrast, the megalithic MultiBand OFDM Alliance
(MBOA), has finalized its physical-layer specifications some four
months later than planned, and presented them at the Intel Developers' Forum in early September.
However, there is still bitter internal debate among MBOA members over whether the MBOA approach
can meet FCC test compliance without compromising range or throughput. MBOA has filed a request
for waiver of Part 15 UWB rules with the FCC, and interference testing is underway at FCC laboratories.
FCC is fast-tracking the waiver request -- comments on the request are due by September 29,
and replies to those comments are due in by October 14.
Although the DS approach must now be considered the leading candidate in the standards battle
that has been ongoing in IEEE for more than a year, no one seems to think that the battle is any
closer to ending. A straw poll before the IEEE meeting in Berlin in Mid-September
indicates that DS has a 60% majority, but not the 75% necessary for adoption. Martin Rofheart,
Freescale's UWB Director, plans to suggest in Berlin a dual standard permitting both approaches.
This would create a situation similar to Wi-Fi, where there a number of different standards permitted.
This would leave the marketplace to determine which of the two will become more popular.
Meanwhile, Intel laid out some interesting information on Multiband UWB at its annual Fall
developers forum just completed. The MBOA has the members, the size, and the clout to continue as a
major presence, and the infrastructure to make their eventual success likely. Down but not out, in
a word!
For more details on this situation, read the articles linked below:
"UWB Forum
Continues to Grow," Digital Science Daily News, September 13, 2004. This article provides details
on the recent growth of the UWB Forum, the group backing the Motorola/Freescale DS UWB approach.
"Ultra wideband may get wider,"
By Ben Charny, CNET News.com September 8, 2004. This article gives information on the upcoming
Berlin meeting of the IEEE UWB committee and describes the current status of the two proposals
and concerns over the continuing inability to pick a standard.
"Intel Reveals its Plan at IDF," by Nick Stam, PC Magazine,
September 10, 2004. Coverage of the MBOA standard and status as presented at the recently-concluded
Intel Developer's Forum.
At the most recent IEEE standards committee meeting, and in a reversal of past votes,
the direct sequence UWB proposal backed by Freescale Semiconductor (formerly Motorola's
semiconductor sector), won the
down-select vote on July 14, 2004. It was unable to get the 75% necessary for selection,
though. This was a major surprise for the Multi Band OFDM Alliance (MBOA), which has
won the previous down-select votes. Both sides are putting their own spin on the results
of this vote, and it makes for some interesting reading.
Also, at the same meeting, a proposal to create a standard that allows for both approaches
was defeated. So it looks like this controversy will go on for a while longer.
Motorola has just launched Freescale Semiconductor, which was formerly its semiconductor
sector. The initial public stock offering was on July 16, 2004. Motorola continues to be the
parent company of Freescale. For more information about this new company, see their
website: http://www.freescale.com/. Of particular
interest is their UWB page, with UWB product information, articles, press releases, and links.
ITU Meeting in June Considered UWB
Information is still rolling in on the results of the International Telecommunications Union (ITU)
Meeting held in Boston, Massachusetts in June of this year. The major topic on the agenda was UWB,
and it's known that ITU would be tough sledding. Some of the news articles and websites related
to this meeting are listed below:
Proposal Aired for Resolving UWB Standards Controversy
A proposal by UWB technology player PulseLink suggests
using an agreed-upon low-speed signaling mode to negotiate differences between UWB devices operating
under different UWB standards. If this works, it would eliminate the need to reach consensus on a
single UWB standard. PulseLink, which originally unveiled this proposal last September, intends to
put in on the agenda at the International Telecommunications Union meeting in June.
A number of UWB proposals will be on the table at the ITU meeting. So far, the ITU has been hostile
to any form of UWB, so not much may be accomplished. Despite this, and Intel's stated opinion that
it doubts whether a common signaling approach will work, PulseLink remains optimistic.
For more information on this subject, see the following:
XtremeSpectrum Inc., a UWB pioneer and one of the key proponents of the underdog
direct sequence CDMA approach to UWB, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on March
10, 2004, at the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Alexandria, Virginia. This comes only
four months after selling its ultra-wideband technology assets to Motorola Inc.
The bankruptcy petition, lists assets between $1 million and $10 million and liabilities
between $1 million and $10 million. The largest unsecured creditors include
Alliance Technology Ventures II ($1.67 million), Cadence Design Systems Inc.
($1.61 million), TI Ventures III L.P. ($1.46 million), Drax Holdings L.P. ($1.31 million),
POD Holding L.P. ($1.06 million) and Motorola Inc. ($795,833).
XtremeSpectrum, a Delaware corporation, is based in Vienna, Va.
With the standards controversy between Motorola/Xtreme Spectrum and the Multiband Alliance (MBOA)
(backers of the multiband OFDM variant of UWB) at a stalemate, it is not certain what impact
Xtreme's financial woes may have on deployment of UWB. MBOA has been very noticeable in the
press recently. See The Next Video Data Channel? Consortium Developing Wireless USB Standard for Audio, Video,
a March 15, 2004 article by Sebastian Rupley, PC Magazine. This article details the progress in
developing a USB that will use MBOA's version of UWB. (For more information on USB, see our
Universal Serial Bus page.)
Other March News
Ultrawideband standards split deepens, article by Rupert Goodwins for
ZDNet UK, March 17, 2004. The lead to the article states, "The race for
ultrawideband supremacy is getting dirtier, with existing agreements torn up by
Intel and its friends." Interesting summary of recent happenings in the standards
battle, along with some opinions.
Ultrawideband gets mixed reception,
Article by Ron Wilson for EE Times, February 18, 2004. At a blue-ribbon panel convened at
the International Solid State Circuits Conference in San Francisco to ponder the question,
"To UWB, or Not to Be?" The answers were decidedly mixed.
In late January, the Bush Administration came out in favor of adopting the current
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ultra wideband (UWB) emission limits for
all outdoor device applications.
The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), the executive
branch's primary policy voice on telecommunications and information technology issues,
filed comments on January 15, saying it believes the restrictions on the pulse repetition
frequency used by UWB are unnecessary as long as the current emission limits for handheld
devices are met.
Noting that the FCC had proposed additional rules to address issues regarding the
operation of low-pulse repetition frequency UWB transmission systems, NTIA said
that was unnecessary.
"NTIA believes that if the FCC adopts the handheld UWB device emission limits for
expanded outdoor device applications, no restrictions on PRF are necessary,"
said NTIA. "NTIA also believes that if the handheld emission limits are adopted,
there is no technical reason to further limit UWB device applications as long as
the commission retains the current restrictions forbidding the use of a fixed
outdoor infrastructure and the operation of UWB devices in toys."
NTIA's filing also includes analysis of pulsed frequency hopping vehicular
radar systems operating in the 22-29 GHz frequency range. NTIA found no greater
interference from such systems with government passive sensing satellites than is
presently permitted. The NTIA noted, however, that its conclusions do
not apply to UWB frequency hopping systems in other bands. In its comments, NTIA
proposes a compliance measurement procedure for pulsed frequency hopping vehicular radar
systems.
NTIA does oppose one FCC proposal that would eliminate the
minimum bandwidth requirement from the definition of a UWB transmitter. According
to the NTIA comments, removing the minimum bandwidth requirement could allow
unlicensed non-UWB operations in restricted bands.
December 2003: Royalty-Free UWB Licenses & Other Shenanigans
Texas Instruments, one of the principal proponents of the
The MultiBand OFDM Alliance (MBOA), issued a press release on December 8, 2003
offering royalty-free UWB licenses under TI essential
patents, if the MBOA proposal is ratified as the new IEEE 802.15.3a standard
for high speed WPANs. This moved is aimed at sweetening the pot for adoption of the
MBOA proposal, which has been stalled since last spring.
You can read the press release here [Editor's note: this is no longer available.]
It's got some interesting comments on the reasons why TI believes the MBOA proposal to be the
better approach for the UWB standard -- they cite its "ability to efficiently capture
nearly 100 percent of the multi-path energy, which results in having the best range, its
ability to provide a robust link in the presence of multi-path and interference, its relaxed
RF and analog requirements, and its ability to coexist with current and future wireless services."
Also, there's another interesting article here about the UWB standards controversy:
The Albuquerque meeting of the IEEE 802.15 committee failed to break the deadlock over
which UWB proposal will form the basis of a new standard. On Monday, November 10, the
committee voted to leave the proposal sponsored by the MultiBand OFDM Alliance as the
only proposal on the ballot. Despite this, on November 11 the proposal only garnered 57%
of the total, substantially less than the 75% necessary for approval. The final tally
was 96 votes for the proposal and 69 against, with 3 abstentions.
This continuing failure to reach agreement only enhances the likelihood
that one or more de facto standards, independent of the IEEE, may well be the way forward
for UWB.
Motorola is making a move aimed at enhancing the chances for adoption of its position
at the IEEE standards meeting that began this week in Albuquerque, NM.
Motorola announced November 10 that it is planning to acquire Xtreme Spectrum, one of the original
players in the development of Ultra wideband. Both Motorola and XtremeSpectrum have been active
in the IEEE standardization efforts for UWB, and are proponents of the "underdog" single-band
UWB standards proposal.
This announcement follows XtremeSpectrum's recent Letter of Assurance to IEEE, stating that if XtremeSpectrum's
proposed approach to the IEEE 802.15.3a standard is adopted, XtremeSpectrum would be willing
to grant royalty-free licenses under XtremeSpectrum's essential patents to parties who would grant
a similar royalty-free license under their patents to XtremeSpectrum and other licensees of the
company's patents. This speaks directly to one of the concerns raised by Motorola and XtremeSpectrum with respect
to the multiband proposal sponsored by Intel, TI, Nokia and other heavy hitters, which calls for more restrictive intellectual
property licensing.
October 2003: IEEE Unable to Agree on UWB Standard in Singapore
The two remaining UWB standards proposals were again considered at the IEEE Committee's
meeting in Singapore on September 14-19 (see article below for more
information on the two proposals). The Multiband-OFDM proposal favored by Intel, Texas Instruments,
and others, again garnered about 60% of the votes. This was not enough for adoption over the
proposal sponsored by Motorola and Xtreme Spectrum, so the selection
is still open. A final decision could now be made in November at the Committee's next meeting in Albuquerque.
In addition to concerns over whether the multiband approach meets FCC requirements, opponents
also object that it does not guarantee zero-royalty
intellectual property licensing, only a "reasonable and fair" licensing policy,
and have raised issues about the fairness of the IEEE process.
Intel elaborated on their earlier hints about breaking off from the IEEE committee to pursue a
proprietary approach to UWB. Speaking before the Singapore meeting, Pat Gelsinger, Chief Technical Officer at
Intel, said that Intel is considering creating a special interest group (SIG) to set a
standard independent of the IEEE. "If agreement isn't reached in the next three meetings
we may consider an alternate strategy such as a SIG," he said. "We have strong
confidence of getting it if not this time, then in November or at the subequent meeting.
Nothing else is close."
In recent months, the UWB battlefield has moved to the IEEE in its standards-making role.
The 802.15.3a committee has been considering 21 different standards proposals. In July, the
committee held its first vote and whittled down the field of contenders to two: the multiband OFDM (MB-OFDM)
proposal sponsored by the MultiBand OFDM Alliance (Texas Instruments, Intel Corp, and 14 others), and a
second proposal backed by a team including XtremeSpectrum Inc. (XSI), Motorola, and ParthusCeva. The
MB-OFDM proposal won a majority of the votes, but fell short of the 75% necessary to exclude competing proposals.
The next meeting, set for September 14-19 in Singapore (that's RIGHT NOW, folks) should be pretty volatile.
Shortly after the July meeting, Xtreme and Motorola filed a request for a declaratory ruling with the FCC,
contending that the MB-OFDM proposal does not comply with the FCC's regulations. FCC's Deputy Chief of the
Office of Engineering and Technology, Julius Knapp, ducked the issue last week, saying that a ruling was
"premature" because IEEE deliberations were still continuing. Knapp doesn't rule out further
FCC involvement in this issue at a later time, however:
We urge that IEEE perform technical analyses to ensure that any UWB standard it
develops will not cause levels of interference beyond that already anticipated by
the rules. This information will be needed to support any necessary FCC rules
interpretations or other appropriate action for the chosen standard.
We recommend that IEEE proceed with its standards development process and that
the committee address any questions to us at a later time when it has formed
a specific proposal.
Here's an interesting article on FCC's decision:
"FCC Ducks UWB Decision,"
Unstrung News Analysis, September 12, 2003. Reports on FCC's decision not to enter the standards controversy
until after IEEE selects a UWB standard.
In the meantime, another controversy is raging between the two parties over the standards process itself.
XSI and Motorola contend that a private meeting in Denver between multiband proponents and members of the 803.15a
Committee was not legal under IEEE bylaws because single band proponents weren't invited.
The multiband group contends that XSI et al aren't open to compromise, and that the meeting
would not have been productive had they been invited. The XSI group disagrees with this contention.
Intel added another twist to the mix by stating that if a compromise isn't reached soon,
they might break off from the IEEE committee to pursue a proprietary approach to UWB.
For more information, read "Samsung adopts XSI's chip set as UWB standards debate heats up,"
by Patrick Mannion for EE Times, September 10, 2003. It has some interesting information on the behind-the-scenes
issues in the UWB standards debate.
