HP Provides Alternate Technology to RFID

NerdForceMaster writes "HP has unveiled a new alternative to standard RFID technology, a chip the size of a tomato seed that has 500KB of memory and can communicate at 10mbps. Lets hope this one is commercially availible soon." We beg forgiveness; dupe etc etc.

Tomato seed?

[MMC Monster]

Okay. Exactly how big is a tomato seed again?

What ever happened to standard units of measure? This is a tech crowd. How about a size in millimeters?

I tried googling "1 tomato seed in millimeters", but that didn't give me a useful number...

Better stock up, guys,

[eighty4]

your wallet is going to need at least three layers of tin foil now...

A little communication goes a long way

[Tim C]

Perhaps the "editors" should talk to each other [slashdot.org]?

$20 says Walmart goes for RFID

[Cordath]

Actually, no.

From the article:

"Information transfer requires actual physical connection to the Memory Spot and Taub says they designed it that way. 'We don't want to increase the range of contact,' he said. 'We think it's just right.'

Of course, the requirement for physical contact to transfer data means that these chips will be completely unsuitable for many of the applications RFID's seem poised to handle. For example, merchandise tags in stores. With HP's chips merchandise currently protected by security tags will still require separate security tags. With RFID tags the securty tags can be eliminated. The concept of being able to walk into a store, stuff your pockets with merchandise, and walk out and be automatically billed as you pass through the door won't work with these chips. That may appeal to some consumers, but not to the people running stores. Less shop-lifting and no cashiers is a pretty sweet deal.

I can see these chips being preferable for some applications though. Although a RFID credit card might let you walk out of that store with your stuffed pockets without slowing down, one of HP's chips may ultimately prove more secure even since physical contact is required for them to operate. (i.e. No RFID-sniffing, or whatever they wind up calling it.) Even if RFID proves perfectly secure, the requirement for physical contact will probably be perceived as more secure by most people anyways.

The storage capacity on HP's chips is impressive however, and will probably open up entirely new applications that RFID never had a hope of filling. Imagine whipping out your HP-ecosystem-ified cell-phone or other such gadget and being able to play short video clips and sounds about a product just by swiping it past your phone. This could range from movie previews from a swiping a movie poster while just outside a movie theater to instructions on how to wash your clothes from a chip inbedded in the tags. Of course, I'm willing to bet that after a while every chip you swipe will try to sell you something before it actually does anything useful...

Not Really Better then RFID

[shaneh0]

Despite the misleading summary and lede, inside the article it explains that you need CONTACT with this "tomato seed" to read its data. I can see this as solving some of the same problems as RFID, like the Passports, for example, that you don't want to be read at a distance. But for other problems, like determining how many widgets Acme Co. has in their warehosue, it's not much better then a bar code.

Re:Lost item locator

[maximthemagnificent]

My model seems to makes things harder for me to find, not easier. (: