Li-Fi is 100 times faster than Wi-Fi
Category: Tech-News
Details:
Li-Fi is completely wireless, much like existing Wi-Fi. Haas also stresses that it can operate with existing LED bulb technology. Note: “existing technology” doesn’t mean “existing LED bulbs” that you already have set up in your house. Li-Fi actually works on wireless protocols much like Wi-Fi’s 802.11.
In short, you’ll need new bulbs. Li-Fi will also require a new piece of technology in your smartphones and laptops: a photosensor. Photosensors (also called photodetectors) are sensors which can “read” incoming light.
Li-Fi works much like the infrared technology in your television, and infrared works on a simple principle: an input command is given (e.g., “change channel” when you press a button) and that input is turned into binary code.
That code is then transmitted over infrared light waves by your remote’s sensor, and the light waves are received by your TV’s infrared sensor, which decodes the light and performs the intended input action.
PureLiFi’s infographic above shows how this works. The Internet and router/server is hooked to a cable, and the cable is attached to any number of LED bulbs in your house. The LED bulbs then transmit the data as modulating light waves while a photodetector on your phone or laptop picks up those light waves and decodes them.
So anywhere that your LED bulb is casting light that your photodetector can “see”, you’re ready to get Internet access — and at speeds faster than Wi-Fi.
Howevenr, this means that Li-Fi requires direct line-of-sight between the source (bulb) and recipient (phone or laptop), so while properly configured Wi-Fi can go through walls, you won’t be able to do that with Li-Fi.
There are some obvious benefits over Wi-Fi:
1.You won’t have to worry about congested radio waves and wireless dead zones.
2.It’s much, much faster than existing Wi-Fi speeds.
3.It’s more energy-friendly than Wi-Fi, which requires power-hungry masts. Also, if your photodetectors are solar cells, as Haas envisions, you might be able to use wireless battery charging and wireless Internet simultaneously.
4.Li-Fi’s direct line-of-sight requirement means that it’s probably going to be more secure than Wi-Fi, since someone outside your home can’t hack into your system. But, as Techcrunch points out, a telephoto lens and optimally tuned photosensor could potentially change that.
While all of this sounds really good, there are some major problems that Li-Fi still has to overcome:
1.Li-Fi cannot be used in direct sunlight (or other odd conditions with harsh lighting) since the photodetectors won’t be able to detect the modulating light waves. It’s unclear what counts as a poor condition, but as Velmenni’s and Haas’s demos have shown, it does work with some amount of ambient lighting.
2.The line-of-sight requirement can be a major bottleneck. Let’s say you have one Li-Fi bulb in your living room and you want to move to your bedroom. Well, you better have another Li-Fi bulb set up there or you’ll be out of luck.
3.Li-Fi is going to need reinvestment in lighting and wiring infrastructure.
Li-Fi seems like really cool technology and could help augment existing Wi-Fi and other wireless connectivity — it could potentially even replace it altogether — but actual usage for us consumers is a long, long time away.
In short, you’ll need new bulbs. Li-Fi will also require a new piece of technology in your smartphones and laptops: a photosensor. Photosensors (also called photodetectors) are sensors which can “read” incoming light.
Li-Fi works much like the infrared technology in your television, and infrared works on a simple principle: an input command is given (e.g., “change channel” when you press a button) and that input is turned into binary code.
That code is then transmitted over infrared light waves by your remote’s sensor, and the light waves are received by your TV’s infrared sensor, which decodes the light and performs the intended input action.
PureLiFi’s infographic above shows how this works. The Internet and router/server is hooked to a cable, and the cable is attached to any number of LED bulbs in your house. The LED bulbs then transmit the data as modulating light waves while a photodetector on your phone or laptop picks up those light waves and decodes them.
So anywhere that your LED bulb is casting light that your photodetector can “see”, you’re ready to get Internet access — and at speeds faster than Wi-Fi.
Howevenr, this means that Li-Fi requires direct line-of-sight between the source (bulb) and recipient (phone or laptop), so while properly configured Wi-Fi can go through walls, you won’t be able to do that with Li-Fi.
There are some obvious benefits over Wi-Fi:
1.You won’t have to worry about congested radio waves and wireless dead zones.
2.It’s much, much faster than existing Wi-Fi speeds.
3.It’s more energy-friendly than Wi-Fi, which requires power-hungry masts. Also, if your photodetectors are solar cells, as Haas envisions, you might be able to use wireless battery charging and wireless Internet simultaneously.
4.Li-Fi’s direct line-of-sight requirement means that it’s probably going to be more secure than Wi-Fi, since someone outside your home can’t hack into your system. But, as Techcrunch points out, a telephoto lens and optimally tuned photosensor could potentially change that.
While all of this sounds really good, there are some major problems that Li-Fi still has to overcome:
1.Li-Fi cannot be used in direct sunlight (or other odd conditions with harsh lighting) since the photodetectors won’t be able to detect the modulating light waves. It’s unclear what counts as a poor condition, but as Velmenni’s and Haas’s demos have shown, it does work with some amount of ambient lighting.
2.The line-of-sight requirement can be a major bottleneck. Let’s say you have one Li-Fi bulb in your living room and you want to move to your bedroom. Well, you better have another Li-Fi bulb set up there or you’ll be out of luck.
3.Li-Fi is going to need reinvestment in lighting and wiring infrastructure.
Li-Fi seems like really cool technology and could help augment existing Wi-Fi and other wireless connectivity — it could potentially even replace it altogether — but actual usage for us consumers is a long, long time away.
Comments
Post a Comment