Apple chose to save some money by choosing Infineon’s subpar baseband solution. They also didn’t learn from the many previously released 3G smart phones that have struggled due to disappointing battery life. For example, the Motorola Q had to basically double the size of its battery. The 3G iPhone should satisfy Apple’s core customers, but it is difficult to see widespread adoption before the battery and baseband are meaningfully improved. That should give AT&T time to upgrade its 3G network to be competitive with Verizon and Sprint. Although doubtful, it might also give competitors time to offer more competitive devices.

Between the imminent WiFi upgrade to 802.11n, mobile WiMax (IEEE 802.16e), and the eventual launch of LTE; wireless broadband will eventually be ubiquitous and most of us will be using an iPhone type device. For Apple it is encouraging how many companies are targeting their mobile platform; with some incredible adoption rates. However, most companies will probably build their “iPhone applications” as web applications that can be just as easily used on a Blackberry or Windows Mobile device; once both companies figure out how to incorporate a web browser into their phone.

Disclaimer: I have no position in any company listed, but do intend on purchasing an iPhone once the battery easily lasts a full day and the 3G baseband is competitive with Texas Instruments’ solution.

tags and readers for the US weigh and toll stations including PrePass, NORPASS, and E-ZPass which use the CVSN protocol.  These tags operate in the 915MHz frequency using a proprietary air interface. In the Southeast, several toll agencies use TransCore’s RFID equipment. The USDOT is trying to eventually migrate all local state toll systems to a new international IEEE standard called 802.11p.  a single system to bypass weigh stations and roll through toll collection booths using E-ZPass, Fast Lane (in California), Pikepass (in Oklahoma), and SunPass (in Florida).

 The 802.11p standard is not expected to be ratified until April 2009 and will use the 5.9GHz frequency.  Mark IV, Genzo, TransCore, and others are prototyping compatible 802.11p products, but it is expected that the 802.11p infrastructure will not be deployed until at least 2012.

Currently there would be a lot of value opening these toll systems to commercial transportations companies to help them track their intermodal cargo.

• Impeva Labs
  • Provides a rugged device that is being tested by the US Army
  • Network: Multi-band cellular and Iridium
• GE’s Equipment Services – Asset Intelligence
  • A major consolidator in the industry, but its disparate products are not on the same platform (frequency, air interface protocol, etc) so little is gained so far from their consolidation
  • Also provides a solution more specific to trucking services
  • Network: CDMA, AMPS (first generation analog cellular), Orbcomm
  • In January 2007 purchased Terion, a major North American trailer tracking player
  • Purchased Veriwise, which products for Europe, Africa, and Asia
    • Network: SpaceChecker which uses 5 satellites over 2 different Networks; it has a GEO-stationary satellite network in L-Band
    • For Europe it uses the European Space Agency (ESA) satellites
    • Uses the Express satellite network for coverage over Europe, Africa, and Asia
• Qualcomm
  • T2 Untethered TrailerTRACS asset management system
  • This may finally be a useful product, but with Sprint moving to WiMAX and Verizon moving to LTE I wouldn’t want to rely long-term on CDMA; so in five years expect to find a new equipment provider
• SkyBitz
  • Network: MSAT
• Axon
  • Uses Globalstar
• Globalwave
  • Previously Vistar, now owned by Transcore which is a subsidiary of Roper Industries
  • Network: Globalstar
• GeoLogic
  • Network: AT&T cellular and L-Band Sattellite (MSAT)
  • Doesn’t appear to have a device for tracking containers

• Iridium
  • 66 operational LEO satellites + 14 in-orbit spares
• Globalstar
  • 48 LEO satellites that relay messages to ground-based gateways (then call passed to Internet and terrestrial telephone network)
  • Can maintain connection using the same IP address
  • Coverage
    • Covers the US from 70 degrees north to 70 degrees south
    • Covers 80% of the world’s landmass (excluding Antarctica) and territorial waters in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Australia, and New Zealand
  • Offers “secure asset tracking” service (small modem placed inside shipping container serving as tracking system, modem programmed to track container’s position)
  • Has three times more overall capacity than Iridium (in 2003 Globalstar’s capacity was seven million users or devices)
  • The maximum voice and data capability is 9.6 kilobits (four times faster than Iridium)
    • Globalstar also has multi-channel modems offering up to 144 kilobits data transfer
• Orbcomm
  • Has 30 low-earth orbit (LEO) satellites
  • Trades on the Nasdaq under ORBC
• Inmarsat
  • Has over 24 Earth Stations and 4 active geo-synchronous orbits (GEO) satellites, providing Global satellite coverage
  • 62 member-country, internationally owned cooperative, formed over 20 years ago
  • Communications at up to 64kbit/s to over 210,000 ship, vehicle, aircraft, and portable terminals
  • New Inmarsat I-4 satellite system, which since 2004 supports Inmarsat Broadband Global Area Network (B-GAN) offering mobile data communications up to 432kbit/s
• Thuraya Satellite Communications Company
  • Provides blanket coverage to 99 countries spanning Europe, North and Central Africa, Middle East, Central Asia, and Indian Subcontinent (approximately 40% of the world’s population)
• Mobile Satellite Ventures (MSV)
  • Has 2 MSAT (Mobile Satellites)
  • Covers most of North America, Central America, and the Caribbean
  • launched in 1995 and 1996, plans to launch replacement satellites in 2009
  • parent company SkyTerra trades on OTC as OTC:SKYT
• ICO Global Communications
  • Attempting to build a “next generation” network through satellites and terrestrial stations
  • Merged with Teledesic

Types of Satellite Networks

LEO (Low Earth Orbit)

Small non-geostationary satellites 485 miles high, operate in LEO, providing mainly mobile data services (e.g. Orbcomm)

Big LEO (Low Earth Orbit)

Larger non-geostationary satellite operates in LEO, providing mainly mobile telephony services. Many of new proposed ‘global mobile phone’ services are provided by this type of satellite. The satellites are located between 700km and 1,500km from Earth (e.g. Iridium, Globalstar)

MEO (Medium Earth Orbit)

Non-geostationary satellites providing mobile telephony services located 10,000km from Earth (e.g. ICO)

GEO (Geostationary)

Satellites occupying an orbital position 36,000 km above the earth that remain in a stationary position relative to Earth (e.g. Thuyara, Inmarsat)

Mesh Attributes

• Communication Performance
  • Distance, channel hopping, data rate, number of nodes, etc
  • Effects of metal, temperature, speed, etc
  • What kind of device to device communication range can we anticipate and total network range?
  • Supports how many nodes?
  • How often does the signal recalibrate? (so unaffected by other radio signals or WiFi networks)
  • What is the KB/s?
  • Can remotely flush software updates?
• Battery Life
  • How does this affect network topology, sleep interval, etc
  • How implementing least cost routing (thru the mesh network)
• Standards / Interoperability
  • Many providers are building proprietary implementations on top of 802.15.4
  • In the near future can we expect interoperability with any existing standard, such as
    • 802.11
    • ISO 24730
    • e-Seal standard (ISO 18185)
    • Or any other?
• Spectrum
  • 2.4 – 2.48 GHz appears to be the preferred spectrum, but some vendors appear to be migrating to 5 GHz
• Security
  • How could we allow partner’s mesh devices onto a secure mesh network?
  • How is security implemented: MAC level, Access control lists, encryption, etc?
• Costs
• Implementations / Pilots
  • Are there any implementations that you can reference?
• Mesh Roadmap
  • Where do expect mesh technology to be in two years, from a price, feature, and performance perspective?
• What other questions should we be asking?

Achieving ROI with RFID for asset management (such as in the transportation, healthcare, and retail verticals) is no longer obscure. Use of active tags (often using Wi-Fi) on high value objects and personnel is accelerating more than item level tagging. RFID is finding some of its best adoption levels in transportation logistics; specifically in RTLS (real-time location systems), often used in conjunction with GPS.

At the company I work for we have an event driven architecture; so we were able to just create new events in our system, along with the appropriate business rules for those events, and the events flowed through our existing IT systems. It was important that we were able to quickly introduce the data into the business applications. After all the goal of an RFID project is to turning real-time or near-time data into actionable business intelligence.

RFID is a way to reduce cost of exceptions; if you design using the 80% rule the other 20% can negate ROI. As when designing any management by exception system it is critical to include your business domain experts in the design process because they can point out the 2% scenarios or the instances where valid exceptions occur.

When selecting a new RFID system spend the time to pick the right technology vendors and “flavor” of RFID and avoid implementing a solution that is not based on a standard. If you’re an early adopter you may not have the luxury of waiting for ratification of a standard, but at this point many, if not the majority of, markets targeted by RFID have a standard available.

Ensure that you build in-house expertise. You probably do not need dedicated RFID expertise, but you need to have basic understanding of how the readers and tags work and especially where and when the data is handed off, by the vendor’s products, to your system. The fears over RFID viruses have been a little farfetched, but this cloning technique could be an issue for some.

Start early and small with specific goals but think about how the solution will scale by having a roadmap for the future. As with all new technology deployments use the snowball approach; the way to build a big snowball is to start rolling up a small one. Here it is important to test readers, test tags, and especially test data integration.

When identifying the ROI for RFID projects constantly keep in mind that RFID introduces opportunities to improve business processes. Beyond business process optimization here are some common ROI Metrics to look for.

• Improved time to market
• Land and equipment optimization
• Proactive response to service disruptions
• Security
• Lower insurance

One of the most difficult aspects of taking full advantage of an RFID system is collaborating with your supply chain partners and implementing a data sharing policy. While this can be the most difficult to navigate this is the most long-term game changing aspect of implementing RFID.

Below is an overview of the top RTLS and yard management solution providers. These solution providers all advertise successful implementations and offer the flexibility of using tags that are permanently or temporarily mounted (usually using a magnet). It is also possible to buy temporary tags directly from manufacturers such as Premo Group.
 

PINC Solutions claims that ROI is usually realized in less than one year; with Aero Scout making a similar claim. Fuensee claims to be a third the cost of WhereNet. Although WhereNet, acquired in February 2007 by Zebra, is lowering prices now that its’ technology has been accepted as an industry standard. Below I’ve outlined the major RFID developments affecting RTLS and the intermodal container industry.

RFID in the Intermodal Container Industry

• Jan 2007, Dow Chemical is piloting a RFID project to track intermodal containers with hazardous chemicals
• March 2007, Oracle, Savi, and EPCglobal completed a pilot project to track intermodal containers in Asia
• April
  2007, WhereNet’s RTLS solution became a global standard (ISO standard 24730)

  This is the first global technical standard for RTLS. A major target of this standard is the international intermodal shipping industry and its more than 18 million containers in use around the world. The standard defines an API to share location data over a network using web services. It also defines an air interface standard in the 2.4GHz spectrum for tags and readers. The asset’s location can be determined by multiple 2.4GHz readers or by low frequency (120 kHz) exciters.

• April 2007, Navis and Identec picked to design Georgia Port Management System
  • Includes installing active RFID tags on over 7500 trucks at the Georgia Port Authority’s Garden City Terminal in Savannah where a huge WhereNet active tag system already orchestrates the positioning of intermodal containers
• May 2007, the e-seal standard (ISO 18185) was ratified
  • This includes an air interface protocol. It is a standard specifically targeted at the intermodal container shipping industry designed with a $10 price point in mind. Some think that DHS or C-TPAT will eventually mandate this e-seal.

RFID Marketplace – Current State & Forecasts

Frost & Sullivan (May 2007) – North American RFID market

• The passive RFID tag market generated revenues of $124.6M in 2006
  • Predicts $486.6M in 2013 – compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) = 21.5%
• The RFID reader market generated revenues of $23.1M in 2006
  • Predicts $241.6M in 2013, CAGR = 40%
  • The reader market still primarily driven by Wal-Mart and US Department of Defense compliance
• Frost cautions that read accuracy is still imperfect and represents a hurdle to wider adoption

In-Stat on WiFi RTLS (May 2007)

• WiFi RTLS tag shipments hit 135,000 in 2006, up from 20,000 in 2005
  • Predicts CAGR of 100% through 2010
• Unit price of WiFi tags has decreased from about $50 to $45 (expected to fall to $30 in 2007)
• G2 Microsystems has the best chip
• AeroScout has well over 50% market share in terms of number of tags shipped because of two advantages
  • A Close relationship with Cisco
    • WhereNet also has a close relationship with Cisco and in August 2007 entered the WiFi RTLS market through a new dual-mode device (previously they had not been using WiFi)
  • Its technology can serve large outdoor environments where other WiFi RTLS technology might not perform well.

RFID Reader & Ede Server Advancements

• March 2007, Intel’s release of a new chip for RFID readers that simplifies reader design allowing reader manufactures to accelerate price cuts, add features, shrink form factor, and increase reader compatibility.
• April 2007, EPCglobal’s ratification of the Low-Level Reader Protocol (LLRP) standard
  • This will increase reader interoperability, allow technology providers to extend RFID reader capabilities
• May 2007, Cisco and WhereNet announced an active WiFi tag that supports the industry standard ISO 24730 transmission signal or IEEE 802.11b; these tags will be available in August for $55
  • Cisco’s Unified Wireless Network version 4.1 gives WLANs the ability to format and read data from sensors
• September 2007, NEC has introduced an RFID reader that operates at three different frequencies: 13.56 MHz (HF), the UHF band, and 2.45 GHz. The device, which NEC indicates is the first of its kind, is novel because typically readers operate at only one frequency. For example, a Gen2 reader (Gen2 operates on the UHF band) would not read HF tags.
• September 2007, Microsoft announced the availability of its RFID software, BizTalk Server 2006 R2

Zebra Technologies as Industry Consolidator

Zebra Technologies is the largest seller of bar-code, plastic ID, and RFID printers and a major seller of readers. The sell their products in 90 countries and more than 90% of the Fortune 500 companies use Zebra printers. In 2006, about half the company’s revenue was outside the United States. In 2007, Zebra made a major push into the RTLS and intermodal transportation market by purchasing three companies.

In January 2007, it acquired WhereNet for $126 million in cash. At the time WhereNet anticipated 2007 sales of fifty million dollars. In October 2007, Zebra acquired both Proveo (a German company, for 16.3 million in cash) and Navis (for $145 million in cash).

Proveo developed a GPS- and WiFi-based RTLS solution for airport ground handlers with installations in some of the world’s major airports such as: Frankfurt, Munich, London, Singapore, and Dubai. Navis provides logistics solutions for marine terminals and other operations that manage supply chain inventory and cargo; such as port operating systems, yard management systems, warehouse management systems, and asset visibility systems. Founded in 1988, it has installations at over 450 customer sites in 50 countries. It is the leading provider of marine terminal management software with installations at 200 ports (there are 850 ports worldwide). It expected 2007 revenue of $60 million which would be double digit growth.

If Zebra is able to successfully integrate all these assets it should be a major player in the RTLS market

Glossary & Notes

Companies are far from automating their inbound and outbound containers; 58% of companies’ distribution center yards still manage inbound and outbound traffic using clipboards and spreadsheets. Of the 42% of companies using software to manage traffic most do so using a stand-alone application that is not integrated with the rest of the company’s systems.

RTLS – Real Time Location Systems

• Solutions to track and identify the location of objects in real time using tags attached to the objects and readers that receive the wireless signals from these tags to determine their locations. WiFi and Active RFID are the two most common wireless technologies used in RTLS solutions.