* Posts by Wolf Luecker

6 publicly visible posts • joined 15 May 2007

NFC fails to find its killer app

Wolf Luecker

It might just make things easier for the user

>You still need the CPU and O/S of the phone though! And quite possibly the display.

Not true. NFC elements are both passive and active (not like passive RFIDs), so your app can write the pass code to it and can then be read by an external active reader.

>>Bluetooth? You want to pair your phone with a door handle? Bluetooth is far from useful for a one-off or 'instant' use.

>An app could make that very simple.

Come on JonB, you can't tell me that just touching the handle with your device is not easier than running a J2ME app which pairs it with the door. I hear what you're saying about a technology that isn't quite mature yet, but you're being disingenuous now.

I'm a big fan of bar codes, but again, they're not quite there either (which user knows how to use a barcode-reading app on their phone?) The huge success of Oyster cards in London has shown that people seem to like the whole touch thing.

About the security issues, I don't feel totally comfortable with having my bank card embedded in my phone either, but by the same token I could say that the Oyster cards would never catch on because if someone nicks mine, they can use up all the pre-pay credit on it. Well, they could, yes, but sometimes benefits outweigh risks.

Wolf Luecker

Potential of NFC

>The whole thing is a solution looking for a problem.

No. NFC has more in stall than other technologies. It is a lot more secure than BT or IR, which is why most people equate NFC with banking/payment applications. The phone has a secure element which can't be accessed by any old Bluetooth transmitter/receiver in the vicinity. Touch has a completely different level of personalisation, privacy and locality.

Also, RFID, which is a related format, is already being used all over the world for lots of contact-related things, and many more goods with in-built RFID tags for identification and tracking are being made every day.

Not saying there is any killer app yet, but there are good reasons why people are excited about it.

BBC culls Jam staff

Wolf Luecker

Funding

Another thing: The article implies that the licence payer funded Jam. That's not correct as far as I know. The money (or at least most of it) came from the DfES, not from the BBC's TV licence pot.

Wolf Luecker

Re: Industry vs BBC

Re: the Devil's Advocate post, I completely understand the needs of the educational software providers but there are a couple of points to consider:

- I am one of the many small businesses that the BBC outsource to. Jam was contractually obliged to pass a third of that £150 Million to companies like us. I know of several who will experience severe problems and job losses now that the income from Jam has disappeared overnight. So it's not just the 200 or 31 jobs at the Beeb.

- The educational software industry also benefits from government money via the E-Learning Credit (Curriculum Online) scheme, which gives funds to schools etc to buy your products. It's not fair to leave that out of this discussion.

And Marc-Oliver, as a fellow ex-pat German I utterly agree with you. Quite often when I hear the moaning about Auntie, I feel that people here don't begin to appreciate what the BBC has done (and does) for broadcasting, creative industries, education etc.

All the BBC-bashing at the moment will lead to it being regulated/scrutinised/penalised to death, and you would all be poorer for it!

Wolf Luecker

Funding

Another thing: The article implies that the licence payer funded Jam. That's not correct as far as I know. The money (or at least most of it) came from the DfES, not from the BBC's TV licence pot.

Wolf Luecker

BESA

Cris, the people who filed complaints in 2003 and now are BESA (British Educational Suppliers Association, www.besa.org.uk).

I'm going to leave it at that because as someone who supplied content to Jam, I'm obviously biased, but here's a comment from BESA's site:

"Industry would be keen to work with the BBC to ensure that they come up with a public service solution which is truly innovative and genuinely distinctive and complementary".

Hmm...