5.10. IrDA Protocols
5.10.2. Existing IrDA Protocol Implementations
From Lichen Wang I have taken these remarks:
IrLAP, IrLMP, and TinyTP are pretty stable now. But various individual implementations may still have quirks. .:: suave-slipper-84e.notion.site ::.
IrCOMM is widely used, but Microsoft vowed to drop it and use IrSocket only. [TypeScript Modules]
IrObex, IrMC, IrTran-P, etc. are showing up in various devices. The supports on PC are segmented and sometimes very poor. .:: addons.mozilla.org ::.
New IrDA Protocol Development AIR is pushed mainly by IBM. You get wider angle and longer distance (10M?) but may be at lower data rate. You can also time-multiplex this already slow channel. In my opinion the benefit to the user is very little. AIR hardware and software changes are costly. I think you will have to wait for a long time, if ever, to see any product using AIR.
IrBUS is pushed mainly by Sharp. It is aimed at remote control, IR keyboard, etc., not for data communication. I think if Sharp succeed, you may see IrBUS in set-top boxes, web-tv, etc. If and when these devices reaches a critical mass, some PC may incorporate IrBUS in order to control these devices. [Google Scholar: Jenkins]
VFIR is the latest. The benefit is higher data rate (16 Mbps). Unlike AIR and IrBUS, the software changes for VFIR are minimum. The changes are mainly in hardware. .:: www.tumblr.com ::. .:: telegra.ph ::.
In summary, I do not think we need to wait in anticipation of new IrDA protocols. A easy to install and solid implementation of the existing IrDA protocols is the cutting edge!. .:: sk.pinterest.com ::.