http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/27/ieee-at-work-on-revised-li-ion-battery-standard/ Engadget Comments for IEEE at work on revised Li-ion battery standard http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/27/ieee-at-work-on-revised-li-ion-battery-standard/http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/27/ieee-at-work-on-revised-li-ion-battery-standard/
(They're the ginchiest!)]]>Sep 27th 2006 8:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/09/27/ieee-at-work-on-revised-li-ion-battery-standard/http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/27/ieee-at-work-on-revised-li-ion-battery-standard/Sep 27th 2006 1:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/09/27/ieee-at-work-on-revised-li-ion-battery-standard/http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/27/ieee-at-work-on-revised-li-ion-battery-standard/
Don't get me wrong, I love standardization, but there has to be a better way to get things done.]]>Sep 27th 2006 9:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/09/27/ieee-at-work-on-revised-li-ion-battery-standard/http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/27/ieee-at-work-on-revised-li-ion-battery-standard/
As for standards taking so long to finalize - trust me, I've been there. The more important a standard is (i.e. the more money it will cost you to change to conform to it, or the more money it will cost your competitors, or the more impact it has on your other businesses...) the more people get involved. The more people, the more opinions.

The rules of developing standards *require* the committee to consider and *respond to* every objection. 1000 smart engineers working for 450 companies who see high stakes in the 802.11n standard means the ballot resolution committee probably got drowned in thousands of objections and comments. Since the ballot resolution committee is made up of real people from real companies with real day jobs to do, they can steal at best a week here or a week there to do resolution. It takes significant time to properly address concerns.

The IEEE has strict rules about standards. A bad electrical standard can cost real users dollars and time; but a bad standard can also cost people their lives. Damage as a result of excess EMI or RFI is bad. A standard which doesn't nail everything down, which allows two people to make products which conform to what the standard says but still don't work with each other, is a bad standard. Getting it right takes time.

If you don't believe me - get involved. Join a standards committee. Pretty much anyone can.]]>Sep 27th 2006 6:03PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/09/27/ieee-at-work-on-revised-li-ion-battery-standard/http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/27/ieee-at-work-on-revised-li-ion-battery-standard/"Nick is exactly right "

Hahaha. Except that they deleted my comment. Nothing like censoring the truth, eh?]]>Sep 27th 2006 11:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/09/27/ieee-at-work-on-revised-li-ion-battery-standard/http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/27/ieee-at-work-on-revised-li-ion-battery-standard/
Engadget should chagrined to have allowed an obvious misrepresentation of the situation between the wifi and battery standards groups. Trust me; these are NOT the same folks. The commenter was either incredibly naive, or trying to spread misinformation.

To his point on .11n, yeah, the latest I've heard; comments in the thousands, and at least half of them are 'technical' not 'editorial', so there is still a big chunk of work going on.


]]>Sep 28th 2006 12:10PM