I would not worry about IRDA disappearing any time soon. It's widely used in metering equipment (electricity/gas meters, etc) and ot= her industrial products.=20 I'm working with such equipment and, as a requirement, newly designed units= have IRDA estimated lifetime is about 30 years.=20 So , as far as I am concerned, IRDA is here to stay. Kind Regards, Robert Csaba Molnar --- On Fri, 6/3/11, Charles Craft wrote: From: Charles Craft Subject: Re: [EE] IRDA here to stay? To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." Date: Friday, June 3, 2011, 9:58 PM On 6/3/2011 1:32 PM, Herbert Graf wrote: > On Fri, 2011-06-03 at 08:49 -0700, William "Chops" Westfield wrote: >=A0 =A0=20 >> On Jun 3, 2011, at 8:36 AM, Herbert Graf wrote: >> >>=A0 =A0 =A0=20 >>> I'd avoid designing something with IRDA and instead use wireless. >>>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=20 >> At like 5 to 10x the price and complexity!? >>=A0 =A0 =A0=20 > 5-10x? > > Wireless modules can be had for a few bucks each, I don't know what the > price of an IRDA module is, but I'll give you that on price. > > Complexity? It's pretty trivial to drive a wireless module, in fact the > algorithms used are pretty similar to what you'd do with an optical > connection, so complexity? The same IMHO. > > TTYL > >=A0 =A0=20 I think the complexity with wireless comes with understanding the FCC rules= .. The dirt cheap modules probably aren't certified. And the certified modules are suspect depending on how they're packed=20 into the final product. --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .