Among the many options for low-power, relatively short-range connections, two technologies stand out—Near Field Communication (NFC) and Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE). Both have relatively low deployment costs and are easy to use.
NFC is well-known as the underlying technology for many modern smart cards. NFC chips must be very close (within a few centimeters) to the reader to establish a connection, but this is an advantage for its primary enterprise use cases (security and access control).
BLE is a low-power derivative of the main Bluetooth standard, trading off lower potential throughput for significantly reduced power consumption, thus accommodating a wider range of potential use cases.
Next, we will delve deeper into each technology and its primary use cases.
The Future of NFC
NFC operates within a short contact range (devices must be close within a few centimeters to connect), a readable passive NFC “tag” requires no independent power source; it draws energy from the reader’s signal, operating at a frequency of around 13.5MHz, requiring 100-700µA of power when actively reading the chip.
“The short distance is actually its advantage,” says a research director and analyst at Gartner. “One major benefit of NFC is that it is not just a radio; it has a large built-in security protocol.” This means that potential malicious actors must be very close—using specialized equipment, within a few meters—to detect an ongoing NFC connection. NFC can also be implemented on top of SSL technology for enhanced security.
Given that NFC originated from contactless payment technologies, it is no surprise. Its foundation in this field lies in its appeal to retailers, who can use NFC to allow customers to access relevant information, obtain coupons, or seek assistance from staff simply by tapping their phones against an NFC hotspot before making a purchase.
Although NFC can only be used at a very close range, which limits the use case scenarios for NFC technology, it is not just for opening doors and buying a latte. NFC can be used to facilitate connections, making it easy and quick for devices to pair. For example, a user can create an NFC connection by bringing their phone close to a compatible projector in a meeting room, verifying that the smartphone is an authorized device capable of connecting and presenting. The presentation or video data itself will not be transmitted via NFC; however, the NFC handshake can serve as a verification mechanism for another wireless protocol (such as Wi-Fi networks or any other higher bandwidth networks capable of transmitting data), eliminating the need for user login.
Characteristics of BLE
In contrast, BLE has a much greater operating distance (up to several dozen meters), with a maximum bandwidth of 1 Mbit/s, approximately twice that of NFC connections. It is a product of the well-known Bluetooth technology, optimized for machine-to-machine connections at lower power consumption compared to the mainstream standard. The power consumption at both ends of the connection is less than 15 mA, with a practical range of about 10 meters, and connections can be protected by AES encryption.
However, according to Forrester chief analyst Andre Kindness, it is far from a replacement for NFC.
He says, “From an information transfer perspective, [NFC] is much faster than BLE.” BLE typically requires a fraction of a second or longer for verification and secure connection, while NFC completes connections almost instantaneously.
Nevertheless, according to IDC senior research analyst Patrick Filkins, BLE has more versatility due to its wider range compared to NFC.
He states, “I think BLE is more suitable for enterprises.” Use cases such as asset tracking, indoor navigation, and targeted advertising are just the tip of the iceberg.
For businesses, the implications are quite straightforward—NFC use cases are largely separate from those using Bluetooth, and for the few overlapping choices, the relative advantages and disadvantages are clear. NFC has a short range, low cost, instant connectivity, and lower data transfer rates. BLE has a longer operating distance, higher transfer rates, and is more expensive, requiring a bit of time for a “handshake” during connection.
via: https://www.networkworld.com/article/3574932/nfc-vs-bluetooth-le-when-to-use-which.html
Author: Jon Gold Topic: lujun9972 Translator: chenmu-kk Proofreader: wxy
This article is originally translated by LCTT, proudly presented by Linux China
