
The U1 chip in the iPhone 11 is the beginning of an Ultra Wideband revolution? - ingve
https://sixcolors.com/post/2019/09/the-u1-chip-in-the-iphone-11-is-the-beginning-of-an-ultra-wideband-revolution/
======
ohnope
My theory on why they didn't elaborate on U1 / announce the (rumored) object
tracking tags: they need better U1 chip penetration geographically before
making any promises. Once a bunch of iPhone 11's are out there, they can
further test the new product in a more realistic setting, and make adjustments
if necessary. There could be some critical flaw that may need reengineering
and they won't want a repeat of AirPower.

For instance, if they released the new object tracking tag with iPhone 11's,
it would be a bad user experience because U1 is not spread out. Better to wait
until the U1 geographically saturates to their standards before releasing it.

They can still talk about U1 in regards to e.g. new AirDrop capabilities, and
in other marketing-level generalities.

~~~
csande17
There's an even more compelling reason why Apple's waiting a while before
announcing the tracking tags: crowdsourcing.

At WWDC this year, Apple announced that all iOS devices would begin reporting
nearby devices' locations back to Apple. U1 probably only works at relatively
close range, so they want to wait until their "crowdsourcing network" includes
enough devices for long-range tracking to work. (IIRC they aren't going to let
users prevent their devices from contributing to the network, so it's just a
matter of waiting until everyone has the latest iOS update.)

~~~
ngcc_hk
is that data privacy issue if we cannot opt out ?

~~~
Despegar
Wired has a good article about how it works

[https://www.wired.com/story/apple-find-my-cryptography-
bluet...](https://www.wired.com/story/apple-find-my-cryptography-bluetooth/)

~~~
TaylorAlexander
A rotating scheme that makes it impossible for the wrong actors to track you.

It would be better if I could verify the code running on the device. You have
to trust that Apple won’t track you. And hey, I trust Apple more than some
unfriendly government, but I still have to trust Apple. If a big profitable
unfriendly government asked them to track someone, what would Apple do?

~~~
eridius
> _If a big profitable unfriendly government asked them to track someone, what
> would Apple do?_

Presumably the exact same thing they'd have done if they hadn't rolled out
this Find My feature. They designed it so Apple can't tell where your device
is, which means if anyone wants to demand this info from Apple, then Apple has
to implement that tracking separately, which they could do regardless of the
Find My feature's existence.

If Apple had access to the device data themselves, then that's a huge problem
because governments can reasonably start issuing warrants for that info. The
fact that Apple doesn't have it means nothing has changed on the governmental
front.

~~~
TaylorAlexander
> The fact that Apple doesn't have it means nothing has changed on the
> governmental front.

You’re presuming that Apple does not “have” our location data. I am making the
claim that Apple could gain our location data if Apple wanted to. I think we
are making different arguments. I don’t know if Apple has anyone’s location
data. But if Apple decided to selectively enable the collection of some
people’s location data, the iPhone 11 would offer them increased precision
which other iPhone 11 users would unknowingly assist in collecting.

~~~
mstolpm
Why would an actor use Apple as a target vector? It is much easier to get
location tracking thru the mobile service providers. They have the location
data in real time and can’t deny that. It’s done thousands of times a day all
over the world with and without a warrant. No vendor specific phone and no
activation of special functions needed.

~~~
TaylorAlexander
> Why would an actor use Apple as a target vector?

I can only speculate. But if I wanted someone’s location without making some
noise, this increased precision would be nice to have over carrier’s coarse
location data. Your GPS position could localize you to a building, but your
UWB position could perhaps localize you to a room. And actually if the law
enforcement agency had a device capable of detecting yours based on its UWB
signal, they could find you very quietly.

~~~
jsjohnst
Using current generation technologies like OTDOA and similar, cell carriers
can already localize you to a room in a building in many cases.

Verizon can do down to around 10 centimeter accuracy with their LTE-M network
in the best case (don’t have a link to support that handy, otherwise I’d
share).

------
icanhackit
It feels like this is the key to unlocking useful AR [1] for low powered,
lightweight headsets. If the heavy lifting for locating and interacting with
objects in 4D space is done with UWB, you don't need to do too much
computational heavy-lifting - reducing bulk, increasing available space for
batteries and reducing battery draw.

[1] Right now I can't really see a killer app for AR, something that would
make you super-human enough to want a layer of abstraction between you and the
real world. However if I could remotely interact with objects through walls,
like turning off a lamp in a bedroom or seeing where my wife is and opening up
a audio chat with her so that we're not yelling to hear each other, all of a
sudden the trade off of having to charge and wear another device seems less
annoying. All of a sudden you have powers not unlike a sorcerer.

~~~
ctdonath
Killer app: ambient information, especially face recognition. Think "thought
bubble" information appearing over anything you might want to know about. I'm
lousy with names, would be nice to see names over everyone I should know.

~~~
crooked-v
One line of thought I've pondered here for scifi settings is people being able
to share their currently playing music that way, like a tiny virtual radio
station.

~~~
r3trohack3r
For my commute I set the radio to between 91.1 and 93.3. This range tends to
be where the default for most Bluetooth and AUX radio broadcasters ends up
being set.

Arguably an invasion of privacy, but it turns fellow commuters into DJs. I’ve
discovered some good music this way.

Also lots of static.

~~~
mathisonturing
Are you saying that if I turn on my phone's radio and set it between 91.1 and
93.3, I'd be able to hear what other people are listening to? Could you
elaborate?

~~~
ilikepi
Nowadays, most new cars offer at least one way of connecting to an external
playback device, via Bluetooth or wired auxiliary input or both. A decade ago,
though, this was more of a premium feature. Back then, if you wanted to
connect your music player or smart phone to your basic stereo, the simplest
and least invasive way was a device that plugged into the headphone jack of
your device (or alternatively connected to it via Bluetooth) and which
broadcast a very low power FM signal. You would the tune your car stereo to
the matching frequency, and your device's audio would be piped through the
car's speakers. Usually the transmitter provided a way to choose from a list
of frequencies so you could pick one not used by any local radio stations.
When operating in good conditions, if another car was driving down the road
next to you, they could also tune to the same frequency and hear your
playback.

------
tlb
UWB is essential for secure vehicle unlocking. Bluetooth isn't, because it can
be relayed. It'll give Apple a nice integration point with your new car.

For scooter rental, it'll be way smoother than opening an app and scanning a
QR code. You can just step on the scooter and go.

(My wife hates the QR-code scooter app experience so much that I generally
unlock both scooters under my own ID when we're going around together. Fun
fact: there are geocoded low-speed zones in Paris, where it limits the scooter
to 10 kph in some crowded pedestrian areas. Fine. But when you unlock two
scooters with the same phone, it uses the GPS location of the phone to decide
when to limit or un-limit the speed. And a lost Bluetooth connection can leave
it stuck at low speed. But I digress.)

UWB will also improve the ergonomics of contactless payment. With the current
system, you have to hold your phone really close to the reader for a few
seconds. UWB could allow an instant gesture.

EDIT: removed fatuous intro

~~~
amluto
> UWB is essential for secure vehicle unlocking. Bluetooth isn't, because it
> can be relayed. It'll give Apple a nice integration point with your new car.

The radio technology involved should have almost nothing to do with the
ability to perform a relay attack. There are two straightforward mitigations:

1\. Timing. The two parties confirm that a message can round trip in a
specified, very short time T. This proves that the distance between the
parties is T/2c or less.

To be useful, T should be, say, 20ns or less, which requires a bit of clever
crypto to make the actual exchange fast enough.

2\. The transmitter attempts to localize itself, using GPS or other
technologies, and refuses to authenticate unless it’s near the receiver.

There is reason to believe that UWB will help with localization. I see no
reason it would be any better than any other technology for time-of-flight
measurements unless sub-nanosecond resolution is needed.

~~~
tlb
Bluetooth uses frequency hopping, which is unsuitable for measuring TOF. This
group tried it:
[https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01995171/document](https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01995171/document)
and even with a lot of cleverness they were seeing 100 foot RMS errors from
Bluetooth. Not enough to prevent stealing someone's car parked in their
driveway while their phone is in the house.

~~~
amluto
They’re using unmodified hardware and minimally modified software. It would be
interesting to see how much precision could be achieved with hardware
modifications.

~~~
kalleboo
Instead of Bluetooth (which Apple could totally fudge on their own devices if
they wanted to), the TOF for the Apple Watch<>Mac auto-unlock uses Wi-Fi
802.11v. It seems really quick too (presumably the Mac is establishing a
short-lived AP), would work fine for unlocking a car.

~~~
Operyl
Here’s a good article further explaining it for those curious:
[https://networkingnerd.net/2016/09/21/apple-watch-
unlock-802...](https://networkingnerd.net/2016/09/21/apple-watch-
unlock-802-11ac-and-time/)

------
function_seven
From the article:

> Imagine a whole-home audio system moving music playback through multiple
> rooms based on the location of an individual listener.

Hell, why stop there? Imagine that same audio system not only activating
different rooms as you move through them, but also adding the appropriate
delays to each audio channel to make sure they arrive at your ears in sync.
That'd be pretty neat.

~~~
Whinner
Bill Gates had the room activating thing back in the 90s. He talked about it
in his book The Road Ahead.

[https://www.digitaltrends.com/home/the-awesome-technology-
in...](https://www.digitaltrends.com/home/the-awesome-technology-inside-bill-
gates-mansion/)

~~~
cheschire
I can imagine Tim Robbins describing this tech as “primitive.”

------
offmycloud
Could someone who understands the radio technology please explain why using
time-of-arrival and phase tricks with existing WiFi and Bluetooth signals is
"wide-banded" in any way?

~~~
varenc
WiFi channel width is 20 MHz or 40 MHz. UWB has 500MHz channels.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_UWB_channels](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_UWB_channels)

~~~
jsjohnst
WiFi channels can also be 80MHz (which my laptop is currently connected at)
and 160MHz (which is still a bit rarely supported), but your point still
stands.

------
dillondoyle
Can someone explain the privacy implications? Is this part of the new always
on Find Phone network? Does apple respond requests from LE to 'find person x'?
Is there similar random UUID protections built in (e.g. change MAC address
frequency)?

~~~
jdnenej
No need to worry. Apple told us they won't track us.

~~~
rahuldottech
I get that Apple has a better rep than most other companies when it comes to
user privacy, but that still doesn't mean that we should take everything that
they say at face value. As users, it is up to us to stay vigilant and ensure
that Apple is doing as promised.

~~~
jdnenej
My comment was satire about how apples proprietary systems offer us no more
than some PR persons comment saying it's all ok.

------
willshepherdson
I expect indoor navigation to be a very powerful, especially the U1 chip is
combined with the existing Indoor Maps functionality in Apple Maps:
[https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-
guideline...](https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-
guidelines/maps/overview/indoor-maps/)

------
yodon
It will be interesting to see how the U1 chip fits into Apple's widely
expected 2020 AR glasses rollout

~~~
caseyf7
I really hope Apple can show enough restraint to not make these glasses
cameras or video recorders like Google glass.

~~~
goodcjw2
I think the interesting question to follow up is: "why not camera"? Is it
intuitively bad? How bad? When weighing against the benefits, is camera still
worth it? I'm not 100% sure, just a couple random points:

1/ The first concern pops into my head is having a recording device nearly
always on. In reality, there is no way you can prevent people to take photos
and/or videos using smartphone when something interesting is happening in the
public. It takes less than 5 seconds for people to take the phone out of their
pockets and start recording. Then what's the real difference between camera on
the face or camera in the pocket?

2/ The Glass-Hole issue. People always blame the camera as the ultimate evil.
I'm not that sure. Remember, the original Google Glass was basically a piece
of not-that-useful-to-put-it-nicely gadget that costs $1500. Honestly, back
then, I thought whoever is buying those stuff that just overpaid nerdy
douchebags (I'm thinking that way mainly because I cannot afford it). I'm not
sure having a camera is the biggest issue; but having a camera is probably the
biggest issue that you can publicly talk about.

3/ Trust issue, i.e. whether Google/Apple/FB are secretively collecting those
video feed. Or even worse: what if the business model of future AR products
depending on collecting those video feed.

~~~
mewse
When someone is holding up their phone or actual camera to take a photo,
that’s very visible and obvious to everyone in the area what they’re doing,
and social feedback can be delivered if the usage is inappropriate.

That’s very different from an accessory like glasses, which are typically on
somebody’s face all the time, whether or not they’re being used for photo
functionality, with a hidden camera constantly pointed at whoever they’re
talking to or whatever they’re looking at. You may never know that a photo or
video or other recordings of you, of your property, of your company secrets,
of national security, etc are imminent or already taking place.

“What’s the real difference” is kind of absurdly obvious, yes?

~~~
goodcjw2
Apologize if I didn't make my idea clear enough. Seems there are two topics
here: 1. being able to use a camera & 2\. being able to conceal a camera.

My originally argument is focusing on point 1: people can already _use_
smartphones to take pictures and to record videos as easily/convenient as
using a wearable camera.

On the point 2. I totally agree with you, wearables will make it easier to
conceal the camera and that is a bad thing. I guess the takeaway here is that
the camera isn't the problem, the problem is being able to conceal the camera.

~~~
jws
No one has ever said anything to me about carrying my phone in my shirt
pocket. The lens is exposed and facing outward.

My primary recording device is 100% socially acceptable to have deployed at
all times. Recording would be unacceptable, but no one can tell if I am
recording. (To be clear, I am not recording.)

There is no technical difference between this and camera glasses. It is just a
weird public perception problem for the glasses.

~~~
auslander
> .. phone in my shirt pocket.. Recording would be unacceptable, but no one
> can tell if I am recording.

People know how phones work, you press a button to start recording. AR Glasses
are expected to capture at all times, recording or sending to cloud for
analysis. And that is what no one would like.

------
ChuckMcM
I don't know, the Decawave DW1000[1] has been out for a couple of years now
and the revolution hasn't happened. Perhaps there is another missing piece to
the puzzle.

[1] [https://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/decawave-
limited/D...](https://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/decawave-
limited/DW1000-I-TR13/1479-1001-1-ND/4499860)

~~~
ladon86
Being inside an iPhone?

------
divan
Not sure if UWB-enabled devices are also capable of sensing spatial position
of other devices (i.e. phone A is on the left of the phone B), but I'm already
envision how this can be used to create screen-to-screen file moving feature –
some sort of Avatar-like UX:
[https://imgur.com/8O89CXK](https://imgur.com/8O89CXK)

~~~
yoz-y
According to their ad copy it should be able to do it.

To quote from the iPhone 11 page:

> The new Apple‑designed U1 chip uses Ultra Wideband technology for spatial
> awareness — allowing iPhone 11 to understand its precise location relative
> to other nearby U1‑equipped Apple devices.

------
nickysielicki
How does this deal with multipath? This article is all hype and no
explanation.

~~~
neaanopri
UWB deals with multipath by having very short pulses. The direct path is
always faster, so the "true" pulse is the one which arrives first.

~~~
Gibbon1
It's been 10 years since I think the last attempt at UWB failed to gain
traction. But I think you can use a rake receiver with UWB to combine the
multipath components.

------
itgoon
If they put the tech into a keyfob, as suggested by the article, does that
mean I would never lose my keys again?

~~~
crooked-v
Apple leaks and patents suggest that they're even aiming to have distributed
location recovery, e.g., you lose your keys in a store and turn on 'find my
keys', some random person's iPhone detects them and pings Apple, and Apple
pings you with the location.

~~~
delfinom
RIP Tile.

~~~
dstaley
In a nightmarish scenario, I can easily imagine Apple's success killing off
Tile. Which would be a shame as I really love my Tiles.

------
mastazi
> UWB can also determine the angle of arrival of the radio signals by
> measuring the phase shift

this reminds me a bit of how VORs work
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VHF_omnidirectional_range](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VHF_omnidirectional_range)

------
tobsmagoats
The tracking tags are still pretty interesting, could see apple succeeding
with a "tile" like device.

~~~
macintux
My Tile died but I’m waiting for Apple’s solution. Hopefully for Christmas.

------
cstross
Short-term and small scale, Apple _really_ needs to add UWB tracking, at least
a beacon you can locate, to the next generation of AirPods.

(Signed: someone whose spouse "can't find my airpods, I was sure they were in
this bag …")

Thereafter: full inventory control and location of all your e-waste-to-be?

~~~
zeristor
Or finding them on the train tracks of the New York subway:

[https://www.macrumors.com/2019/09/03/lost-airpods-nyc-
subway...](https://www.macrumors.com/2019/09/03/lost-airpods-nyc-subway-train-
tracks/)

------
patsplat
UWB scales poorly. There's a limited number of channels. Ad hoc range finding
requires a call and response.

However.

The range finding is accurate.

So long as one is dealing with a few devices, it is incredibly effective. It's
not going to be GPS for the house, but it does make proximity triggers
reliable.

~~~
colordrops
What's the upper limit though? Wouldn't a half dozen devices placed at known
coordinates around the house be enough to do indoor GPS?

~~~
patsplat
There's 6 channels, and I think a high / low setting to get a total of 12.

With indoor positioning, the anchors aren't positioned as precisely as GPS
satellites, nor do they have the same quality clocks. Thus time of flight is
done with a call and response per device.

It was hard to setup positioning for more than 1x device... remember that 1x
device is range finding to 4x anchors.

Am sure these problems can be solved, but in the near term think this is more
about precise distance rather than position.

------
kccqzy
I haven't really been this exciting for a new technology on my phone for a
while. Am I just drinking the UWB hype kool-aid it is this actually
revolutionary? So far it is difficult to tell but I guess we'll see.

------
DrTung
Does this mean Bluetooth is dead, if UWB can do all the stuff that Bluetooth
did?

~~~
gilgoomesh
I have no idea if this could replace Bluetooth but even if it did, Bluetooth
would not be "dead". Bluetooth has enough inertia that it will be supported
for the next decade.

------
georgedotin
This will really help a a lot in tracking things real time for AR apps

------
Zenst
UWB may well end up the USB of wireless for tech as it has many uses.

