There seems to be a bit of a struggle going on in the EV sector. So-called smart chargers are required if customers want to avail of the OZEV grant which is at a the paltry sum of £350. It looks like many manufacturers have gone the GPRS route using OCPP while others are connecting to the internet via the customers own internet connection. Is this a VHS v Betamax type thing? Which do you think is best?
I think you will see both needed for many years to come, especially in rural areas that have either patchy cellular coverage, or a very stringy phone network and broadband that drops out.
Sadly it is often the same sort of places that suffer from both. The 4G networks in our nearest city (Southampton) is remarkably complete, but also very under used. I suspect the wonderful data rates that folk are getting now will not be sustainable once there are more than a few users per base-station. 5G will probably need a new round of hardware again.
Also there will be plenty of places (underground car parks come to mind) that the RF will not get without a sprinkling of repeater base-station micro-cells and other hacks, that have to be paid for by someone, and undo the advantage of not installing cables.
Ultimately, assuming the incessant demand for more bandwidth continues, the winner will be neither copper cables nor radio for static locations, but optical fibre to the home and for the keenest, fibre right to the desktop.
This makes it difficult for designers of kit now to make anything future-proof for more than a few years, and the little I have seen inside the tendency is to make provision for wired and to have a wireless modem of some kind as well, but usually as a plug in module, so when the standard changes, only the interface module needs changing. (and some companies think they can save money and that the rest of the giblets can be designed by someone who does not understand radio, leading to some amusements.
A problem design I saw not so long ago had an integrated GPS module that 'never works properly' - understand that the module was mounted with the antenna underneath the PCB, so how they thought it would see the satellites in the sky I have no idea... turning it over worked, but the plastics had to change.)
I think you will see both needed for many years to come, especially in rural areas that have either patchy cellular coverage, or a very stringy phone network and broadband that drops out.
Sadly it is often the same sort of places that suffer from both. The 4G networks in our nearest city (Southampton) is remarkably complete, but also very under used. I suspect the wonderful data rates that folk are getting now will not be sustainable once there are more than a few users per base-station. 5G will probably need a new round of hardware again.
Also there will be plenty of places (underground car parks come to mind) that the RF will not get without a sprinkling of repeater base-station micro-cells and other hacks, that have to be paid for by someone, and undo the advantage of not installing cables.
Ultimately, assuming the incessant demand for more bandwidth continues, the winner will be neither copper cables nor radio for static locations, but optical fibre to the home and for the keenest, fibre right to the desktop.
This makes it difficult for designers of kit now to make anything future-proof for more than a few years, and the little I have seen inside the tendency is to make provision for wired and to have a wireless modem of some kind as well, but usually as a plug in module, so when the standard changes, only the interface module needs changing. (and some companies think they can save money and that the rest of the giblets can be designed by someone who does not understand radio, leading to some amusements.
A problem design I saw not so long ago had an integrated GPS module that 'never works properly' - understand that the module was mounted with the antenna underneath the PCB, so how they thought it would see the satellites in the sky I have no idea... turning it over worked, but the plastics had to change.)
