Bluetooth Beacon Technology Vs. Alternative Location Positioning Technologies

Source： DateTime：2019-02-28 Hits：

If you’re considering Bluetooth beacon technology for your use case, you’re probably also looking at a few alternatives. Take a look at how Bluetooth compares to passive RFID, ultra wide-band, and WiFi below.

Bluetooth Vs. Passive RFID

Passive RFID uses simple, battery-free tags that receive energy over the air from high-powered readers. The tag’s collector antenna picks up on that energy through brute force, and transmits back to the reader using a different frequency. It’s very similar to proximity-based beacon technology when it comes to accuracy and infrastructure requirements, but passive RFID is rarely used for positioning and is more frequently used for inventory management.

Bluetooth Vs. Ultra Wide-Band (UWB)

Ultra wide-band is not typically the first choice for those hoping to do indoor location positioning because of the amount of infrastructure required, the complex installation, and the high cost of tags. Additionally, it requires a great deal of sensitive equipment that must be maintained regularly. Bluetooth beacon technology is far simpler in all these areas.

Bluetooth Vs. WiFi

Some organizations prefer WiFi because you can use an existing network (if it supports location positioning), which means you won’t have to install new infrastructure. But due to the high cost of the tags and the high power consumption of both tags and readers, it’s used less frequently for indoor positioning than Bluetooth beacon positioning systems.

Have questions about how Bluetooth beacon technology could work for your use case?

Contact us. We’re happy to answer any questions you have and give you some additional details on whether the AirFinder intelligent active RFID system is a good fit for you.

Back >>

News and Events

News

Bluetooth Beacon Technology Vs. Alternative Location Positioning Technologies