I haven’t read the patent, but I’d bet my shiniest quarter that the phrase “in one or more embodiments” (or the equivalent) shows up.
When you write a patent application, you usually try to cover as many use cases as possible. But you also can’t be too vague or abstract. So you provide an “embodiment” to show how it works, typically using existing technology. Then you clarify the broad cases–so in this embodiment they use wifi, but could use other secure, high-bandwidth wireless protocols.
It’s not actually. Bluetooth, especially LE, isn’t made to be secure, robust, or work with any distance. You don’t want to lose control of your cargo because it’s raining or you went around the corner.
Nothing wrong with wifi here in particular
Using Wi-Fi for this seems like a really weird choice. I’d think the better per option would be something like low energy Bluetooth.
The trailer module can still be hooked to the car physically while providing it’s own power.
That completely defeats the point of using wifi. You may as well connect a cable at that point.
That’s kinda my point.
Not sure if satire or not…
I haven’t read the patent, but I’d bet my shiniest quarter that the phrase “in one or more embodiments” (or the equivalent) shows up.
When you write a patent application, you usually try to cover as many use cases as possible. But you also can’t be too vague or abstract. So you provide an “embodiment” to show how it works, typically using existing technology. Then you clarify the broad cases–so in this embodiment they use wifi, but could use other secure, high-bandwidth wireless protocols.
It’s not actually. Bluetooth, especially LE, isn’t made to be secure, robust, or work with any distance. You don’t want to lose control of your cargo because it’s raining or you went around the corner.
Nothing wrong with wifi here in particular