RFID Journal Blog
Where the RFID Community Shares Ideas

The Journal's supposed evidence: Wal-Mart had said, upon launching its RFID initiative, that it would be in 12 distribution centers by that point, yet it was only in five. A lot of journalists picked up on this blatantly idiotic line of thinking—companies do change their technology rollout plans, after all—and a cacophony of experts gleefully predicted the demise of RFID.

Of course, RFID adoption is not fizzling—not at all. There's a lot going on, though there aren't enough people talking about it (at least, from my point of view). Still, every now and then, we get a significant announcement. One such announcement occurred this week, when Metro announced plans to install Reva Systems' Tag Acquisition Processor (TAP) in 200 distribution and retail facilities (see Metro Rolling Out Reva's Reader Network Appliance).

This news is significant for the RFID industry, because it shows Metro rolling out RFID in a serious way. Each TAP device controls numerous readers within a single facility; if Metro were simply installing one or two readers in these facilities, it wouldn't need such a network infrastructure to support the rollout.

Two hundred locations may not be a huge number, but it's a pretty good start. As one of the largest retailers in the world, Metro will, no doubt, continue to build out its infrastructure as it learns from the initial deployment. It will be interesting to see if those who said RFID wasn't gaining traction change their tune, or if they continue to look for signs to support their preconceived notions.

Interesting points
A few comments in response. First, yes, all forms of auto-ID are gaining traction. Bar codes are well established and no thoughtful person ever said RFID will replace bar codes.

I don't think RFID has been oversold to the industry. The timing may have been. It is the answer for drug pedigrees in the longer term.

The read rate comment I simply have to disagree with. First, Purdue Pharma has been achieving 100 percent read rates on bottles of Oxycontin, so it is achievable today. But to say RFID has to achieve 100 percent read rates to be effective is just a non-starter. Bar codes are 100% readable and human error is inevitable. Also, one has to define what 100% is. If you miss an item at point A and read it at point B, that might be fine in some applicaitons. In others, it might not be. The read rate required depends on a lot of factors, including the application, the business process involved and whether the read indicates a transaction of record.

Posted By: Mark Roberti 9/30/07 at 11:11 AM

It doesn't take a giant to make a huge splash
It is absolutely ridiculous to think RFID is losing steam. It is not getting the WIDE adoption we all thought it would because we are not addressing the business needs of the customers yet. I am trying but I am but one small RFID reseller. More resellers need to get off their ass and either sell or develop RFID based business solutions or just go back to selling whatever it was they were doing before. Shut up and sell RFID or just go home. Again, screw what they are saying about RFID not growing. If you are a RFID reseller, sell a solid business solution and shut the critics up once and for all. Do not sit there and complain about your market not growing when you are not doing a damn thing about it.

Posted By: Joe Milam 9/28/07 at 10:34 PM

Hmmm
It's true that many forms of ID are gaining traction. No argument there. Companies are looking for ways to capture and use data and they will use whatever technologies do the job cost effectively.

The Pfizer comments address one potential use of RFID in one industry. I think it's a bit like saying in 1996, The Internet will never take off for sharing large graphics files because it's too slow and the infrastructure is too costly to build out. RFID might never be used in the pharma supply chain for anticoutnerfeiting. I can't say. But I do believe that looking at one narrow application is a mistake. RFID infrastructure can be used for many applications simultaneously.

As for 100% read rates, that seems to me to be a red herring. Bar codes are far from perfect but we use them. Inventory counts are far from perfect, but we use them. Cell phone calls are dropped but we use cell phones. The Internet and email aren't 100% reliable but we use them. There are ways to design systems and business processes that allow you to achieve business goals without having 100 percent read rates. If you wait for any technology to be perfect, you're probably missing out on a lot of opportunity to improve the way you do business.

Posted By: Mark Roberti 7/7/07 at 6:42 AM

All forms of Asset Identification are gaining traction
I was around in the early days when there were broad statements about RFID replacing Bar-codes. Not true. Traction in all sectors are moving forward. RFID is simply one of the identification sectors. There is now another location and tracking solution - www.rapidid.com. This does not replace bar-code or RFID, just another product in the big world of asset location.

Posted By: Rick May 6/29/07 at 1:33 PM

Good points, but...
You make some good points. However, I still contend that the benefits of RFID have been oversold to the pharma industry. See the comments on RFID by Pfizer:

http://www.drugchannels.net/2007/06/pfizer-questions-rf...

Adam

Posted By: Adam J. Fein 6/29/07 at 10:58 AM

There is no free lunch
Read rates are still a long way from 100%. Insuring the right item and quantities are identified is still a real stumbling block. Accepting anything less than a 100% read rate means someone is going to be short changed. When you have 100% read rates you will have traction. Until then, anything less than 100% means a free lunch for someone.

Posted By: John Swanson 6/28/07 at 7:45 PM

Add Your Comment:

Please enter your name or an alias and your email address.
Only your name or alias will appear in your post.

Name / Alias:
Email:	(will not be displayed)
Comment Title:
Comment: