Haha what, literally line of sight internet, so you're going to have stations with PC's with big antenna. And shadows will kill your internet. Not a new concept and I can't see this going past a replacement for an office landline, if it ever catches on that is. Oh, and a light emitter with a bulb or diode that can burn out. Very 1960s concept of how to do wireless

So.... basically this?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li-Fi

I would be ok simply with a non-overpriced AC1900 wifi card.

It's really nothing new, it's the same thing as VLC or LiFi. Sure, it provides huge throughput, as any optical link, but it requires direct line of sight and that is something that can never be guaranteed for mobile devices. The other obvious problem is the uplink, where a mobile device has to have a transmiter facing the reciever. In VLC they use the display as it can be modulated and is large/powerfull enough, which has obvious issues with line of sight. Here, they didn't even try to tackle it. This technology is probably viable in stuff like inter car communications. Where cars driving on a road, facing one direction without any obstacles between them, can comunnicate by modulating LED headlights, but relly, what and how much information do they need to share ? I therfore really doubt it will ever replace wifi as it simply impractical and goes against the idea of wifi - a cheap wireless communication. I mean even when the wifi was accepted as standard there were alternatives that compete with it. Alternatives that provided much better speeds and were thechnically superior, they just costed much more and that's why wifi won.

So basically modded TOSLINK.

Just because its infrared, doesn't mean its bad. I had a lot of customers returning their wireless (RF) headphones because of interference with other signals, and buying IR ones And as long as emitters are cheap, they can be in every room i want internet.

And as long as emitters are cheap, they can be in every room i want internet.

Could actually be an interesting solution when one installs "access points" in every room that emit from a central area (ceiling?). But I doubt that's something that can be done easily in older homes.

WTF? "found a new form of WIFI" Why do they want to hijack WiFi trademark with yet another optical data transmission?

@corrupt^ those wires are a lot smaller and thinner than any other wire, so as long as the walls arent concrete/stone it shouldnt be to hard.. at least i would prefer this over getting constantly grilled by microwaves. and i could use my G7 mouse again... (dreams) @Fox2232 AFAIK wifi is a certification, not a trademark which belongs to a (single) company..

Could actually be an interesting solution when one installs "access points" in every room that emit from a central area (ceiling?). But I doubt that's something that can be done easily in older homes.

With the amount of wiring involved to accomplish this, you may as well just go for a wired connection. Sure, IR doesn't need much power (where batteries could be used instead) but I'm not sure I'd want to deal with that either. One thing to keep in mind - if you use incandescent light bulbs or have a room that is very sun-lit, this technology is pretty much useless. Unlike TV remotes, the purpose of this is for very high-bandwidth networking that (ideally) would go un-interrupted. Incandescent light bulbs and the sun emit a LOT of IR light, so the receiver could really struggle to filter the noise.

With the amount of wiring involved to accomplish this, you may as well just go for a wired connection.

Depends on the end user devices. If all anyone uses are wireless devices, then it could be interesting with a centralized point in every room. But even when the wires are thin, if the infrastructure isn't there to begin with, it's going to be difficult to apply imo.