Skip to main content

Intel acquiring gesture recognition start-up InVision Biometrics

News broke this morning (here, here) that Intel is about to acquire Israeli start-up company InVision Biometrics.  The company has developed 3D sensor technology that recognizes human movement, including gestures, and interprets them for a wide variety of applications.
The company's technology is based on, and apparently builds on, research by Professor Ron Kimmel at the Technion Institute of Technology.  Professor Kimmel has a number of patents in this and other areas, some owned by the Technion and some licensed to companies.

For Israel, dubbed the Start-Up Nation, this acquisition continues a number of trends.  It's Intel's second acquisition of an Israeli start-up company in October alone, having acquired Telmap at the beginning of the month.  Both acquisitions are interesting in that they move Intel into new areas that have been previously handled by software.  Grizzly Analytics predicts that Intel will acquire more start-ups in software areas that they can move to hardware.

Other chip companies are moving in the same direction.  QualComm also recently acquired a gesture recognition start-up company, GestureTek, in July 2011.  Another QualComm acquisition in a software area is their acquisition of Israel-based iSkoot, whose products included mobile Skype and mobile feature-phone (non-smartphone) applications, in October 2010.

It's also Israel's second big success in gesture recognition, following Microsoft's using technology from PrimeSense in its Kinect 3D-gaming system (PrimeSense was not acquired, and is continuing to develop additional technology).  Does Israel have some sort of secret sauce for gesture recognition? That may make other Israeli gesture-recognition companies, such as XTR (Extreme Reality)eyeSight, Omek Interactive, and others, very attractive for upcoming M&A. 

InVision Biometrics makes a lot of sense for Intel.  It's "coded light 3D sensor" is a MEMS-based hardware solution.  PrimeSense's technology is also hardware-based, in the form of a CMOS system-on-a-chip.  EyeSight's technology, on the other hand, is pure software, ideal for mobile devices (standard cameras and low-power CPUs).  XTR's technology is similarly software-only, designed for a computer with a WebCam.  Omek's technology, on the other hand, requires a third-party 3D camera for depth data.

Other gesture recognition start-ups include California-based SoftKinetic, France and Japan based LM3Labs and Barcelona-based AITech.  SoftKinetic's solution includes both CMOS hardware and software middleware.  LM3Labs technology, like Omek Interactive, is middleware based on other 3D cameras.  Correction: LM3Labs contacted me with the information that they produce both their own sensor and also middleware that can run with other company's sensors.

So if you're racing with Intel and QualComm, take a look at PrimeSense, SoftKinetic or LM3Labs. For software on phones or other devices, check out EyeSight or XTR.  For higher-powered devices, check Omek or LM3Labs.

The $64,000 question, of course, is what Intel and others will DO with gesture recognition and the other technologies they're acquiring.  Will they be integrated into next-generation CPUs? Offered as dedicated hardware solutions? Or something else altogether?

Popular posts from this blog

Intel demos indoor location technology in new Wi-Fi chips at MWC 2015

Intel made several announcements  at MWC 2015, including a new chipset for wireless connectivity (Wi-Fi) in mobile devices. This new chipset, the 8270, include in-chip support for indoor location positioning. Below we explain their technology and show a video of it in action. With this announcement, Intel joins Broadcom, Qualcomm and other chip makers in moving broad indoor location positioning into mobile device hardware. The transition of indoor location positioning into chips is a trend identified in the newest Grizzly Analytics report on Indoor Location Positioning Technologies , released the week before MWC 2015. By moving indoor location positioning from software into hardware, chips such as Intel's enable location positioning to run continuously and universally, without using device CPU, and with less power consumption. Intel's technology delivers 1-3 meter accuracy, using a technique called multilateration, generating a new location estimate every second. While 1-

The year indoor location will truly take off

For years I've been writing sentences like "this will be the year that indoor location will explode into the market." I, and many others, have been expecting indoor location technology to enable the huge range of location-enabled apps, which currently work only outside where GPS signals are available, to work inside. But until now the promise of indoor location has remained a promise. But if we look at the reasons for this, we'll see that it is about to change. 2017 and 2018 are poised to be the years that the challenges keeping indoor location from going mainstream will be solved. First is accuracy. Most indoor location technologies until a year or so ago had accuracy in the range of 4 to 8 meters. This sounds good in principle, and in fact is better than GPS in many cases. But GPS systems are able to use road details to hide their inaccuracies, so that the blue dot seems to follow your driving car almost perfectly. But indoors, this sort of inaccuracy means y

Waze and Google Maps: A Quick Comparison

I've been a big Waze fan for years, relying on it to make my daily commute as quick as possible.  I try to never leave my hometown without checking Waze first to avoid getting stuck in traffic. For those of you who don't know about Waze, they basically crowd-source traffic information, learning where traffic is slow by measuring how fast their users are moving.  This traffic information is then used to route people in ways that will truly be fastest.  (Apple has reportedly licensed Waze data for their upcoming maps app.) Waze is used most heavily abroad, and is only recently building a following in the States.  (It was also just reviewed on the Forbes site .)  So on a recent trip to the States, I decided to compare Waze to the latest USA-based version of Google Maps for Android. In a nutshell, I reached three conclusions.  (1) Google's use of text-to-speech in their turn-by-turn directions is very nice.   (2) Google's got Waze beat in terms of explaining what