Actually, faster can be better even if it does cost a little more. Personally I have a few TB of video data at home. Even as that mores more to streaming from central servers the video density is increasing. Right now I habitually hook up an Ethernet cable to transfer large amounts of data to and from a laptop. If I could do that via short-range faster wireless I might be interested.
I don't see application for "short-range, ultra high-speed wireless technology". What is use for? Today we (at least I) don't keep tens of gigabytes of files on smartphone. Music, Picture, Movie and App... most of them are on cloud storage. When sharing information between smartphones, most people (at least around me) just put it on blog then forward URL. I see less frequently people shareing information by "old school" file transfer - crossover cable, peer-to-peer connection or USB/SD memory.
Faster is better, only if that comes in same cost and ease of use. 60GHz radio is limited for short range, it takes precious PCB and antenna footprint, draw more power from battery. Will consumer find out more value of 60GHz than its price? There's something I can't be convinced...
As we unveil EE Times’ 2015 Silicon 60 list, journalist & Silicon 60 researcher Peter Clarke hosts a conversation on startups in the electronics industry. Panelists Dan Armbrust (investment firm Silicon Catalyst), Andrew Kau (venture capital firm Walden International), and Stan Boland (successful serial entrepreneur, former CEO of Neul, Icera) join in the live debate.