Two stories that appeared last weekend couldn't demonstrate more clearly the differing approaches to and fortunes of companies tackling RFID developments within their business.
While one story suggested that the German retailer Metro was ready to move its RFID development into full scale implementation, another report was indicating that pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline might have to consider scrapping an RFID pilot in the US, because of the technology's unreliability.
If true - and admittedly, it has yet to be confirmed - the GlaxoSmithKline story will cause concern to RFID advocates and potential users alike. One of the driving applications for RFID outside the retail sector has been the use of RFID technology to prevent drug counterfeiting.
Some commentaries have put the market for fake prescription medicines at $75bn by the end of the decade, and the World Health Organisation suggests that up to 10% of the world's pharmaceuticals may be counterfeit. RFID has often been touted as a solution, even though the technology still has to prove itself. Even the FDA in the US is an RFID advocate.
It is clear that, in general, much more still more needs to be done to both prove and improve RFID's reliability, and, certainly, the costs have to come down. Without those criteria happening, the technology's development is in danger of stalling way before we even get to the medium-term issues of RFID data management and manipulation.
Meanwhile, at Metro, which has become the standard-bearer for RFID in Europe, the technology's development continues apace. What does this indicate? That in its retail environment, Metro believes it can answer any technical and Return on Investment questions regarding RFID within its business, and is ready to step up deployment.
However, what those questions and answers will be, will differ business by business, which is why, for now, GlaxoSmithKline may be unsure about its own RFID plans.