Near Field Communication vs Bluetooth Low Energy

Developers should learn NFC when building applications for mobile payments (e meets developers should learn ble for building iot devices, fitness trackers, smart home gadgets, and location-based services where battery life is critical. Here's our take.

Near Field Communication

Nice Pick

Developers should learn NFC when building applications for mobile payments (e

Pros

• g
• Related to: rfid, bluetooth

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Bluetooth Low Energy

Developers should learn BLE for building IoT devices, fitness trackers, smart home gadgets, and location-based services where battery life is critical

Pros

• It's essential for applications like health monitoring, asset tracking, and proximity marketing, as it allows devices to run for months or years on small batteries
• Related to: iot-development, wireless-communication

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

Use Near Field Communication if: You want g and can live with specific tradeoffs depend on your use case.

Use Bluetooth Low Energy if: You prioritize it's essential for applications like health monitoring, asset tracking, and proximity marketing, as it allows devices to run for months or years on small batteries over what Near Field Communication offers.

The Bottom Line

Near Field Communication wins

Developers should learn NFC when building applications for mobile payments (e