The Economist has an interesting contrarian article. According to it, you shouldn't worry about RFID naysayers, or assume there will be disappointment from RFID implementations.

"SO THOROUGHLY have the lessons of the internet bubble been learned that the launch of any new technology is now invariably accompanied by much talk from industry observers about dangerous hype and inevitable disappointment. A case in point is radio frequency identification (RFID), a new, super-cheap version of which may, its backers hope, be destined to transform everything from shopping to warfare. As soon as RFID's boosters alerted the world to their innovations, reports of dire setbacks began to circulate. Yet if anything, the surprise is how well the roll-out of the new technology is meeting early expectations."

The article says that many of the doom and gloom reports are coming as a result of suppliers who are being forced to implement RFID in order to save retailers -- like Wal-Mart -- money. Add to that the lack of standards for tag technology and "scaremongering" by privacy advocates (the article's terminology, not mine!), and you have a situation where firms are defensive about RFID and downplaying expectations.

But the technology, the articles insists, holds huge promise. We should expect firms to find new uses for RFID, with the result that the number of tags will grow to trillions in the next decade.