RS-232 alternatives
As of 4 November 2026, 39 iot platforms protocols are named by companies instead of RS-232: Modbus by 2,067 companies, CAN bus by 1,760, SPI by 1,559.
As of 4 November 2026 · refreshed daily · counts move as websites, DNS and career sites are re-read.
- RS-232, companies in postings
- 446
- Most used alternative
- Modbus · 2,067
- Fastest hiring, 90 days
- Modbus
- Alternatives ranked
- 39
- Catalogue
- T-1.0.1-prov
iot platforms protocols companies choose instead of RS-232
Companies naming each tool in their own postings, and postings in the last 90 days. Bars are relative to the category leader.
| # | Alternative | Companies | companies | vs RS-232 | postings, 90 d | Compare |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ModbusModbus Organization | 2,067 | 463% | 5,698 | RS-232 vs Modbus → | |
| 2 | CAN busISO | 1,760 | 395% | 5,610 | RS-232 vs CAN bus → | |
| 3 | SPIMotorola | 1,559 | 350% | 4,935 | RS-232 vs SPI → | |
| 4 | I2CNXP | 1,515 | 340% | 4,820 | RS-232 vs I2C → | |
| 5 | UART(industry standard) | 1,237 | 277% | 3,224 | RS-232 vs UART → | |
| 6 | MQTTOASIS | 1,201 | 269% | 2,656 | RS-232 vs MQTT → | |
| 7 | EtherNet/IPODVA | 1,048 | 235% | 2,374 | RS-232 vs EtherNet/IP → | |
| 8 | OPC UAOPC Foundation | 935 | 210% | 2,090 | RS-232 vs OPC UA → | |
| 9 | PROFINETPROFIBUS & PROFINET International | 914 | 205% | 2,036 | RS-232 vs PROFINET → | |
| 10 | PROFIBUSPROFIBUS & PROFINET International | 701 | 157% | 1,645 | RS-232 vs PROFIBUS → | |
| 11 | BACnetASHRAE | 598 | 134% | 1,743 | RS-232 vs BACnet → | |
| 12 | USBUSB Implementers Forum | 597 | 134% | 1,786 | RS-232 vs USB → | |
| 13 | Bluetooth Low EnergyBluetooth SIG | 473 | 106% | 934 | RS-232 vs Bluetooth Low Energy → | |
| 14 | RS-485TIA | 464 | 104% | 1,001 | RS-232 vs RS-485 → | |
| 15 | OPC (OPC UA)OPC Foundation | 451 | 101% | 1,193 | RS-232 vs OPC (OPC UA) → | |
| 16 | KNXKNX Association | 401 | 90% | 703 | RS-232 vs KNX → | |
| 17 | EtherCATEtherCAT Technology Group | 378 | 85% | 884 | RS-232 vs EtherCAT → | |
| 18 | BluetoothBluetooth SIG | 346 | 78% | 659 | RS-232 vs Bluetooth → | |
| 19 | IEC 61850IEC | 324 | 73% | 1,126 | RS-232 vs IEC 61850 → | |
| 20 | DNP3IEEE | 321 | 72% | 895 | RS-232 vs DNP3 → | |
| 21 | DeviceNetODVA | 285 | 64% | 598 | RS-232 vs DeviceNet → | |
| 22 | DDS (Data Distribution Service)Object Management Group | 280 | 63% | 663 | RS-232 vs DDS (Data Distribution Service) → | |
| 23 | LIN BusLIN Consortium | 266 | 60% | 1,210 | RS-232 vs LIN Bus → | |
| 24 | CAN FDBosch | 181 | 41% | 545 | RS-232 vs CAN FD → | |
| 25 | RS-422TIA/EIA | 180 | 40% | 607 | RS-232 vs RS-422 → | |
| 26 | SAE J1939SAE International | 179 | 40% | 468 | RS-232 vs SAE J1939 → | |
| 27 | ZigbeeConnectivity Standards Alliance | 179 | 40% | 427 | RS-232 vs Zigbee → | |
| 28 | 175 | 39% | 552 | RS-232 vs UDS (ISO 14229) → | ||
| 29 | 168 | 38% | 380 | RS-232 vs GPIO → | ||
| 30 | CANopenCAN in Automation | 162 | 36% | 293 | RS-232 vs CANopen → | |
| 31 | NFCNFC Forum | 147 | 33% | 366 | RS-232 vs NFC → | |
| 32 | DMX512USITT | 122 | 27% | 150 | soon | |
| 33 | LonWorksEchelon | 115 | 26% | 403 | soon | |
| 34 | ARINCSAE ITT | 114 | 26% | 492 | soon | |
| 35 | EcoStruxureSchneider Electric | 109 | 24% | 339 | soon | |
| 36 | LoRaWANLoRa Alliance | 108 | 24% | 185 | soon | |
| 37 | Azure IoT HubMicrosoft | 100 | 22% | 162 | soon | |
| 38 | DALIDiiA | 99 | 22% | 154 | soon | |
| 39 | HART ProtocolFieldComm Group | 99 | 22% | 265 | soon |
Filter on any of them, or on RS-232 users who also name an alternative, and open the person who owns the stack.
Start free, no card. The first 20 are above; e-mails are verified at the mail server when you open them.
Quote the sentence with the date and the link. The numbers change daily; the link always shows the current ones.
39 iot platforms protocols are named by companies instead of RS-232: Modbus by 2,067 companies, CAN bus by 1,760, SPI by 1,559, measured from their own job postings. (Breaknorm, 4 November 2026, https://breaknorm.co/tools/rs-232/alternatives)
Read from the source, not self-reported
Every number on this page can be traced to a page we crawled or a posting we read. Full methodology →
- RankingCompanies whose own postings name the tool as the team's system, from the Breaknorm technology catalogue T-1.0.1-prov. Editions are folded into their parent product.
- 90-day postingsOpen postings first seen or posted in the last 90 days that name the tool.
- Not includedRatings, prices, feature claims, sponsored positions.
RS-232 alternatives: questions
What is the most used alternative to RS-232?
Modbus: 2,067 companies name it in their own job postings, against 446 for RS-232.
How is this list ranked?
By the number of companies whose own postings name the tool as the team's system (Breaknorm technology catalogue T-1.0.1-prov), then by postings in the last 90 days. No ratings, no vendor input, no sponsored positions.
Does this say which is better?
No. It says who uses what, by company size, industry and country, so you can see which tools companies like yours choose. For features and prices, read the vendors.
Can I get the companies on any of these?
Yes: click the tool, see the first 20 companies, and sign up for the full list with verified e-mails. Counting is free.
Get these companies your way
The same data as a search, over MCP and the API, as bulk files, or pushed to you as it changes.
Every company on RS-232
or on what replaces it
Connect the MCP server, filter on any tool. Start free, no card.