Slashdot Mirror

The reason I will never use a bluetooth headphone is that I don't want to be emanating a wireless signal as I move around town. Bluetooth and wireless tracking is everywhere now.

It's weird how Apple champions privacy, yet decided everyone should send out a wireless signal if they want to listen to music.

And yes, Apple's implementation rotates the bluetooth mac to different mac-addresses. Still, that doesn't make me feel comfortable. Perhaps Apple realised that after the GDPR went into effect they might become vulnerable to lawsuits for not applying Privacy By Design principles, so they rushed it through before then.

Samsung has never implemented that MAC address randomization feature. Bluetooth 4 and above actually supports this as a privacy feature, but last time I checked Samsung hasn't implemented it.

If the Samsung A8 doesn't support mac randomization someone in Europe should sue Samsung using the GDPR.

I've sadly tried my hand in the BLE domain and bluetooth group is all hype and not much follow through. We must be coming up to some convention where they are going to tell us that stuff is almost here.

like:

https://www.bluetooth.com/news...

There already are some mesh implementations by other folks but we don't even have a full BLE 5.0 stack yet. And no one seems to mention the old - faster, further, better battery life. Pick one.

So, lots of talk and then you have to wait on someone else to deliver it. It really reminds me of when Intel would show a 'computer concept' and then assume that someone else will actually implement it.

Bluetooth 5 spec is out there. No change in latency. Meaning - you'll still have latency in the 100-600 msec range unless you do something custom (like AptX).

That must have just been ratified. I knew it was close; but last I checked (last month or so) it hadn't gotten final approval.

So what, pray tell, could AptX do to improve on the raw latency figure-of-merit (with their alleged 40 ms. low-latency protocol), and still maintain base compatibility with the standard itself? And more importantly, if AptX can do it, why do you discount that Apple can do it, too?

BTW, who in the hell ratifies an "improved" standard (BT 5) and doesn't address one of the biggest user complaints regarding audio transfer (latency)? That makes zero sense!!!

But you appear to be right; I don't know much about the BT spec (and don't have time to become an "instant expert"); but it looks like most of it remains from 2012, with some stuff update a year ago. BT5 appears to be focused on the damn IoT crap.

But you would think that "2 x the speed" would cut the latency in half, all things being equal.

600 ms latency? Might as well not even bother...

Bluetooth 5 spec is out there. No change in latency. Meaning - you'll still have latency in the 100-600 msec range unless you do something custom (like AptX).

BT 5 is still not released as a spec. Expect hardware to follow in Q1 or Q2 next year (meaning not the iPhone 7). And to the best of my knowledge it requires a different chipset as the bandwidth through the modem is 4 times as high. Existing BT sets won't support BT 5 protocols. So in this case - the iPhone 7 will be crippled on an older protocol, without any clean way - short of a dongle - to use literally billions of existing headphones.

According to the Bluetooth Technology site, BT 5 is due to be released as a spec "in late 2016 to early 2017." So obviously, they are pretty far along in the "Draft" process.

So, how can you be sure that this won't be like the 802.11n WiFi spec; where GOBS of devices were released based on the Draft spec, and then updated to support the finalized spec with a Firmware Update? Apple is perfectly capable of designing their own BT 5 chips based on the Draft spec, and it is doubtful that the lowest layers of the BT 5 protocol will change much, if at all, at this late date.

And if Apple includes their BT 5 earbuds based on the Draft spec, too, it at least partially answers the need for compatible BT 5 devices to use with the phone, and if the finalized BT 5 spec somehow renders the Apple earbuds incompatible (and assuming they cannot be updated themselves), Apple can continue to support their own earbuds as a variant of the BT 5 spec.

And of course, the phone would continue to support earlier versions of the BT spec, too.

So, it really doesn't matter if the last "i" hasn't been dotted and the last "t" crossed on the BT 5 spec; it is obviously far enough along that I would be shocked if Apple wasn't simply one among many who were in various stages of BT 5 product designs.

Cords suck. They snag, they fray, they tangle, they slack, they break. They take up space in your pocket, your bag, your shelf. Some are too short, some are too long. Wireless headsets are mediocre at best, it is true. They have a whole bunch of their own problems and many on this thread feel those problems are worse than cord problems. But this is exactly the point. I'm sick of slow advances in wireless and so is Apple. Its time to kick the wireless headset market into high gear and get lots of models from lots of competitors getting iterated multiple times a year and getting cheaper all the time. How do we do that? Simple. Eliminate the 3.5mm jack.

That, and although not one other person has mentioned it, there is a new Bluetooth standard (Bluetooth 5) that has JUST been announced. It's main features are 4 times the range and twice the bandwidth, for the same power as Bluetooth 4 LE.

So, perhaps the days of the crappy, high-latency, low-bandwidth, highly-compressed Bluetooth headphones are coming to an end, and Apple is about to imminentize that particular New Era.

Boy, for a "Geek" site, some Slashdot readers sure are Luddites!

No need to get paranoid, yet...it's not that kind of advertising.

Advertising Channels are used for discovering devices, initiating connection and broadcasting data. For instance, when you go to pair a Bluetooth keyboard or speaker with one of your devices, advertising packets can let you see the name of the device before you've paired it so you can distinguish it from all the other Bluetooth devices that are within range.

Think, "Hi, everyone out there....I'm a (device) named (name)"

Most likely, the enhancements allow for longer names or more capability descriptions.

https://www.bluetooth.com/specifications/bluetooth-core-specification/technical-considerations

Maybe it did

And mesh networking will enable Bluetooth devices to connect together in networks that can cover an entire building or home, opening up home and industrial automation applications.

I am missing any reference to mesh networking in the announcement. Come one, it feels like it has been already been decades, that mesh networking is supposed to come with the next release.

Except it's free to be an Adopter member and use the Bluetooth specification and trademarks.
HP probably already pay for an Associate membership.

http://www.bluetooth.com/Pages...

In the pas that was true of Bluetooth. However, with the release of Bluetooth low energy this is resolved. In addition there will be things like hearing aid profiles. Until the last year, it would have been very impracticable to use Bluetooth in a hearing aid. Especially given that folks who wear aids want them to be as small as possible.

If you are interested to read about it, it can be found here:
http://www.bluetooth.com/Pages/Loud-and-Clear.aspx
 

Apparently PC-Mag missed the original press release too.
BELLEVUE, WA – December 17, 2009 – The Bluetooth Special Interest Group (SIG) today announced the adoption of Bluetooth® low energy wireless technology, which is the hallmark feature of the Bluetooth Core Specification Version 4.0.

Normally I wouldn't mind.. but is is the right there on google when searching for "bluetooth 4"

Informative huh ?
1)The Bluetooth class 1 range is 100 METRES not 100 feet, so roughly 3x what you state.
2)According to the A2DP spec, A2DP *requires* a sampling frequency of both 44.1KHz and 48KHz for SNK and either one of 44.1 or 48 for SRC.
Read (pdf) it for yourself.

Bluetooth doesn't have to be "choked into 30 feet". Get a Class 1 radio for your computer and a Class 1 radio for your peripherals and enjoy greater range.

From http://www.bluetooth.com/Bluetooth/Learn/

Range
The operating range depends on the device class:

        * Class 3 radios - have a range of up to 1 meter or 3 feet
        * Class 2 radios - most commonly found in mobile devices - have a range of 10 meters or 30 feet
        * Class 1 radios - used primarily in industrial use cases - have a range of 100 meters or 300 feet

I cannot find a phone that doesn't lock out all bluetooth communications when a headset is connected.

Upon a user action or an internal event, either the HF or the AG may initiate the establishment of an Audio Connection whenever necessary. Further internal actions may be needed by the HF or the AG to internally route the audio paths.
An Audio Connection set up procedure always means the establishment of a SCO link and it is always associated with an existing Service Level Connection.
In principle, setting up an Audio Connection by using the procedure described in this section is not necessarily related to any call process.
Once an Audio Connection between the HF and the AG exists, the AG shall utilize the HF as its sole audio port. The AG shall keep the audio paths, call related or not, routed towards HF for all the operations (e.g. voice, alert, key press tones) involving presence of audio.

A Bluetooth device may participate concurrently in two or more piconets. It
does this on a time-division multiplexing basis. A Bluetooth device can never
be a master of more than one piconet. (Since the piconet is defined by synchronization
to the master's Bluetooth clock it is impossible to be the master of
two or more piconets.) A Bluetooth device may be a slave in many independent
piconets.

That's why you should use wireless devices capabale of working together on the same network, and networks with sufficient bandwidth to handle your rapid keystokes without buffering. Maybe something like Bluetooth. Seesh. Why would anyone still be using low-bandwidth, short-range, 49MHz/900MHz junk on their computer?

And if you really wanted response time you'd forgo all these bus-based keyboard technologies and go back to something with a direct data connection.

once you pair with a bluejacked device, its yours, you 0wn it
you can dial any number you like, transmit files etc
just because people use it for harmless things doesnt mean you cannot cause harm

What is bluebugging?
Bluebugging allows skilled individuals to access the mobile phone commands using Bluetooth wireless technology without notifying or alerting the phone's user. This vulnerability allows the hacker to initiate phone calls, send and receive text messages, read and write phonebook contacts, eavesdrop on phone conversations, and connect to the Internet. As with all the attacks, without specialized equipment, the hacker must be within a 10 meter range of the phone. This is a separate vulnerability from bluesnarfing and does not affect all of the same phones as bluesnarfing.

http://www.bluetooth.com/Bluetooth/Learn/Security/

see the videos on f-secures site on what happens when you get jacked badly (commwarrior)
but hey they are the FUD runners so of course the video is doctored right ?

ouch.. it appears that it may only be 64Kb/s (at least according to the synchronous mode talked about at http://bluetooth.com/Bluetooth/Learn/Works/Data_Tr ansport_Architecture.htm)

I looked up Bluetooth licensing, and as far as I can tell, there's an annual "membership" fee of US$7,500 for companies with annual revenue under US$100M that allows companies to use the Bluetooth specs "royalty free". Since $7.5K would be chump change for any "real" manufacturer, plus it would be a fixed cost not tied to any particular device, I would guess it's mostly the complexity of the implementation that makes Bluetooth wireless devices more expensive then their proprietary wireless counterparts.

I guess it doesn't surprise me too much, just because I have become aware how embedded devices really use the lamest possible CPU they can get away with to shave a few pennies; often devices that cost hundreds of dollars are hobbled by incredibly wimpy microcontrollers, as well as, of course, generally shoddy firmware and UI design...

TFA links to http://lwn.net/Articles/163266/

On that page we read:

Weird factors come into play. The BlueZ project used to have a very nice list of working hardware, but that list was pulled down as a result of objections from the "Bluetooth Qualification Administrator."

On that page there are two mailto: links - mailto:bqa@bluetooth.com and mailto:member.relations@bluetooth.com

See that @bluetooth.com bit? That's called a domain. Since these bits of email are going to people @bluetooth.com it is safe to assume that they are involved with the website that appears at http://www.bluetooth.com/ - let's go there, shall we?

There is a very prominent link "about the SIG" that appears on this page. Since TFA was about "a registered member of the Bluetooth SIG" it is fairly probably that this is the SIG in question. Let's click on the 'about the SIG' link, shall we?

The Bluetooth Special Interest Group (SIG) is a trade association comprised of leaders in the telecommunications, computing, automotive, industrial automation and network industries that is driving the development of Bluetooth wireless technology, a low cost short-range wireless specification for connecting mobile devices and bringing them to market.
The Bluetooth SIG is a privately held trade association and is not publicly traded. The Special Interest Group, whose name was inspired by the Danish King Harald Bluetooth, known for unifying Denmark and Norway in the 10th century, was founded in September 1998. Now, in the 21st century, unification is a guiding principle of Bluetooth wireless technology, as it connects innovative products and companies to consumer aspirations.
The Bluetooth SIG has established its global headquarters in Bellevue, Washington, USA . The staff is comprised of Executive Director Michael Foley, Ph.D., Marketing Director Anders Edlundand a small staff of Marketing, Engineering, and Operations professionals. In addition to the Bluetooth SIG Staff, volunteers from member companies play key roles in running the Bluetooth SIG organization.
The Bluetooth SIG includes promoter member companies Agere, Ericsson, IBM, Intel, Microsoft , Motorola, Nokia and Toshiba, and thousands of Associate and Adopter member companies.

http://tinyurl.com/e4olu

TFA links to http://lwn.net/Articles/163266/

On that page we read:

Weird factors come into play. The BlueZ project used to have a very nice list of working hardware, but that list was pulled down as a result of objections from the "Bluetooth Qualification Administrator."

On that page there are two mailto: links - mailto:bqa@bluetooth.com and mailto:member.relations@bluetooth.com

See that @bluetooth.com bit? That's called a domain. Since these bits of email are going to people @bluetooth.com it is safe to assume that they are involved with the website that appears at http://www.bluetooth.com/ - let's go there, shall we?

There is a very prominent link "about the SIG" that appears on this page. Since TFA was about "a registered member of the Bluetooth SIG" it is fairly probably that this is the SIG in question. Let's click on the 'about the SIG' link, shall we?

The Bluetooth Special Interest Group (SIG) is a trade association comprised of leaders in the telecommunications, computing, automotive, industrial automation and network industries that is driving the development of Bluetooth wireless technology, a low cost short-range wireless specification for connecting mobile devices and bringing them to market.
The Bluetooth SIG is a privately held trade association and is not publicly traded. The Special Interest Group, whose name was inspired by the Danish King Harald Bluetooth, known for unifying Denmark and Norway in the 10th century, was founded in September 1998. Now, in the 21st century, unification is a guiding principle of Bluetooth wireless technology, as it connects innovative products and companies to consumer aspirations.
The Bluetooth SIG has established its global headquarters in Bellevue, Washington, USA . The staff is comprised of Executive Director Michael Foley, Ph.D., Marketing Director Anders Edlundand a small staff of Marketing, Engineering, and Operations professionals. In addition to the Bluetooth SIG Staff, volunteers from member companies play key roles in running the Bluetooth SIG organization.
The Bluetooth SIG includes promoter member companies Agere, Ericsson, IBM, Intel, Microsoft , Motorola, Nokia and Toshiba, and thousands of Associate and Adopter member companies.

http://tinyurl.com/e4olu

TFA links to http://lwn.net/Articles/163266/

On that page we read:

Weird factors come into play. The BlueZ project used to have a very nice list of working hardware, but that list was pulled down as a result of objections from the "Bluetooth Qualification Administrator."

On that page there are two mailto: links - mailto:bqa@bluetooth.com and mailto:member.relations@bluetooth.com

See that @bluetooth.com bit? That's called a domain. Since these bits of email are going to people @bluetooth.com it is safe to assume that they are involved with the website that appears at http://www.bluetooth.com/ - let's go there, shall we?

There is a very prominent link "about the SIG" that appears on this page. Since TFA was about "a registered member of the Bluetooth SIG" it is fairly probably that this is the SIG in question. Let's click on the 'about the SIG' link, shall we?

The Bluetooth Special Interest Group (SIG) is a trade association comprised of leaders in the telecommunications, computing, automotive, industrial automation and network industries that is driving the development of Bluetooth wireless technology, a low cost short-range wireless specification for connecting mobile devices and bringing them to market.
The Bluetooth SIG is a privately held trade association and is not publicly traded. The Special Interest Group, whose name was inspired by the Danish King Harald Bluetooth, known for unifying Denmark and Norway in the 10th century, was founded in September 1998. Now, in the 21st century, unification is a guiding principle of Bluetooth wireless technology, as it connects innovative products and companies to consumer aspirations.
The Bluetooth SIG has established its global headquarters in Bellevue, Washington, USA . The staff is comprised of Executive Director Michael Foley, Ph.D., Marketing Director Anders Edlundand a small staff of Marketing, Engineering, and Operations professionals. In addition to the Bluetooth SIG Staff, volunteers from member companies play key roles in running the Bluetooth SIG organization.
The Bluetooth SIG includes promoter member companies Agere, Ericsson, IBM, Intel, Microsoft , Motorola, Nokia and Toshiba, and thousands of Associate and Adopter member companies.

http://tinyurl.com/e4olu

TFA links to http://lwn.net/Articles/163266/

On that page we read:

Weird factors come into play. The BlueZ project used to have a very nice list of working hardware, but that list was pulled down as a result of objections from the "Bluetooth Qualification Administrator."

On that page there are two mailto: links - mailto:bqa@bluetooth.com and mailto:member.relations@bluetooth.com

See that @bluetooth.com bit? That's called a domain. Since these bits of email are going to people @bluetooth.com it is safe to assume that they are involved with the website that appears at http://www.bluetooth.com/ - let's go there, shall we?

There is a very prominent link "about the SIG" that appears on this page. Since TFA was about "a registered member of the Bluetooth SIG" it is fairly probably that this is the SIG in question. Let's click on the 'about the SIG' link, shall we?

The Bluetooth Special Interest Group (SIG) is a trade association comprised of leaders in the telecommunications, computing, automotive, industrial automation and network industries that is driving the development of Bluetooth wireless technology, a low cost short-range wireless specification for connecting mobile devices and bringing them to market.
The Bluetooth SIG is a privately held trade association and is not publicly traded. The Special Interest Group, whose name was inspired by the Danish King Harald Bluetooth, known for unifying Denmark and Norway in the 10th century, was founded in September 1998. Now, in the 21st century, unification is a guiding principle of Bluetooth wireless technology, as it connects innovative products and companies to consumer aspirations.
The Bluetooth SIG has established its global headquarters in Bellevue, Washington, USA . The staff is comprised of Executive Director Michael Foley, Ph.D., Marketing Director Anders Edlundand a small staff of Marketing, Engineering, and Operations professionals. In addition to the Bluetooth SIG Staff, volunteers from member companies play key roles in running the Bluetooth SIG organization.
The Bluetooth SIG includes promoter member companies Agere, Ericsson, IBM, Intel, Microsoft , Motorola, Nokia and Toshiba, and thousands of Associate and Adopter member companies.

http://tinyurl.com/e4olu

It's been around for a while.

No problem. It's powered by ShoeTooth.

Nokia, IBM, Ericsson, Intel, and Toshiba were the founding members in 1998. Today there are thousands of members, but note that on the board of directors section of the webpage, Jeff Kosar is the Product Unit Manager and he is from Microsoft Corp. However I'm not going to blame Microsoft automatically for the problem if there are 2000 or more companies contributing to the technology.

Nokia, IBM, Ericsson, Intel, and Toshiba were the founding members in 1998. Today there are thousands of members, but note that on the board of directors section of the webpage, Jeff Kosar is the Product Unit Manager and he is from Microsoft Corp. However I'm not going to blame Microsoft automatically for the problem if there are 2000 or more companies contributing to the technology.

I think the "XYZ is dead" proclaimations are getting lamer. It is not you, but gee, nothing really dies until everyone, not just the technical elite quits using it. For example, VHS and floppy are slowly going away but is hardly dead.

There appear to be hundreds of Bluetooth products: Bluetooth SIG site product listing

Several PDAs have bluetooth built in. Mobile phones seem to be the #1 device with a bluetooth transciever. I've seen printers in stores that have built-in bluetooth capabilities. With a lot of new computers, notibly laptops, a Bluetooth reciever is often a $50 add-on. I've seen bluetooth cellphone headsets, so there is no cord between the phone and the earpiece/mic unit.

I think for syching, portable music won't work well given the 2.1 Mbps limit of the latest version of the standard, you would be better off with USB 2.0 or Firewire. I really don't think any currently available wireless standard (a, b, g, etc.) is acceptable for transferring large amounts of files anyway.

I do have bluetooth, but currently only the reciever for my laptop, a Logitech mouse and a Logitech keyboard. It does what I need, and a standardized module in my laptop + a third party cordless mouse is far better than any cordless mouse with an easy-to-break USB dongle. I could make it easy with a corded mouse but I think that's messy.

Supposedly there is a wireless USB coming out, but it still doesn't exist yet and will take a while to be integrated into computers. There are no real wireless human interface standards other than what is in Bluetooth where you can mix and match receivers of any brand with peripherals of any brand.

I live in downtown Austin and have for nearly a month now. 802.11b and 802.11g get a lot of press these days, but don't forget about Bluetooth.

Bluetooth is just as powerful, as it allows true meshing of the virtual world with the real world around you, connecting you seemlessly with people up to 10+ metres away.

That not convince you? I hear some people even use Bluetooth to fuck strangers!

I use Bluetooth in Austin on the bus and have so far made two guy friends and one girl friend. In fact, she just called me up and we're gonna go grab a bit to eat tonight and then check out the new Lord of the Rings movie.

Ahem. Please check out: Bluetooth Products. You'll see that there are more than just a few components like mouse, keyboard, phone, etc.

Ummm.. don't we already have something for that called Bluetooth? Hrm.

From the Bluetooth SIG Mission Statement:
Develop, publish and promote the preferred short-range wireless specification for connecting mobile products...

What matters for bluetooth is not whether a pundit thinks it's going to survive, but whether manufacturers like Apple, Nokia, Sony/Ericsson, Toyota (!!), Panasonic, IBM, Microsoft, Toshiba, Motorola, and the rest of these companies support it.

-jcr

MultiSync is a free modular program to synchronize calendars, addressbooks and other PIM data between programs on your computer and other computers, mobile devices, PDAs or cell phones. MultiSync works on any Gnome platform, such as Linux.

Currently MultiSync has plugins for

• Ximian Evolution synchronization, supporting calendar, ToDos and contacts.
• IrMC Mobile Client synchronization (supported by e.g. SonyEricsson T68i/T610/Z600, Siemens S55 phones etc.) via Bluetooth or IR on Linux, or cable connection.
• Windows CE / Pocket PC synchronization. This plugin is part of the SynCE project, and can be downloaded there.
• Opie and Zaurus synchronization.
• SyncML support (supported by e.g. SonyEricsson P800/P900 and many other phones and devices, for example the SyncML server Sync4j). SyncML also allows you to do remote connection of two MultiSync programs via an encrypted connection over the net.
• Palm synchronization.
• LDAP synchronization.
• Backup of your PIM data.

More detail about Multisync supported devices

That phone, combined with AT&T's GSM service was so aggravating, I came very close many times to throwing it out the window without the replacement.

It's Garbage.

Also, more on topic...
Be sure to check user reviews of the GSM cell service in your area, as my complaint was probably 75% with AT&T's GSM, more so than the phone.

You can also check out the bluetooth website or, more specifically, the list of bluetooth phone products they say 59 available, but many seem to be for outside the US.

That phone, combined with AT&T's GSM service was so aggravating, I came very close many times to throwing it out the window without the replacement.

It's Garbage.

Also, more on topic...
Be sure to check user reviews of the GSM cell service in your area, as my complaint was probably 75% with AT&T's GSM, more so than the phone.

You can also check out the bluetooth website or, more specifically, the list of bluetooth phone products they say 59 available, but many seem to be for outside the US.

The Official Bluetooth Website, has a Product page that has links to various products that support Bluetooth technology.

The Official Bluetooth Website, has a Product page that has links to various products that support Bluetooth technology.

Whitetooth is like bluetooth only without as much IBM in it.

I'm told that when it's officially launched Whitetooth will feature full backwards compatability with Bluetooth. Whitetooth features higher bandwith and increased range.

I recently feild tested Bluetooth and Whitetooth in a few clubs and bars. Whitetooth fared better client responsiveness than Bluetooth or even the ubiquitous Yellowtooth. Clients which were signaled with the Whitetooth "grin" responded far more frequently than when presented with the Bluetooth "grin". The experimental Yellowtooth would often cause a total loss of communications with client devices in the vacinity.

I would say that Whitetooth has a much brighter future than Bluetooth from these informal feild tests. I personally would avoid use of Yellowtooth until it gets cleaned up. If you don't have a Whitetooth vendor in your particular market, Bluetooth is still a good solution...

Actually linux 0.9x _did_ support IDE, along with RLE, ESDI, and a couple of SCSI flavors. If it weren't for all the time wasting they spent writing device drivers for disk drives then I might have been able to plug my into slackware 10 years ago.

The automatic alarm feature on the PalmOS is incredible. I have some issues with UI, but overall I've loved using my Samsung I300. However, I just bought a Sony Ericsson T68i with Bluetooth, IR port, Calendar, and a camera. IMO, the PDA/Cell Phone convergence is most important. I HATE carrying around 2 separate devices when one will do. BTW, email me at if you are interested in purchasing my I300 :) --Joe

Does anyone know if the encryption for Bluetooth is as braindamaged as some of the others out there at the moment, or if it's actually something halfway decent?

Yes. It's decent. They've written a white paper about it. And while I'm on the subject, Extremetech did a very good Bluetooth overview some time ago. Read it.

--Bud

Research?

Are they talking about universal remote controls? The Philips Pronto TSU2000 and VAR derivatives, like the Yamaha RAV-2000 and Marantz RC5000i are not "in research" products - they are current universal remotes with a user defined interface. If you had a Microwave that accepted IR controls, these would work with it, and quite nicely so. If they are interested in bringing a universal remote to the market, they have a tough act to follow.

Or are they researching controlling everything in the normal house? Like using Bluetooth wireless technology, or using JNDI as a naming and control mechanism? (Well, they used X-10, but that's besides the point) If that is their focus, I wish them luck in bringing the industry into a situation where they both care and cooperate with standards.

They seem to be doing everything with RF (not IR) wireless technology, but that is both uncommon and unsupported on current and legacy systems. I don't know how they plan on supporting, in a cost effective way, IR and wireless in a single remote, as well as all the wireless devices you would have to deploy around the house to justify the cost of the remote. Perhaps in a market of sufficient scale this would be viable.

Err, isn't this what bluetooth was about ...

There is finally some bluetooth devices coming out. I have been using a traditional wireless keyboard and mouse (IR) for a while and get quite a few missed keystrokes and mouse jerks. Bluetooth from what I understand is supposed to eliminate this. For those of you who dont know what bluetooth is go here.

Think Bluetooth. I'm hoping for something like a HD on my belt with a PDA/Phone/Camera/game device on my wrist. Bluetooth can connect these and more. Sounds awful proprietary though.

hmm. "low-range radio" transmitter/receiver pairs in a PDA. now what existing technology might replace their custom hardware?

Seriously, I think there is an interesting new genre of games that integrate PDAs and real world locations and/or real world people. Its nice to see others working in this direction.

I took a tour of this lab last Fall. While it was impressive from a consumer usability perspective, the technical decisions they made were at times curious. Like Microsoft, IBM sees the home of the future as a collection of dumb appliances that are dependent on a big, smart server to operate. Microsoft sees the server as the Windows XP platform, while IBM sees it as some form of their Websphere application server.

So there were no peer-to-peer technologies like IEEE 1394 or JINI to be found in their lab. And no Bluetooth or X-10, either.

In fact, the connection technology of the future, if the PvC lab is to belived... is CeBus! Now, CeBus is mighty fine at what it does, and fits well into IBM's architecture where everything is controlled by a Websphere set-top box, but it is much more expensive than the competing technologies. Right now, I can't see anyone (except Larry) paying a couple of hundred bucks extra for blinders that go up and down at different times in the day.

Corby

Bluetooth has certainly taken surprisingly long to appear. I now have 802.11 devices I never expected to have, because I thought they'd go straight to Bluetooth. The Bluetooth kit that is out is also staggering expensive (a 200 quid DECT phone goes to 500 with Bluetooth).

The same thing happened with USB. Why did I buy my last scanner with a pain-in-the-ass SCSI interface, when I knew all along that I really wanted USB, but just couldn't get them yet ? In the end though, I'm now happily using it - maybe two years after I expected it to become pervasive.

USB wasn't a failure, and isn't a failure now. It does something useful, it's cheap, and it got there eventually.

So why has WAP been such an unmitigated disaster ? (and for the Americans reading this, it's yet another cellphone technology where Europe is far ahead of you).

IMHO, WAP failed because it wasn't adventurous enough. The tiny deck size limit was too rigidly fixed around a phone-sized display, just as PDAs were gaining radio links. Although WAP was capable (barely) of driving a Yellow-Pages interface, it ran out of steam for ordering pizza/

I'm still not sure about Bluetooth. I don't like it, because (like WAP) I see some huge limitations in how far they've pushed it. Making my phone headset talk to my fridge ? Yes, it will do that. Maybe (radio permitting) we'll all have Bluetooth phone headsets like Lt. Uhura in a couple of years.

The thing I'm really unsure of about Bluetooh are the discovery protocols. It's one thing to make my phone talk to my fridge, but what about all that useful stuff I'm already doing with my IR Palm and someone else's hardware ? How do you "beam" a business card between two Bluetooth PDAs if they've never been introduced before ? How do you stop everyone in radio range overhearing it too ? How can Bluetooth support a railway season ticket, so that I'm let through the barrier, but not the guy in front ? IMHO, the Bluetooth SDP is painfully weak on these areas - yet they're the areas of neo-Gibson tech that I want to be inventing (and buying) in the next few years.

LEDs (and laser diodes) keep getting better and better. Will we see IrDA making a comeback, on the back of more powerful optics, longer range, and a simple to understand line-of-sight discovery protocol ?

PS - And Bluetooth should fix their damned website if they want developers to adopt it. How can I judge the spec if it takes an hour to download it ?

The Bluetooth Specification is a de facto standard containing the information required to ensure that diverse devices supporting the Bluetooth wireless technology can communicate with each other worldwide.

The Core part specifies components such as the radio, baseband, link manager, service discovery protocol, transport layer, and interoperability with different communication protocols. The Profiles part specifies the protocols and procedures required for different types of Bluetooth applications.

Download these specifications from: here

Grab some white papers from: here

Cheers!

The Bluetooth Specification is a de facto standard containing the information required to ensure that diverse devices supporting the Bluetooth wireless technology can communicate with each other worldwide.

The Core part specifies components such as the radio, baseband, link manager, service discovery protocol, transport layer, and interoperability with different communication protocols. The Profiles part specifies the protocols and procedures required for different types of Bluetooth applications.

Download these specifications from: here

Grab some white papers from: here

Cheers!