Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bluetooth Bombs

Posted by michael on from the universal-incompatibility dept.

Carey sent in this story that shows Bluetooth still has a few kinks to work out. Bluetooth's universal standard instead seems to be about 10 different standards, and if these companies think they are going get people to buy devices that only work with other devices from the same manufacturer, I think they're in for a rude awakening.

2 of 106 comments (clear)

  1. Re:This is a non-story by MrShiny · · Score: 5
    So because the computer industry has fucked up on standards many times before, it's ok for them to do it again? I love this quote from the article:

    "Right now, the standard is defined, but companies are using different specifications"

    Translation: Right now, the standard is defined, but companies are so busy madly rushing products out the door that they don't bother following the specs or doing any compatibility testing.

    I'm sick and tired of buying a shiny new upgrade and then finding out it doesn't work with my computer because:

    1. the person who made the component didn't follow the spec
    2. the person who made the thing it plugs into didn't follow the spec
    3. the spec is not complete
    I was really excited when I bought my TNT2 until I plugged it into my LX mobo and found out the AGP slot didn't provide enough voltage to drive the card. If this were any other kind of product, it would be considered defective.
  2. They're for different things by Rix · · Score: 5

    802.11 is overkill for the niche Bluetooth is aimed at. You don't need a fullblown NIC in your cell phone, but it might be nice if it could communicate with your PDA.

    One of IBM's Bluetooth guys spoke at VanLUG last week, and according to him IBM is aiming at 50 cents/chip for bluetooth. This will never happen with 802.11.
    Cheers,

    Rick Kirkland