Slashdot Mirror


Rob Enderle Announces Death of Bluetooth

prostoalex writes "Rob Enderle is typing away (perhaps even on his very own Ferrari laptop) at Intel Developer Forum, noting that Intel gave up on IEEE Ultrawideband and decided to switch to Wireless USB derivative. This, in Mr. Enderle's opinion, signifies the end of life for Bluetooth standard, although Enderle calls Bluetooth 'dead' in the title of the article and 'all but dead' in the actual text."

15 of 514 comments (clear)

  1. Rant. by DarkHelmet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Netcraft confirms... Bluetooth is dy--- err skip it.

    Anyway, slashdot, what are you thinking? You first show how retarded this fellow is by linking the story about the ferrari laptop. You then proceed to start to post other stories by this fellow. Don't you think that the credibility of this fellow has long since gone down the toilet after an article about his laptop that goes vroom?

    Everybody has an opinion. Everybody has a voice. What's next? A BSD-is-dead troll getting linked on the front page? Seriously guys ;)

    I hope everybody realizes that linking to this fellow's posts will only validate him, even if it's for the purpose of laughing at his assertions, calling him wrong, whatever. Sorry, but I don't trust reviewers that get a kick out of a car sound starting up a laptop, just like I don't trust the technical opinion of someone who discovers that they don't have to hear "You've got mail" when they get a new message.

    I don't think he deserves the time of day after the last story. And if anybody disagrees with me here, by all means reply to this and say why I'm wrong.

    </rant>

    --
    /^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
    1. Re:Rant. by jcr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    2. Re:Rant. by useosx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wireless USB comes from the same group that spec'ed out USB 1.0, 1.1, and 2.0, and that managed to out-sell the arguably-superior firewire spec.

      I know you're not implying that Firewire is therefore useless and doomed to extinction, but just to clarify:

      USB 2.0 and Firewire both have their pros and cons and different uses. USB 2.0 is more prominent because it's cheaper and more of a "consumer" protocol because it puts more work on the system's processor (instead of the controller) and doesn't sustain its data rate as well as Firewire. So yeah, more devices have USB 2.0 because most people don't care if their USB 2.0 scanner is 15% slower on a 600dpi scan.

      However, video editors and more "pro" types will pay a premium for Firewire because of its higher sustained data rate. It also has devices that *gasp* support daisy-chaining which is really useful. Not to mention Firewire 800 which is hella faster than USB 2.0.

      So, yeah, USB 2.0 definitely has out-sold Firewire, but that doesn't mean Firewire is going away. Just like IDE drives have outsold SCSI, but you don't see that going anywhere, do you?

      Anyway, sorta OT, but the examples apply to the BT/WUSB debate. Since I don't know the specs of WUSB I can't compare them, but I'm sure one will have a power/performance/distance trade off somewhere which will make each protocol have their uses.

      Now if only someone will make a Bluetooth CDMA phone so I can switch to Sprint because my overpriced cell provider was just bought by the evil Cingular overlords.

    3. Re:Rant. by BasilBrush · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The main drivers of Bluetooth in cellphones are Nokia and Sony Ericsson. These guys do not provide the functionality based on what comes in off the shelf chips. They spec that they want Bluetooth in a phone series, and the chip will have Bluetooth.

  2. Bluetooth was Dying by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I always thought it was...then I didn't...then I did...and now I'm sure it's not.

    Looking at the Dude with the Ferarri laptop's website sold me.

    "The Enderle Group provides an unparalleled look underneath breaking technology events to identify the core reasons that buyers and builders of this technology should care. The stated goal for the firm is "to bring diverse and challenging views into technology advisory services and consulting"."

    If anyone can totally misjudge the future of a product or technology, it's a consultant.

  3. They do this every week... by Bobdoer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Linux is dead. Windows is dead. BSD is dead. Slashdot is dead.
    We've heard in all before. If it's true or not, only time will tell.

  4. I doubt it... by codeonezero · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not to sound like an all knowing leet mac user, but I think bluetooth will be dead when Apple stops including it as an option on the Macs.

    Apple by it's nature seems to be a good indicator of what's in. Apparently USB was around for a while, but didn't really pick up until Apple added it to it's machines. Look at Wi-Fi/Airport, Apple was one of the first companies to include it and make it standard.

    Ditto with Bluetooth. Them Mac users will jump on anything Apple sugar coats and make it viable :-)

    Feel free to correct me if I've made erroneous assertions. Thanks :-)

    --

    ....
    int main (void) { ... }

  5. Somebody pull the plug on this idiot by Anonymous+Cowabunga · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is the same guy who was shown Linux code and told it was stolen from SCO--he then parroted the same crap to help boost SCO's stock prices. This guy's on the opposite end of "tech expert"--please don't feed or publicize this troll.

  6. Uh, about that... by flynns · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...yeah. Bluetooth is dead.

    So don't tell Apple. Or ANY of the folk who make PDAs and accessories with Bluetooth capabilities.

    Out of curiosity, am I the only one who hadn't heard of "Wireless USB" before this article?

    --
    'If you're flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit.'
  7. FUD, FUD, FUD... But is USA catching on? by nordicfrost · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I use Bluetooth every day. My GF uses it. My IT-clueless friend who works as a manager worships it. So for us in Europe, it isn' anything to declare alive or dead, we're too busy using it.

    But it seems that for once, USA was a bit slow to catch on with the whole BT thing. We have been using BT for almost two years now, and most here look upon it as an intergral part of cellular life. Kids in class pass notes with it, adults use it for headsets and syncing, etc. But he is right about the MS mouse. You're welcome to read my experiences with the MS BT Mouse here on Slashdot. If you can find that old comment...

  8. Re:Excellent News! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, the mere fact that Apple has begun to push Bluetooth indicates that it's probably going to survive. After all, who had even heard of USB before the iMac had it? Very few x86 computers had it, Apple made it standard on the iMac, and now every single x86 motherboard I see at Fry's has USB. Sure it can be argued that this wasn't entirely Apple, but even so, they accepted it and it is now standard. They accepted Bluetooth, so it's probably not going anywhere, whether it's Apple keeping it alive and driving acceptance or whether Apple just sees a good thing.

  9. Intel claims bluetooth is dead... by HockeyPuck · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only reason they're claiming that bluetooth is dead is because they missed the boat on creating/shipping products that use it. Its like Microsoft saying linux is dead or Redhat saying windows is dead...

    If you can't sell your product, create a new one and claim the old one is "dead"...

  10. Re:Bluetooth is dead, long live Bluetooth by cyberformer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The article is wrong: Intel hasn't abandoned Bluetooth. It bought a Bluetooth chip company three months ago and announced yesterday that it would include Bluetooth along with 802.11a, b and g in the next version of Centrino.

    Thanks purely to Intel's huge advertisng campaign, Centrino is already the most popular Wi-Fi chipset on the market, so its inclusion of Bluetooth will actually give the technology a huge boost. (The exact opposite of what the article says.) What Intel actually claimed is that UWB might replace Bluetooth five to ten years from now. Just like (Intel hopes) Itanium will replace its new Opteron clone.

  11. Not the best article Slashdot ever ran. by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This is a bad article for a number of reasons.

    First the technical. Right now, Bluetooth works really well (even on Linux) and it's cheap, cheap, cheap. It's still in the running. It's really impressive making a GPRS call to connect to the Internet from my laptop with class 1 bluetooth dongle to my Ericsson t68i anywhere in the room, maybe still in the car. I don't have to move the laptop over to the window to get a good signal any longer.

    Second, editorial. We had a series of articles that essentially said "Enderle's stupid and malicious". All this article says is "He's still stupid". Nobody's interested in that.

    Bruce

  12. Re:Excellent News! by the+pickle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You've obviously not used anything with Bluetooth support. You're also an idiot.

    Yup, just like Firewire is so well accepted

    Yeah, so well-accepted, in fact, that it's standard on many good Wintel motherboards now, most all DV equipment, and most better-than-the-cheapest beige-box PCs from Dell, Sony, HP, etc. Or were you going to connect your brand-new digital camcorder to your USB2 port? Good luck with that...

    and SCSI has become a standard feature of all PCs.

    Until FireWire made it obsolete on the consumer level, SCSI was the standard for connecting peripherals that needed more bandwidth or speed than parallel could give, which was basically every storage device there was (except floppies).

    USB didn't go anywhere until Windows 98 came out since Windows 95 had crappy USB support...USB was quickly accepted once it became useable

    No, USB didn't go anywhere because there was no market for USB devices, because Joe-User on his Windoze box was still stuck in "Parallel solves all my problems" mode. It took Apple's abandonment of serial, and ADB -- and the resulting ENORMOUS market for USB peripherals due to the horrid round mouse and lack of a floppy drive -- to give USB the kick in the pants it needed. USB's usability had nothing to do with it, either. You can thank Apple for making USB more than another failed Intel experiment.

    Bluetooth is relatively slow at 760 kb/sec, so it's not very practical for anything high bandwidth.

    You're exactly right.

    BECAUSE BLUETOOTH WASN'T DESIGNED TO BE HIGH-BANDWIDTH! It was designed to be convenient, short-range, wireless networking to replace slower, less reliable technologies like IrDA and the proprietary RF used in wireless mice/keyboards. It was designed to connect wireless fones with PDAs with computers with headsets. And it mostly succeeds at all of that. I don't expect my car to fly, so I don't know why you seem to expect Bluetooth to be an 802.11b replacement...

    Why would I recommend to Joe-User that they make sure their next computer has Bluetooth support?

    You don't recommend any purchases for people who have laptops, PDAs, or cell fones, do you?

    Sheesh.

    p