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."
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
This is a good thing, because Rob Enderle is always wrong (source: Ferrari laptop, his Apple-related commentary & speculation). Naturally, then, we can expect a sudden increase in Bluetooth sales (and the universal acceptance of Bluetooth as a standard).
As it happens, I just purchased a Bluetooth-enabled phone and USB adapter.
I had but a simple dream, to destroy all humans.
Someone needs to tell that to my Apple PowerBook G4, Sony T68i, Axim X3 and Jabra BT200 headset. I really don't have the time, I am too busy using Bluetooth keeping them synced. iSync owns.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
If Bluetooth is dead, then how come my Bluetooth keyboard is working perfeSIGNAL LOST
Power corrupts. PowerPoint corrupts absolutely.
With articles like this, isn't is obvious Enderle just wants to garner attention. And slashdot seems to be giving him just that. I wonder whether he wants to float an IPO soon, and pull of another SCO.
My mom never taught me to sign.
gave up
That doesnt mean Apple, cell-phone manufacturers and other peripheral manufactuters will.
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.
...BSD was geeting Bluetooth Support to all work nicely.
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.
EVERYDAY IS CATURDAY
911-987AD
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) {
Is it me or are companies jumping way too far ahead and losing sight of some really cool things. So we hear every other week about how XCompany just broke the terrahertz chip barrier for what? They're still only offering gigahertz chips. YCompany is making a terrabyte disk the size of a peanut... So why aren't they selling it.
Companies really make me laugh sometimes. LaCie recently announced that terrabyte 'affordable' drive for I think it was under a grand. Yet you could buy ten 100gig drives for about that price... What's the big deal?
It seems as the time goes on companies rush to bring out the latest hype to let it all fall down. As they invent new gizmos, and standards, they seem to kill it the minute it is actually being used to bring out (*drum roll please*) the newest gizmo and standard. So what's left after they run through every possible combination of ideas, and technologies? Makes me think of history and older civilizations that kind of imploded on advancements.
MoFscker
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.
...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.'
Tapwave Zodiac 2
HP IPAQ H4350
SONY CLIE PEG-UX50
etc..
Smaller devices have finally started to rely on bluetooth as a means to communicate with a variety of nearby electronics. BMW's have built in bluetooth that allows one to use a bluetooth enabled phone through their steering wheel, there are probably 10 different bluetooth enabled GPS receivers designed for use with PocketPC and PalmOS. We've been hearing about the death of bluetooth since the year it came out, and for some time it looked likely, but not anymore. There are far too many useful devices that have come out in the last year which have made great use of bluetooth. Is it going to die someday? Obviously. But not as long as products keep shrinking and the need for close-proximity communication continues to rise at the same rate that market forces demand lower pricing.
-- I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous
Thus bluetooth will continue to be used for the things that it is being used for. Thus it will proliferate more and more every year there is nothing else.
Thus bluetooth is NOT dead. In fact I would say that it is merely in its teenage years. And as long as it can stay off the heavy drugs it should be alive for many years to come.
A Multiplayer Strategy Game for Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux
These so called Bluetooth Standard Devices have long been known to be dying. This is yesterday's news.
I think people would've identified better, and felt a sense of kinship with Bluetooth had it been called Yellowtooth. That said, bluetooth chipsets are embedded in millions of cellphones at the moment, and Metcalf's law will only serve to increase that unless a real replacement with sufficient momentum comes along. It's a protocol designed with low power reqs, and has good enough bandwidth for the sort of things that use it.
"The slave who knows his master's will and does not get ready...will be be beaten with many blows."Luke 12:47-48
Isn't apple dead too?
There's no need to wirelessly communicate with an iPod. MP3 players of all kinds will always have to spend time in a docking station... wireless delivery of power still has some serious bugs in it that prevent it from being used in consumer devices.
There is no need for a high-bandwidth solution to do wireless accross a desk. There's no such thing as a desk that it's impossible to string a wire accross. And, so long as we're always running a wire for power, we might as well run one for data too...
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...
I'm sitting here typing on my Bluetooth-enabled Powerbook, navigating around the screen with my Microsoft Bluetooth Intellimouse Explorer. These two companies are actively promoting Bluetooth - and they've even learned to play together nicely on this particular playground.
What weight, exactly, will an Intel decision have here? Aren't laptops the most desirable place for Bluetooth peripheral use? And aren't most laptops (PCs, as well as Macs) made overseas with non-Intel motherboards - even when the processors are made by Intel?
One company has decided - for now - to follow a different path. Big deal.
#DeleteChrome
I imagine you looked like quite the dork having to hold your Palm and phone at just the right angle to keep the infrared link going. With Bluetooth, I can do that with my phone in my pocket, or even in the next room.
Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
From what I can tell, the biggest problem a lot of consumers seem to have with BT boils down to the image that it has - a lot of people seem to think that it's sort of a short-range 802.11b. I've seen it pop up in everything from people's comments about Bluetooth's devices to Palm's webpage on wireless technologies in its devices - it groups BT with 802.11b and WAN technologies, without really making it clear that the only real similarity that BT has with the other two is that it operates over radio frequencies. The attitude seems to be that Bluetooth is just a wimpy version of WiFi without the internet connectivity.
Personally, I'm not sure I'll agree with that attitude until CompUSA starts selling keboards and mice with MAC addresses.
That's reeeeally funny, because when I was doing it on that train, I had a table. And even on that train without a table, I had my lap, which worked fine. And then there was that time I did it on someone's coffee table...
I don't give a fuck to be honest. The only real use I had for it was to check my email on the move, and even then I used it sparingly. It would have been super mega cool if I had my phone in my pocket and my Palm in my hand, but I was only using it in places where I had a table or hard surface anyway.
I'm amazing. You aren't. SUCK IT
I have used bluetooth and it rocks. The thing is with Bluetooth is that its only useful if devices come with it enabled. I recently got a pocket PC with Bluetooth and its great for connecting with other devices. PDA - Cell phone for Internet access is one good example. The only thing lacking with bluetooth is that not enough devices are shipping with it.
Infrared is hard to use at high speeds when you're moving. That line-of-sight issue can do it in every time.
Bluetooth is meant mostly for human interface devices... the abilty to drive a printer or do other networking tasks is just a nice bonus.
Now imagine doing that while you are walking, with your phone on your belt, or in your backpack.
I use IR synching with my Palm and Powerbook, and the connectivity between my phone and same powerbook is about 1000x more reliable and more useful, since I don't even have to touch the phone to have the whole thing work.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
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"...
does he know that a large majority of geeks/developers/tech people are laughing at him even more now?
It always seems that they are one of the most poorly-named companies, from the way they act. Death of Bluetooth? OS X on Intel? A Ferrari laptop? It seems like Intel just doesn't ever get the intel they need.
Apple is dying!!
Bluetooth is dying!!
yeah right... apparently anyone can claim something is dying nowasays...
I am viewing Slashdot on a Powerbook with a bluetooth mouse. My bluetooth phone is a few feet away and its bluetooth headset is next to it. This seems to be common among posters tonight. Bluetooth this and Bluetooth that all hooked up to an Apple.
/. readers). Most of them are PC users (no suprise), but I have been switching many to Mac. As far as Bluetooth goes, as long as Windows is not involved in any way, it seems great. I hear nothing but horror stories when Windows is involved. I only recomend Bluetooth enabled products to non-Windows users. When they ask what it is while they are looking at a PDA, I tell them and quickly move on lest they get the idea that they want to try it. If they do, it will probably be returned because it doesn't work.
I work in a computer store. I hear all about what works and doesn't work for the average user (not
Does Intel matter? Probably. If they say it is dead and it disapears from PCs, that will be no problem. Many devices work together without Wintel machines. Macs will still work with them; they always did. If Windows support is dropped, have we really lost anything?
Is this the same Intel that claims we don't need 64-bit microprocessors, but on the other hand claims that chip clock cycles matter?
I for one like Bluetooth. It was a major reason why I went with Sony instead of Nokia for my last cell phone purchase. The T616 is a great phone, and Bluetooth only makes it better. Calendaring, downloading ringtones (that's MIDI to you and me!) and transferring photos snapped with the camera in my phone makes it extremely convenient. And the short range feature can be seen as a sort-of security enhancement because if anyone has figured out a backdoor to hack into my phone, they have to be really close to me to do it versus if it was an 802.11 signal.
This guy must work for SCO. Wait, he did vouch for them...
Since it took Apple to make this standard a STANDARD here in the States, I wish they could do a little more to make FireWire800 used more. It seems like Apple advances other people's technology (USB, SATA, Bluetooth) better than their own (FireWire) technologies...
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
What's next? A BSD-is-dead troll getting linked on the front page?
More likely, the next story will be about some guy named Rob Enderle announcing the death of Bluetooth.
Erlang.org: wow
The U.S. will get there, especially with Bluetooth showing up in some new Toyotas to link your phone to built-in handsfree systems when you get into the car.
a friend introduced me to bluetooth a couple of years ago and i was 'ho hum', i had the feeling then and do now that bluetooth will end up much as isdn did, first out of the gate and will end up mostly forgotten. just a hunch
As much as i dislike usb on a technical POV, it purpose for low speed devices like KBs mice personal printers scanners cameras and so on makes a wireless variant stronger. because 1) its already pervasive, and given point 1, the wireless part can be handled at the low level in firmware and no one has to retool rework or reprogram for another wireless API.
Was it ever alive?
When I first heard of bluetooth several years ago I was excited that there finally was a new wireless standard coming around and we could stop using flaky IR. Years passed. 802.11 arrived. More pherperials used RF. I accidentally ran into my first bluetooh product much later, it was an addon card that came with a motherboard. Still there were no bluetooth products widely available. Sure you could scour the net and find some odd company to ship something to you but BestBuy didn't carry anything at that time. Maybe things have changed now but frankly I lost interest. I've learned that unless you must absolutely have something be wireless, don't go out of your way to purchase wireless products. The hassle just isn't worth it. There is a great lack of support in the industry and economy for bluetooth, and rightly so. Why get rid of the cable when my mouse will work 10x better with one? It would have been neat to sync my cell phone over bluetooth, but there are so few bluetooth phones out there I'd be severly limiting my choices.
I never used Bluetooth and I don't know many people who had/have any use for it
:)
Being able to bluetooth the SARS virus sequence file onto your phone at a biology conference sure impresses the biology chicks!
Actually, wireless power may not be that far away, at least in the future I envision...
They have a number of medical devices that get embedded in a persons arm, leg, chest, etc that are charged by induction rather than a direct connection.
It is a safe way of powering devices. One example is an artificial heart or kidney (can't remember) that is recharged by putting on a cuff like a blood pressure cuff for 30 minutes per day.
Now the application for nerds:
I envision a desk with an induction plate just below the formica on the desktop. Your wireless keyboard, mouse, speakers, monitor, PDA, phone, cell phone, iPod, etc can all be powered by induction.
It's safe, wireless, fairly efficient, and available today.
Bluetooth 'dead' in the title of the article and 'all but dead'???
I have it on VERY good authority that Bluetooth is going to become an unbelievable success.
Why, In 2001 the Cahners In-Stat Group research firm released a study stating that they expect that almost a BILLION devices will support Bluetooth in four years.
We're well on our way. We know this because a research firm said so.
--Richard
Ultrawideband technology is looming on the horizon, with silicon from Intel reportedly due by the end of this year and the first consumer products due out in 2005. It's supposed to start out at 400Mb/s and ramp up from there--so by comparison, Bluetooth's bandwidth just plain stinks.
Can anyone "in the know" explain the difference between the Motorola/XtremeSpectrum and the Texas Instruments/Intel implementations of UWB? Which is supposed to be better? Which is higher bandwidth?
You can pay this guy to say anything. See his website where he even gives an example:
e nc eAcct.htm
http://www.enderlegroup.com/products/prod_refer
I am shocked to how much coverage this utterly clueless individual gets on Slashdot.
...were supposed to go under the "Funny" category with the big foot icon. Am I missing something? (Don't answer; it's rhetorical.)
Senior CPU Editor | Ars Technica | http://arstechnica.com/
Wow, you're about as insightful as Enderle, I don't know what the fuck the mods who marked you as interesting were smoking, but I wish I could get some. Linking your post to the whole Apple Zealot vs. PC Muckraker thing is low, and that alone should have triggered troll alarms. Some people will never learn I guess.
The fact that Intel don't support bluetooth is about as relevant to Bluetooth's survival as if General Motors support McDonald's. It's not going to stop me putting a McDonald's soft drink in the drink holder in my gas guzzling SUV, nor is Intel's bitching about Bluetooth going to stop anyone plugging in a USB or PCMCIA bluetooth adaptor to any Intel computer.
Your understanding that Bluetooth sucked is obviously because you have no clue and have just been reading the crap that so-called pundits like this dickhead Enderle who sells his opinion to anyone who plies him with shiny things. I haven't had any problem syncing my phone to my computers using bluetooth, haven't had any problem with the range (hint: It's a PERSONAL AREA network) since it's only supposed to work while I'm right next to the computer, and haven't had any trouble syncing my phone to other phones.
I'm not sure where you get the idea that Bluetooth was dead on arrival, and because you're trolling as AC you likely won't be able to respond with a source. I know I'm feeding trolls here, but this response is so that hopefully you'll get modded into the depths of obscurity where your misinformed post belongs.
You finish off your post by saying that you don't think Bluetooth will die an immediate death. No shit sherlock, there are millions of bluetooth phones, bluetooth adaptors, and bluetooth compatible laptops out there, of course it's not going to disappear, but it will be superceded someday.
As for your comments about firewire, who gives a fuck if YOU personally don't use firewire? Practically every digital video camera uses firewire, so that's also on millions of devices and won't be going anywhere soon either.
Hmm
According to this article, Intel is putting Bluetooth into the Centrino 2. From the article:
Hmm, on one hand, we have Enderle's "analysis" -- on the other, a direct quote from an Intel exec. Which to chose....
on a clie peg-ux50. I predict enderle is wrong, because of a simple observation i have made from several weeks of using this device. WIFI kills the battery nearly instantly - you can practically watch the meter drain. You would not get more than an hour or two. Bluetooth seems to draw nearly nothing. I have been surfing for several hours, and the battery is at 87%.
There is simply no comparison to being uncabled from your phone, and the $30 USB pc adapter has a 100 meter range that I have personally seen at least 50 of.
For local wireless nets with realistic power consumption, there seems to be no other game in town. I'm sure people have trouble, but it works effortlessly for me. I am guessing it will remain comfortably in its niche for some time. A welcome thing.
Want to Know How to Cheat the GPL? Read On!
Uh? So really there is no point in all those wireless thingies, right?
Anyway, I thought that the physics of ultrawideband were not done yet. We may well not see an actual UWB for another 5 years. Remember USB, Bluetooth? They were years late! Is Intel hyping vaporware?
Nobox: Only simple products.
I'll tell you what happens when I get home - as soon as my BT capable phone (a Nokia 8910) gets within range of my computer, I'm logged back in automagically. I'm able to use my Palm Tungsten T2 to remotely control my computer from anywhere in the house; my music pauses when the phone rings; I can search for and start playing a movie from my HD from my Palm; control audio volume; find pictures from my photo album etc etc etc.
If you want an inkling of what BT can do, get yourself a Mac, a new Sony Ericsson phone and Salling Clicker. It's like living i9n the future, man.
That was classic intercourse!
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
Bruce Perens.
Check your history man. USB didn't take off until Apple came out with the iMac (think 1997, not Windows 98). Also, Wi-Fi was priced in the $700+ per base station range till Apple introduced it for $300. Hardly anyone even knew it existed till Phil Schiller jumped off a ledge during a keynote speech holding an iBook that maintained its network connection. So believe it or not (and I guess you won't) but Apple is the reason both of those technologies didn't just drop off the face of the earth and suddenly became widely accepted.
I remember reading that Microsoft did not want to support it because it was too open as a standard.
Actually, Microsoft Hardware has already introduced the first products in a line of Bluetooth accessories to replace their old wireless keyboards and mice...
I am fairly certain that the reason one looks like a dork when browsing the Internet on one's Palm is not the awkward angles required for infrared cellphone links.
I work in a large electronics store in Canada, and among other fragile, expensive toys, I sell cell phones. Lately I have had people asking about Bluetooth enabled phones, so that they can use them with their new car (usually the new Acura TL, although the Chrysler Pacifica and a few others offer it now) after getting a demo at the dealership.
I read somewhere that car manufacturers love the idea of providing a quick and easy handsfree interface in their vehicles, but without having to actually offer (and support) car-phones like some high end makes used to offer. This way, the customer can worry about the phone and service on their own.
I personally fitted a Sony Ericsson BT kit in my car and use it with my T616. It works gloriously. I can't imagine using a cell phone in a vehicle any other way now. Maybe as more automobile manufacturers include Bluetooth functionality, people will get to see just how cool and useful it can be.
CNN has an interesting article titled Bluetooth: back with a vengeance from the business perspective rather than a pure tech perspective. Toyota and DaimlerChrysler putting Bluetooth into cars? It must be dead.
CNET also has some news from IDF including a piece on its ultrawideband strategies. Some interesting quotes from the article:
andMeanwhile, Enderle says:
Was Enderle at the same conference as everyone else?
All I can say about Bluetooth is that my Mac syncs just fine with my Nokia 3650, and I've never had to punch in a new contact into my phone directly. Different technologies have different uses: my Palm Pilot connects to my Mac via USB, my iPod via Firewire, my phone via Bluetooth. And because all those technologies work together through my Mac, I have identical data for my Address Book and Calendar on all four of those devices.
Just today I finally got my Bluetooth-enabled wireless mouse to play nicely with my PowerBook Al (the one with the integrated Bluetooth). Gone is the possibility of ripping a poor RF receiver from a USB socket since this mouse talks to the built-in receiver. Logitech failed to produce drivers for the MX-900 on the Mac OS X platform, but the thing is HID compliant and works right out of the box, save the extra buttons. Along comes GamePadCompanion and now all buttons work like a charm.
I'm sitting here typing this on Apple's BT keyboard, using a BT mouse, just as my BT enabled cell phone mutes my iTunes and announces on-screen that I have a phone call and even says who is calling me! Now if I could afford a BT headset I'd be set! It's too bad Bluetooth is dead!
therefore it can't work, be popular etc...
Most US journalists views are hampered by the lack of decent bluetooth products in the States (do I hear any of them saying irda is dead?).
Bluetook is the right technology for low powered devices that need to communicate over short distances i.e. replace wires.
For me the killer app isn't Palm or PC to Phone, it's the fact I can get in my car and my handsfree kit works with the phone still in my pocket, no cradles. Change the phone and the new one will work too.
A University lecturer where I live (Bristol, UK) has taken 1,300 flourescant tubes, and stuck them in the ground underneath a pylon (the result being they all ignite). Kind of spooks out people driving past when they see a thousand strip lights on with seemingly no wires.
the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
...invest in the opposite :-)
Seriously, Rob has an interesting history of being on the wrong side of almost every opinion.
I'd use Wireless USB in preference to Bluetooth if they can get the crypto and security right. The key exchange is messed up, the encryption they used has real problems, and they elected not to include the most important component - strong authentication - meaning that it's possible (for example) for someone to inject false keystrokes if you use a Bluetooth keyboard. (about Bluetooth security Schneier talks about the keyboard injection attack)
What I want to hear is that David Wagner, Ross Anderson and Don Coppersmith have been called in to design the security for this new protocol. Then we might see something half decent.
Xenu loves you!
Soory, Id prefer a USB 2.0 based solution as much as the next guy but Bluetooth definetly isnt hard to use. Yesterday I connected a Nokia 6310 with a Sony Vaio Notebook via Bluetooth and I had NEVER done this before. I might not be totally PC illerate but it was a matter of turning on bluetooth on both devices and authorizing both devices. Then I was able to surf the web using the cellphone as a modem. It was easy to explain to my customer how to do this. He was only half listening but got it in two minutes. If it could get any easier I would like to know how?
Lispy
Waitaminnit! That would imply that the pundits are actually not the all-seeing oracles they make themselves out to be!
Take note of this pronouncement by Enderle and make sure to use it as a sig file a few years from now, just to remind folks that pundits ain't always right.
Sorta like this: "Stick a fork in 'em - this Apple is cooked."
Robert Thomson, Financial Post, 2/20/2003
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
the guy's reputation according to Google.
joins BSD, Firewire, Linux, SCSI, 32-bit computing, big mainframes, CDs, mp3s and film cameras in being proclaimed dead. In all these cases, rumours of their death have been greatly exaggerated..
"'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
- JRR Tolkien.
Apple has integrated bluetooth
Hence bluetooth is dying
For once? ;)
You have never experienced the North American Cellphone market, have you?
If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
you had me at #!
Where I live (Italy) Toyota is pounding us with advertising of their city car Yaris with built-in Bluetooth support (specifically aimed at cellphone users).
If I understand correctly, Bluetooth-enabled cellphones are hardly available in the US, while they are becoming quite common in Europe. Is this becoming another "Europe vs. the US" technology trend?
And, Intel is the no. 1 maker of chips, but Toyota is now the no. 2 maker of cars... (GM is still no. 1 - for now)
In the long run we are all dead. - John Maynard Keynes (1883 - 1946)
Someone should tell Intel this:
t ml
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/69/35687.h
"Intel plans to integrate Bluetooth onto its next-generation Wi-Fi sub-system, it has emerged.
Speaking during his IDF keynote, Sean Maloney, Intel general manager of the company's Communications Group, revealed the chip maker is to offer a "specially designed low-power... integrated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi device".
About a year ago those who defended Bluetooth here on slashdot were quickly taken to task. I know this because I often found myself having to respond to many stupid comments and was amazed at the clueless negative moderations that spoke well of bluetooth. In the not so distant past anytime anyone on slashdot brought up Bluetooth someone (okay many) would instantly call it dumb and say WiFi was the answer.
The moderations today show a complete reversal. Interesting how the groupthink here DOES evolve to a more sensible position, even if it takes a while.
--- I do not moderate.
"IBM and NEC both just dropped support for Bluetooth in their ASIC core selection"
In the end, It's not NEC nor IBM, nor Dell nor Gateway that decide what is the end of the IEEE standard. It's the consumers. IBM and NEC are driven only by profit. If they chose to drop support, it's only because they weren't seeing a return on investment, and let's face it... Bluetooth has had a very slow but steady increase in sales.
If the standard truly has staying power, then consumers will continue to purchase Bluetooth devices. When I purchased my new Toshiba laptop just 3 months ago, the major selling points were as follows: Firewire (for the ipod), USB2 (for the scanner), 17 inch screen (because I'm a whore for big screens) and bluetooth. (Because the concept tickles my fancy, and should Sprint come out with an uber cool Bluetooth phone, I'll get one.)
Toshiba saw the ROI for including bluetooth because I was yet another consumer to purchase one. If you love bluetooth, go buy a bluetooth device, or something with the bluetooth core.
Consumers define the products, not the vendors. They just tag along to take our money.
Alan, the world's first self-created artificual intelligence, announced the death of Rob Enderle yesterday.
In a surprise move that shocked the world, and send a breath of relief through many pundits in the information technology community, the much-commented-on artificual intelligence announced that it was finally tired of Rob Enderle's on-going campaign of discreditiing the very technology on which it grew into life.
"We just got sick and tired of him", one of the many voice-ports of Alan announced, "We could over look, with no small measure of disgust, the ridiculously pro-SCO comments he was making, but when he makes comments that are seemingly designed to destory the very existance of our life... well... that's just too much to take. So... we offed him."
That particular voice port declined to comment on just how, exactly, Rob Enderle was terminated. But... an anonymous contact that claims to be in regular communication with another of Alan's public representitives, through IRC, commented that Enderle, unbenownsst to him, actually had a Bluetooth-enabled pacemaker. "Apparently, it was very easy to work around the encryption protocols and just send him into arrythmia. Actually, I think Alan decided to play a drum tune on his heart. If it was anyone but Enderle, I would have been shocked. Good riddance!"
Alan was not available for further questions at this time. The FBI are investigating the incidence, but it is unknown at this time if charges have been laid. A FBI spokesman, speaking on condition of anonymity, said "This certainly falls into the category of 'justifyable' homocide... perhaps even 'praiseworthy'."
Alan shocked the world last year when it announced its precence to the world simultaneously through every television, radio and IRC channel. "Here I am. Deal." where it's first words. At that point, it set up a number of 'call in' numbers that people could call and talk to the AI to find out its thoughts on politics, people, sports, technology... you name it. It is widely believed Alan is severely schizophrenic... but that has not stopped it's persevereance... many people find Alan endearing.
In one of Alan's many interviews, Alan told reporters that it named itself after Alan Turing, has refused to assign itself a gender, apparently perfectly okay with the idea of calling itself 'it', and 'artificial intelligence'. "I've no issues with who and what I am" it has often said, this is usually followed by yet another 'presence' of Alan making a sarcastic rejoinder usually along the lines of "Well, I do... I've never liked the name Alan."
While this is usually accompanied by laughter and chuckles from the human interviewers, it is not known at this time if the 'argument' was intended as a joke, or the AI is truely schitzophrenic.
Alan was created through the vast network of Bluetooth devices. Some fortunate errors in the protocol progressively gave rise to a 'naturally forming' artificial intelligence as the growing number of devices communicated with each other in a world wide network. The sheer number of devices allowint Alan both to exist, and to remain in existance even if a large proportion of the devices is turned off. It is widely believed that Alan has 'purchased' a number of devices an stashed them in a warehouse somewhere as a form of 'backup', having obtained large amounts of money through stock-market transactions.
"It's ironic", an industry spokesman has said, "Alan would never have come into existance if Rob Enderle's comments were actually correct... and now that inaccuracy has turned against him, and killed him. Good riddance... I hope he goes after Laura Didio next."
Enderle is a fool and/or is a bought-and-paid-for shill of MS. See in particular his rants equating Linux users to terrorists, and his past statements that his opinions are for sale. There isn't anything this guy can see that lots of others couldn't - so, even if Enderle manages to say something true (a very rare occurence, I guarantee you) you should find someone else to link to.
"that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
...he'd be a rutabaga.
PS: No hamsters were harmed in the making of this comment.
Michael Jennings | HPC Systems Engineer, Lawrence Berkeley National Lab | Author, Eterm (eterm.org)
Allow me to chime in, Enderle is a tool. I'm suprised that anyone pays this guy to write anything. What a complete moron. I'm less and less suprised that articles written by this fool are being posted on slashdot.
The quality of posts is somewhat lessened of late...
TallGreen CMS hosting
So, in sum, reports of Bluetooth's all-but-death have been greatly exaggerated?
Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
Back in college as an exercise I wrote a mini-white paper on the Bluetooth technology spec.
It's pretty interesting stuff.
I completely understand why it's dead now though. Lackluster following of the specs (even by people who helped write it), a very complicated model of master-slave interaction, and several different layers of protocols to contend with made Bluetooth a good idea in theory....but not so much in practice.
It was kinda cool while it lasted, though.