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."

35 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 RobPiano · · Score: 5, Informative

      Its pretty clear most of us don't care much about what Rob Enderle has to say. Apple has integrated bluetooth and I love it. Its in many devices and its cheaply priced.

      Plus I would never be caught dead with a Ferrari laptop.

    2. 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."
    3. Re:Rant. by waynelorentz · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, there is wireless power. But it doesn't work very well. Using just a few electronic parts from the local Radio Shack (depending on how well stocked your local Radio Shack is) you can build an AM radio that is completely powered by the signal of the radio station. No power cord. No batteries. Not really enough power from the air to run a speaker, but enough for headphones. And it's free. As long as you don't break it, and the AM station is on the air you can listen for free forever. Now, if this could only work on FM then we'd have something special.

    4. Re:Rant. by penguinstorm · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The death of Bluetooth view is being advocated from a perspective that says Intel is in the driver's seat - a very PC centric view.

      Take a look from another perspective - device centred - and the picture looks much much different. There are millions of bluetooth enabled cell phones (mine included) in consumers hands around the world; Palm is using the standard in their exorbitantly expensive models.

      So I'd have to suggest that consumers are going to demand compatiblity there - the Bluetooth market is far from dead, even if there are outstanding issues (pairing - although I've never had a problem with this.)

      --
      Skot Nelson music is my saviour / i was maimed by rock and roll
    5. Re:Rant. by randyest · · Score: 5, Informative

      The death of Bluetooth view is being advocated from a perspective that says Intel is in the driver's seat - a very PC centric view. Take a look from another perspective - device centred - and the picture looks much much different.

      Cheap devices use ASICs and ASSPs to implement Bluetooth. IBM, NEC, Toshiba, LSI, and somewhere down the line Mitsubish are the major ASIC and ASSP players. Now, with that in mind re-read my post, especially this part:

      IBM and NEC both just dropped support for Bluetooth in their ASIC core selection (which is key to cellphone, other cheap device, and mobo mfg'ers), LSI and Mitsubishi stopped development altogether after wasting some cash trying to figure out what the spec actually was and how to plug the holes in it safely.

      Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but you bought a phone with an ASIC inside that includes a core that is no longer supported. That means there will be nore updated models of your device, no big deal, but it also means no new Bluetooth support in that line either. Which is what we're discussing. As much as I hate to agree with that ferarri-licking laptop monkey, he's right.

      --
      everything in moderation
    6. 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.

    7. 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.

    8. Re:Rant. by Sique · · Score: 5, Informative

      1. Intel chipsets had USB builtin since the days of USB 1.0, thus for about half of the sold motherboards (those with Intel chipset), USB was just there without additional cost. Firewire required extra hardware until non-Intel chipset designers started to put it into their products.

      2. Firewire uses an own controller design to handle the protocol, making the chip design to support Firewire more complex. USB does a lot of work in the software USB driver, thus making for a more simple chip design or an easier integration of USB into the I/O part of the chipset (mostly in the southbridge).

      This basicly covers also the pros and contras for USB and Firewire.

      USB is cheaply to implement in hardware, and you can add functionality later in the driver. So USB-support for non-commodity platforms is more complex, because you have to write more complex drivers. USB transfer rate is coupled with system load, a loaded system can't keep the full transfer rate, and USB transfers in reverse generate considerable system load at higher rates.

      Firewire is more complex to do in hardware, but once it is implemented, the drivers are quite straight forward and generic and thus easily implementable on different platforms. Protocol extensions will break backward compatibility though or require at least a software compatibility layer to run also on older hardware. But firewire transfers are not coupled with the system throughput and can run with high rates on highly loaded systems or slow CPUs.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
  2. Excellent News! by momerath2003 · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.
    1. 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.

    2. 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

  3. Then how am I typing this? by IntelliTubbie · · Score: 5, Funny

    If Bluetooth is dead, then how come my Bluetooth keyboard is working perfeSIGNAL LOST

    --

    Power corrupts. PowerPoint corrupts absolutely.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. Been dead for some time now. by Gary+Yogurt · · Score: 5, Funny
  7. 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) { ... }

    1. Re:I doubt it... by kfg · · Score: 5, Funny

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

      "Unix? Don't make me laugh. That's for geeks and dorks. It's clunky, arcane, command line driven, everything a Mac isn't. You'd never get me to switch fromm. . . Oooooooooooo, shiney!"

      KFG

  8. 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.

    1. Re:Somebody pull the plug on this idiot by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Funny

      If only we could give ZDnet writers -1's for the columns they hand in....

  9. 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.'
    1. Re:Uh, about that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yeah- don't tell Intel either.

      Wait? You mean Intel is adding bluetooth support to next gen Centrino, and this whole /. story is nothing but a troll designed to whip you geeks into an anti-Intel frenzy? Imagine that...

  10. Yes, the fucking cat has my toungue, thanks. by DrunkenTerror · · Score: 5, Funny
    Another problem--we don't have wireless power yet. Some of these devices pull power off of a USB cable, which is easier to carry than the power brick... ...Powering them from a tether is ironic, considering that these devices are called "wireless."
    Apparently Ferrari-boy needs to be shown a pack of AAA cells, and how to install them properly.
  11. 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...

  12. 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"...

  13. e=mc squirreled ? by DrunkenTerror · · Score: 5, Funny
    Infrared is hard to use at high speeds when you're moving.
    Very true. In fact, it gets exponentially harder the closer you get to c.
  14. From an almost equally reliable source... by finelinebob · · Score: 5, Interesting


    Hmm ... refute Enderle with a report out of the Register? Why not!

    According to this article, Intel is putting Bluetooth into the Centrino 2. From the article:

    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".

    Hmm, on one hand, we have Enderle's "analysis" -- on the other, a direct quote from an Intel exec. Which to chose....

  15. 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.

  16. 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

  17. Think again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  18. The Automobile Biz May Be The Savior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  19. More reads about the "beleaguered" Bluetooth... by finelinebob · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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:

    Intel's (chief technology officer Pat) Gelsinger stressed that ultrawideband is not meant to be a competitor to already established wireless technologies such as Wi-Fi and Bluetooth. Ultrawideband allows higher amounts of data to be wirelessly transferred than Bluetooth but has a smaller range than Wi-Fi.
    and
    On top of the ultrawideband foundation will be various wireless interface technologies, such as wireless USB and wireless 1394, so devices with USB and 1394 built in can connect, then send and receive data. Ultrawideband could support Bluetooth, Gelsinger said, but even further down the road, it could ultimately replace Bluetooth.

    Meanwhile, Enderle says:

    At the Intel Developer Forum on Wednesday Intel announced the company was giving up on the deadlocked Ultrawideband IEEE task group and going it alone with a derivative offering they are calling Wireless USB. This initiative, for them, does everything that Bluetooth does and, effectively means that for PCs Bluetooth is all but dead.

    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.

  20. if Rob says it... by geoff+lane · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...invest in the opposite :-)

    Seriously, Rob has an interesting history of being on the wrong side of almost every opinion.

  21. I don't like personal attacks, but... by tin_the_fatty · · Score: 5, Funny

    the guy's reputation according to Google.

  22. PLEASE just cut off his air supply by toby · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Enderle is an idiot. Don't give him any more readers. It will only encourage him to produce more wrongheaded, destructive FUD at the behest of his corporate masters. This is the twit who wrote nonsense like:
    Remember that the open-source community uses the thousands-of-monkeys method to ensure security. This method hearkens back to the college theory about a thousand monkeys who -- if given all eternity and endless typewriter ribbon -- eventually type out the complete works of Shakespeare.
    Thanks, Rob, for connecting those two concepts for the first time. They've never been related except in your head.
    So, in the face of the Microsoft code leak, I have to think the old saying that people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones applies here very well. My sense is that these stones, tossed by the open-source community, will be coming back like boomerangs with booster rockets.

    I predict that in the near future, a large number of folks relying on open-source software will suddenly see that while auditors can be funny, when it comes to source-code leaks -- including the entire source code freely available in the open-source community -- they have no sense of humor whatsoever.

    Maybe ex-auditor Mr Enderle is upset because Open Source is under continuous audit. He's the archetypical soi disant "Analyst" Who Does Not Get Open Source; and having signed his name to so much FUD, can't afford to recant any time soon.
    --
    you had me at #!