Posted by
michael
on from the wi-fi-all-the-way dept.
rookie1 writes "According to this article and this, Ericsson has shut down its Bluetooth division. Ericsson has not made any formal announcement. Considering SonyEricsson is a major supporter of Bluetooth technology, will this have a huge impact on its adoption?"
From TFA: "Although Ericsson will continue its involvement in the Bluetooth Special Interest Group as a promoter of the technology, Akesson said, 'We will no longer develop new hardware or new IPs based on the Bluetooth specification.' Ericsson also won't pursue new chip customers for Bluetooth technology licensing."
Could someone explain to me how telling the world you're no longer interested in developing the technology or finding people to license it to is a method of "promoting" Bluetooth?
To my knowledge, the word "promoter" means someone in the second line of development. Either someone funding, or advertising it.
For example, a promoter of art is usually some rich guy, not necessarily the poor chap, who actually paints the pictures.
-- "Between strong and weak, between rich and poor [...], it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free"
Re:Promoting?
by
ElForesto
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I think what they're trying to say is that with Bluetooth being standardized, they're perfectly happy to depend on 3rd-party manufacturers to make the peripherals. I imagine this is a way for them to focus on their core business and not get too involved in something ancilliary to it.
-- There is a difference between "insightful" and "inciteful" other than spelling.
I think you've hit the nail on the head. The article states that Ericsson will no longer be making products for the semiconductor market- ie, they will no longer be making Bluetooth CHIPS. It has probably become more economical for Ericsson to buy said bluetooth chips from other (probably Chinese or Taiwanese) vendors and integrate them into their mobile devices instead of producing the chips they integrate themselves.
And this is nothing but a good thing, as it means that the Bluetooth implementations have become uniform to the point that Ericsson can trust other manufacturers to make the chips that they use.
While the majority of the comments for this article seem to be ringing the death-knell for Bluetooth or at least proclaiming that Ericsson has lost faith in the technology, you correctly show that this couldn't be further from the truth.
Might not be bad
by
attaboy
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
From the News.com.com article:
Ericsson doesn't plan to continue design and development around Bluetooth, but it will continue to support existing customers and include it in products, the company representative said. Bluetooth technology efforts will be incorporated into the work of Ericsson's Mobile Platforms group.
Glass Half Full Interpretation: Maybe this means that Bluetooth has become so simple to implement that they don't need a dedicated development team anymore. It seems that Bluetooth is cropping up in all sorts of CE devices. BT chips and control sets are becoming more and more standardized. For Ericsson, the hard work of developing tie-ins to their phone OS is already done. This could be a good sign, rather than a bad one, for Bluetooth in general.
I'm a little fuzzy on the relationship between Ericsson and SonyEricsson. Not sure if the former will impact the phones of the latter.
-- The facts have a liberal bias. --The Daily Show
Re:Might not be bad
by
shaka
·
· Score: 4, Informative
I'm a little fuzzy on the relationship between Ericsson and SonyEricsson.
Also, what's the relationship of Sony to SonyEricsson? I've had a lot of frustration with Sony and Bluetooth support in the USA.
Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications was established in 2001 by telecommunications leader Ericsson and consumer electronics powerhouse Sony Corporation. The company is equally owned by Ericsson and Sony.
I always like the idea of Bluetooth, though I'm afraid I saw this coming. I don't know why it was never adopted on a wider scale, but I certainly hope that other short distance wireless technologies (like WUSB) do take off. It would be nice to have a desktop with no wires except for power.
No effect at all. JVC invented the VHS standard, it's small market share was not signifigant in it's adoption. Phillips invented the redbook audio CD, it's influence is miniscule today, or even 15 years ago.
Ericsson not REALLY pulling out...
by
BTWR
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
From the article:
Further advancements in Bluetooth technology will be made by the Special Interest Group, which consists of a number of companies with ties to the technology. Ericsson will remain a part of that group.
So it seems that Ericsson is perhaps just diverting their bluetooth division to one of it's subsidiaries/subdivisions. After all, SonyEricsson is one of the main Bluetooth supporters. This may just be overpanic...
Bluetooth is not dying (ignore Netcraft)
by
plover
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Well, according to both of the articles it's the research team that created Bluetooth, and the technologies around it. They are not the group that is responsible for incorporating Bluetooth into the other products.
It could be as simple as "the standard has been set, the goals have been accomplished, move on to new things." Since Ericsson is no longer the sole creative force behind Bluetooth, it makes financial sense to not keep 125 people employed to argue one seat on the Bluetooth Special Interest Group.
It's too bad for Bluetooth in that I think Ericsson had some brilliant visionaries doing this work, and that those people are no longer focused on Bluetooth. However, they're being incorporated into other units which can only help them overall.
It's not good news, it's not bad news. It's just news. The timing is interesting as I see Bluetooth now on the cusp of adoption by every cell phone maker for their mid- and possibly even low-end phones.
( And Michael, wi-fi is not necessarily a good replacement for Bluetooth. The higher power requirements for wi-fi mean shorter battery life, which is death for cell phones. And Bluetooth incorporates discovery protocols which are all geared toward personal networking, not internet networking. I think wi-fi would be a really chatty way to accomplish those goals, again at the expense of battery life. )
-- Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
I doubt it...
by
Philosinfinity
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I doubt this will affect bluetooth's ability to enter the mainstream. In fact, I never quite understood the need for bluetooth in your cellphone (aside from cellphone PDA type devices). Wireless headphones are nice, but is this really what I want to use bluetooth for?
Rather, I think that the PC perhipheral market is what will ultimately drive bluetooth. Think about it. Truely wireless keyboards, mice, modems, printers, etc. are so beneficial for end users. Bluetooth's future is in "untangling the PC" not the convienence of wireless cell phone headsets and small PC to cellphone data transfers.
Re:Bluetooth not "adopting"
by
mccalli
·
· Score: 5, Informative
When was the last time you used a Bluetooth-enabled device to do anything useful?
Well, admittedly typing this reply on a bluetooth keyboard might not count as useful, so I'll have to go for an hour ago when I used it transfer photos. Before that I'd have to stretch a whole two hours ago when I used the built-in bluetooth on this Powerbook to communicate with a bluetooth mobile in order to send an SMS. And before that, it would be about five hours ago when I synchronised my address books. Without taking the phone out of my pocket.
Enough yet? Or shall I cast my memory as far back as this morning to dig out some more usage?
Eericsson shifted the bleutooth work to a difrferent division folks..no stopping bluetooth at ericsson but a shifting of resources..
Micahel why did you avoid reading the 2nd paragraph?
-- Don't Tread on OpenSource
Re:Bluetooth not "adopting"
by
RapmasterT
·
· Score: 4, Informative
What adoption? When was the last time you used a Bluetooth-enabled device to do anything useful?
Last time? I'd guess about 5 minutes ago.
1. I use a bluetooth connection to my laptop to edit my cell phone contact list with a real keyboard.
2. I use a bluetooth headset to talk on my cell phone without a wire catching on everything.
3. I have a bluetooth GPS unit that I use map routing with my pocketpc.
4. I have a bluetooth router on my home network to provide LAN access to my pocketpc (WiFi drains the battery in about 1.5 hours, bluetooth in 5.5).
Too many people make the mistake of thinking that since THEY don't use a technology, nobody does. Bluetooth is not only gaining wide acceptance, but it's very useful as well. Short range, low power consumption is a killer combination for many many uses.
Re:Bluetooth going away?
by
Smitty825
·
· Score: 4, Informative
The CDMA providers/phone manufactures are just getting a clue about Bluetooth. In the US, Verizon should be selling a Bluetooth Motorola phone. Sprint has sold a Bluetooth Sony Ericsson phone (with lots of BT bugs), and Nokia has announced a CDMA flip-phone with bluetooth...
Why would it? What other technology can do what bluetooth can do? It doesn't really have a direct competitor. The market is just not as large as some people expected. It does not "replace wires." It removes (some) wires for people who are willing to pay extra. Most of the bluetooth products are top notch and top dollar, so they have a specific market. Adoption was limited at the start.
Re:Does it matter?
by
shaka
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Heh. It sounds as if you're American. Sony Ericsson has been doing major inroads the last year and a half or so, mostly at Nokia's expense. You see, while all of Nokia's phones look like an alien has designed them, Sony Ericsson's actually look nice, and they are almost all very feature packed.
Then again, you wouldn't know if you live in the US, since you lot have been 2-3 years behind in mobile telephony adoption for the last 10 years.
-- :wq!
In typical slashdot fashion...
by
Critical_
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
In typical Slashdot function, we see people sitting here typing away responses about how useless bluetooth is for wireless-whatever due to its short range. Unfortunately for those people, they never realized that bluetooth is a wire-replacement technology. When I have my cell phone on at my desk, I don't want to feel like I am sitting in a hospital ICU bed with a bunch of wires hanging off my body. Instead, my bluetooth headset takes care of that part. Also, at my current location, internet access via Edge is far more useful and cheaper than buying DSL. So it serves two purposes right there that 802.11 is too killer for. Also, sync'ing my PDA is much easier than having to drag a craddle with me everywhere. My point is that SE is only moving their bluetooth operations under another division so bluetooth is not going anywhere and I am glad. 802.11 is too power hunger for the things I need to get done. Lastly, big manufacturers such as Dell are doing away with ALL legacy ports such are IrDA, Parallel, Serial, so we are left with firewire, USB, and bluetooth. Out of those, bluetooth makes the most sense.
Re:Bluetooth is dead
by
lidocaineus
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
The short range may have something to do with it.
If you think that's a liability, you really don't understand the hallmarks of bluetooth and what its purposes are.
You haven't used Bluetooth have you? Or maybe you just had a bad experience. I don't know. What I do know is that Bluetooth is a feature I now regard as indespensible in my phone, pda and, soon, headphones. I won't even consider a phone, pda or laptop without it now.
My phone and PDA (nokia 6310i and Palm Tungsten T3) essentially act as one device thanks almost entirely to bluetooth. I can look up a number in my Palm, tap it and it automatically dials on my phone. But unlike a smartphone, I can leave the PDA behind if I don't need it. If I want to sync my phone or pda with my computer, I don't have to find a cable, I just do it. If I want to check email on my laptop or my pda, I connect automatically through the bluetooth modem in my phone and it's like carrying a (admittidly slow until I get an EDGE phone) wifi hotspot with me everywhere. Driving in my car? Bluetooth headset. I don't even have to pull the phone out of the bag and there are no wires needed.
At the risk of sounding like a fanboy, Bluetooth is seriously cool. It makes it very easy for devices to interact. Will something better come along one day? Sure. But in the mean time, bluetooth does the job and does it very well.
Re:God I hope not
by
ElGuapoGolf
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
The problem is, I think, that you mention Bluetooth to most people, and those who have heard of it think it's Just Another Wireless Thingy. They think about 802.11b or whatever and don't see the need for bluetooth.
Then when they're with you in your car, and you get an incoming call and your stereo automagically cuts off and a message pops up on the radio display with all your caller ID info, they're confused and a little shocked. Then when you hit a button and your talking via a mic in the car, and hearing the caller come in over the speakers, they're amazed.
The PDA to cellphone via bluetooth to browse the internet, IMO, is even better than a hotspot, but to the non-techie, the car thing is like seeing into the future.
Re:Bluetooth going away?
by
dave420
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
That's pretty funny. Do you actually know about bluetooth? It's a very small, very cheap, very low-power radio technology for low-bandwidth data. It's not meant to be a 100ft-range-gigabit-ethernet-multimedia-streaming technology, but a useful replacement for low-bandwidth cabling. Headsets, keyboards, mice, microphones, etc. It does something other wireless chipsets don't, and nothing out there at the moment (or the forseeable future) can replace it.
Here's a nice scene: You're on your PDA, and not in a wireless hotspot. You want to check your mails, so you connect to your ISP using your phone which is in your pocket. You don't have to reach for anything - the two communicate, and you instantly have GPRS to your PDA. Or, another cool scene: At work, listening to music, and you want to check your voicemails quickly. Dial the answerphone on your phone (or from your computer), and listen to the messages over your headphones, nicely mixed with some quiet music from itunes or whatever, via bluetooth. Even better: send and receive text messages from your desktop/pda/notebook using a real keyboard. The list goes on.
People always pipe up and say something like "waah waah bluetooth waah crap waah WUSB is miles better waah waah", when they've blatantly misunderstood the purpose of the technology, and haven't realised just how useful it is.
Are you American?:)
Re:Few will miss it...
by
Maxon
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Oops, hit submit too early... To finish my thoughts..
Zigbee (802.15.4) was designed for long battery life time and simple design. It achieves this long battery life goal with keep the receivers off most of the time. Depending upon configuration and the accuracy of you're timers, you're receiver might only be on a few milliseconds every couple of minutes. Not good for low latency or high bandwidth, but works wonders for making batteries last a year or more.
Bluetooth is about speed and QoS. Eats much more power than Zigbee, and only supports 7 devices in a Piconet. Zigbee is designed to support thousands of devices in a network.
Bluetooth and Zigbee are complementary technologies, not competitive. Even the IEEE says so (Bluetooth is on top of 802.15.1).
(An early 802.15.4 adopter)
Little old ladies
by
Bender+Unit+22
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
So are people here a bunch of little old ladies? All those people writing about it being dead. Are there no technology/gadet geeks here. I have many uses for Bluetooth. I got a Notebook with bluetooth so I don't need any wires to update my calender. Updating phone numbers to friends, co-workers, business relations are a lot easier with Bluetooth. I use Bluetooth to transfer MP3 files to the phone which also serves as a MP3 player when I am not taking the car to work. I also got a Bluetooth car kit installed, hopefully I don't need to get a entire new set installed when I change phone in the future, just the holder/charger. You can even get cars with Bluetooh phone kits that fits with the car. On rare occations I have used Bluetooth and GPRS to connect to servers using SSH from my notebook, although the latency are REALLY bad, but if you are in the middle of nowhere it's better than having to drive home. Some of my co-workers likes to use those Bluetooth head sets.
I see bluetooth phones all over the place, from my desk at work, I see about 15 different bluetooth devices, phones, PCs, PDAs and printers. When I take the subway home from work I can always see 2-3 other Bluetooth phones.
I admit that a lot of phones had a lousy implentation with few features, which has not helped the adoption.
Ok, maybe it is just in my "world" that Bluetooth is used, or maybe it is just non-existent in America?
Re:Bluetooth not "adopting"
by
mccalli
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Are the data transmissions are encrypted in any way?
Yes, they are. Not certain of the standard though, so I don't know how difficult it is to brute force.
How do you select which device you are exchanging data with?
Interface depends on device, but normally you browse for them - a list is presented, and each device is named. Of course, you have to rely on the user having set the name to something more useful than "Nokia 3650" so you can identify which Nokia 3650...
Can you limit which devices can and cannot communicate with each other to prevent the nosy neighbors from listening in?
Yes, you can specify that devices need to a passkey to pair with each other. The neighbours don't get the key.
Can you limit which devices can and cannot communicate with each other to prevent the nosy neighbors from listening in?
Yes - you put your device in non-discoverable mode (similar to not broadcasting the SSID of a wireless network)
How do you enter a secret access password into a headset?
Or, indeed, a mouse as I had to set up for this machine. The answer is that the passkey is fixed on such devices, but they're also tied in with a hardware id (analogous to a MAC address). Thus another, similar headset with the same passkey still wouldn't successfully pair with your device - different hardware id
Slashdot Mirror
"Although Ericsson will continue its involvement in the Bluetooth Special Interest Group as a promoter of the technology, Akesson said, 'We will no longer develop new hardware or new IPs based on the Bluetooth specification.' Ericsson also won't pursue new chip customers for Bluetooth technology licensing."
Could someone explain to me how telling the world you're no longer interested in developing the technology or finding people to license it to is a method of "promoting" Bluetooth?
Right is wrong when left is right.
From the News.com.com article:
Glass Half Full Interpretation: Maybe this means that Bluetooth has become so simple to implement that they don't need a dedicated development team anymore. It seems that Bluetooth is cropping up in all sorts of CE devices. BT chips and control sets are becoming more and more standardized. For Ericsson, the hard work of developing tie-ins to their phone OS is already done. This could be a good sign, rather than a bad one, for Bluetooth in general.
I'm a little fuzzy on the relationship between Ericsson and SonyEricsson. Not sure if the former will impact the phones of the latter.
The facts have a liberal bias. --The Daily Show
I always like the idea of Bluetooth, though I'm afraid I saw this coming. I don't know why it was never adopted on a wider scale, but I certainly hope that other short distance wireless technologies (like WUSB) do take off. It would be nice to have a desktop with no wires except for power.
No effect at all. JVC invented the VHS standard, it's small market share was not signifigant in it's adoption. Phillips invented the redbook audio CD, it's influence is miniscule today, or even 15 years ago.
Further advancements in Bluetooth technology will be made by the Special Interest Group, which consists of a number of companies with ties to the technology. Ericsson will remain a part of that group.
So it seems that Ericsson is perhaps just diverting their bluetooth division to one of it's subsidiaries/subdivisions. After all, SonyEricsson is one of the main Bluetooth supporters. This may just be overpanic...
It could be as simple as "the standard has been set, the goals have been accomplished, move on to new things." Since Ericsson is no longer the sole creative force behind Bluetooth, it makes financial sense to not keep 125 people employed to argue one seat on the Bluetooth Special Interest Group.
It's too bad for Bluetooth in that I think Ericsson had some brilliant visionaries doing this work, and that those people are no longer focused on Bluetooth. However, they're being incorporated into other units which can only help them overall.
It's not good news, it's not bad news. It's just news. The timing is interesting as I see Bluetooth now on the cusp of adoption by every cell phone maker for their mid- and possibly even low-end phones.
( And Michael, wi-fi is not necessarily a good replacement for Bluetooth. The higher power requirements for wi-fi mean shorter battery life, which is death for cell phones. And Bluetooth incorporates discovery protocols which are all geared toward personal networking, not internet networking. I think wi-fi would be a really chatty way to accomplish those goals, again at the expense of battery life. )
John
http://www.wired.com/news/wireless/0,1382,62687,00 .html
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
I doubt this will affect bluetooth's ability to enter the mainstream. In fact, I never quite understood the need for bluetooth in your cellphone (aside from cellphone PDA type devices). Wireless headphones are nice, but is this really what I want to use bluetooth for?
Rather, I think that the PC perhipheral market is what will ultimately drive bluetooth. Think about it. Truely wireless keyboards, mice, modems, printers, etc. are so beneficial for end users. Bluetooth's future is in "untangling the PC" not the convienence of wireless cell phone headsets and small PC to cellphone data transfers.
Well, admittedly typing this reply on a bluetooth keyboard might not count as useful, so I'll have to go for an hour ago when I used it transfer photos. Before that I'd have to stretch a whole two hours ago when I used the built-in bluetooth on this Powerbook to communicate with a bluetooth mobile in order to send an SMS. And before that, it would be about five hours ago when I synchronised my address books. Without taking the phone out of my pocket.
Enough yet? Or shall I cast my memory as far back as this morning to dig out some more usage?
Cheers,
Ian
Please reread the article
Eericsson shifted the bleutooth work to a difrferent division folks..no stopping bluetooth at ericsson but a shifting of resources..
Micahel why did you avoid reading the 2nd paragraph?
Don't Tread on OpenSource
What adoption? When was the last time you used a Bluetooth-enabled device to do anything useful?
Last time? I'd guess about 5 minutes ago.
1. I use a bluetooth connection to my laptop to edit my cell phone contact list with a real keyboard.
2. I use a bluetooth headset to talk on my cell phone without a wire catching on everything.
3. I have a bluetooth GPS unit that I use map routing with my pocketpc.
4. I have a bluetooth router on my home network to provide LAN access to my pocketpc (WiFi drains the battery in about 1.5 hours, bluetooth in 5.5).
Too many people make the mistake of thinking that since THEY don't use a technology, nobody does. Bluetooth is not only gaining wide acceptance, but it's very useful as well. Short range, low power consumption is a killer combination for many many uses.
The CDMA providers/phone manufactures are just getting a clue about Bluetooth. In the US, Verizon should be selling a Bluetooth Motorola phone. Sprint has sold a Bluetooth Sony Ericsson phone (with lots of BT bugs), and Nokia has announced a CDMA flip-phone with bluetooth...
Doh!
Why would it? What other technology can do what bluetooth can do? It doesn't really have a direct competitor. The market is just not as large as some people expected. It does not "replace wires." It removes (some) wires for people who are willing to pay extra. Most of the bluetooth products are top notch and top dollar, so they have a specific market. Adoption was limited at the start.
Open Source Sushi
Heh. It sounds as if you're American. Sony Ericsson has been doing major inroads the last year and a half or so, mostly at Nokia's expense. You see, while all of Nokia's phones look like an alien has designed them, Sony Ericsson's actually look nice, and they are almost all very feature packed.
Then again, you wouldn't know if you live in the US, since you lot have been 2-3 years behind in mobile telephony adoption for the last 10 years.
:wq!
In typical Slashdot function, we see people sitting here typing away responses about how useless bluetooth is for wireless-whatever due to its short range. Unfortunately for those people, they never realized that bluetooth is a wire-replacement technology. When I have my cell phone on at my desk, I don't want to feel like I am sitting in a hospital ICU bed with a bunch of wires hanging off my body. Instead, my bluetooth headset takes care of that part. Also, at my current location, internet access via Edge is far more useful and cheaper than buying DSL. So it serves two purposes right there that 802.11 is too killer for. Also, sync'ing my PDA is much easier than having to drag a craddle with me everywhere. My point is that SE is only moving their bluetooth operations under another division so bluetooth is not going anywhere and I am glad. 802.11 is too power hunger for the things I need to get done. Lastly, big manufacturers such as Dell are doing away with ALL legacy ports such are IrDA, Parallel, Serial, so we are left with firewire, USB, and bluetooth. Out of those, bluetooth makes the most sense.
The short range may have something to do with it.
If you think that's a liability, you really don't understand the hallmarks of bluetooth and what its purposes are.
Perhaps if we're lucky, Bluetooth will go away.
You haven't used Bluetooth have you? Or maybe you just had a bad experience. I don't know. What I do know is that Bluetooth is a feature I now regard as indespensible in my phone, pda and, soon, headphones. I won't even consider a phone, pda or laptop without it now.
My phone and PDA (nokia 6310i and Palm Tungsten T3) essentially act as one device thanks almost entirely to bluetooth. I can look up a number in my Palm, tap it and it automatically dials on my phone. But unlike a smartphone, I can leave the PDA behind if I don't need it. If I want to sync my phone or pda with my computer, I don't have to find a cable, I just do it. If I want to check email on my laptop or my pda, I connect automatically through the bluetooth modem in my phone and it's like carrying a (admittidly slow until I get an EDGE phone) wifi hotspot with me everywhere. Driving in my car? Bluetooth headset. I don't even have to pull the phone out of the bag and there are no wires needed.
At the risk of sounding like a fanboy, Bluetooth is seriously cool. It makes it very easy for devices to interact. Will something better come along one day? Sure. But in the mean time, bluetooth does the job and does it very well.
Here's a nice scene: You're on your PDA, and not in a wireless hotspot. You want to check your mails, so you connect to your ISP using your phone which is in your pocket. You don't have to reach for anything - the two communicate, and you instantly have GPRS to your PDA. Or, another cool scene: At work, listening to music, and you want to check your voicemails quickly. Dial the answerphone on your phone (or from your computer), and listen to the messages over your headphones, nicely mixed with some quiet music from itunes or whatever, via bluetooth. Even better: send and receive text messages from your desktop/pda/notebook using a real keyboard. The list goes on.
People always pipe up and say something like "waah waah bluetooth waah crap waah WUSB is miles better waah waah", when they've blatantly misunderstood the purpose of the technology, and haven't realised just how useful it is.
Are you American? :)
Oops, hit submit too early... To finish my thoughts..
Zigbee (802.15.4) was designed for long battery life time and simple design. It achieves this long battery life goal with keep the receivers off most of the time. Depending upon configuration and the accuracy of you're timers, you're receiver might only be on a few milliseconds every couple of minutes. Not good for low latency or high bandwidth, but works wonders for making batteries last a year or more.
Bluetooth is about speed and QoS. Eats much more power than Zigbee, and only supports 7 devices in a Piconet. Zigbee is designed to support thousands of devices in a network.
Bluetooth and Zigbee are complementary technologies, not competitive. Even the IEEE says so (Bluetooth is on top of 802.15.1).
(An early 802.15.4 adopter)
So are people here a bunch of little old ladies?
All those people writing about it being dead. Are there no technology/gadet geeks here. I have many uses for Bluetooth.
I got a Notebook with bluetooth so I don't need any wires to update my calender. Updating phone numbers to friends, co-workers, business relations are a lot easier with Bluetooth.
I use Bluetooth to transfer MP3 files to the phone which also serves as a MP3 player when I am not taking the car to work.
I also got a Bluetooth car kit installed, hopefully I don't need to get a entire new set installed when I change phone in the future, just the holder/charger. You can even get cars with Bluetooh phone kits that fits with the car.
On rare occations I have used Bluetooth and GPRS to connect to servers using SSH from my notebook, although the latency are REALLY bad, but if you are in the middle of nowhere it's better than having to drive home.
Some of my co-workers likes to use those Bluetooth head sets.
I see bluetooth phones all over the place, from my desk at work, I see about 15 different bluetooth devices, phones, PCs, PDAs and printers. When I take the subway home from work I can always see 2-3 other Bluetooth phones.
I admit that a lot of phones had a lousy implentation with few features, which has not helped the adoption.
Ok, maybe it is just in my "world" that Bluetooth is used, or maybe it is just non-existent in America?
Yes, they are. Not certain of the standard though, so I don't know how difficult it is to brute force.
Interface depends on device, but normally you browse for them - a list is presented, and each device is named. Of course, you have to rely on the user having set the name to something more useful than "Nokia 3650" so you can identify which Nokia 3650...
Yes, you can specify that devices need to a passkey to pair with each other. The neighbours don't get the key.
Yes - you put your device in non-discoverable mode (similar to not broadcasting the SSID of a wireless network)
Or, indeed, a mouse as I had to set up for this machine. The answer is that the passkey is fixed on such devices, but they're also tied in with a hardware id (analogous to a MAC address). Thus another, similar headset with the same passkey still wouldn't successfully pair with your device - different hardware id
Hope this helps.
Cheers,
Ian