iPhone Opens Up Bluetooth For Data

WildNahviss writes "Apple has loosened its tight grip on the iPhone and allowed a third party to develop a health device that exchanges data with the iPhone and their hardware. Is this the start of a trend for Apple that will relax constraints on non-audio Bluetooth use, or is this an exception? Does anyone know of any other devices for the iPhone that allows non-audio Bluetooth transmission of data?" Reader climenole points out an article about another health-sensor system, dubbed a "body area network," that is built to work with Android devices, but not via Bluetooth.

Comments

This is the reason

[odies]

There is one really simple reason why Apple is now opening up their iPhone. They wont however do it fully, just a little bit. And the reason? Windows Mobile 7. From the announcement it looks like a real competitor for iPhone. You also aren't only capable of getting one kind of phone, you can get the one that suits you best.

WM7 will also have the app store and by the looks of the announemenet, intuitive UI and great user interface. It basically has everything that is good in iPhone, but gives you more freedom in choosing the type of phone you want.

If Apple doesn't start opening up things and let the kinds of Adobe and Flash on iPhone, people will move away to a superior platform. And by the looks of it, that is going to be WM7.

Re:This is the reason

[h4rr4r]

How much did you make for that comment?

WM7 will be stillborn, android already has any market share it would have had and RIM will keep the business market.

Re:This is the reason

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL, great post.

Also word up, the people have moved on to a better platform... Android.

QQ fucker!

Re:This is the reason

[thestudio_bob]

Windows Mobile 7.

This message brought to you by MS-Odies.

Re:This is the reason

[odies]

None of those are what Windows Mobile 7 is trying to compete with. They're going after somewhere between iPhone and Android, which is a sweet spot. I agree however, I don't Android is going to take off anymore. Not the same way as iPhone and WM7 anyway.

Even while Microsoft is now targeting more mainstream users it doesn't mean its not a good platform for business users. Integration with Office and other tools is great and WM7 doesn't have the childly feel that i associated with iPhone.

For gamers there is Xbox Live integration and the fact that developers can really easily port games between Windows, Xbox360 and WM7 is making it even greater. I think I should actually start developing some game for those platform, it's a sweet deal. And everybody knows that Visual Studio is the top class development environment, and Microsoft is even providing things like XNA that make the development a lot easier and faster.

This means it's going to be the game changer and has a really good possibility of getting a significant market share in the mobile market.

Re:This is the reason

[rueger]

It basically has everything that is good

Well, except cut and paste....

Re:This is the reason

[WrongSizeGlass]

It basically has everything that is good

Well, except cut and paste....

[types in 'cut and paste' into Windows Phone 7 help screen]
Hi! I'm Clippy! It looks like you would like to 'cut & paste', is that correct?
[taps 'Yes']
I'm sorry, Windows Phone 7, by Microsoft, doesn't support 'cut & paste' yet, would you like to 'cut & paste'?
[taps 'Yes' again]
[hourglass]
Hi! I'm Bob! Where would you like to go today?
[types in 'to get another phone']
[hourglass]
Hi! I'm Clippy! It looks like you would like to buy another Windows Phone 7, by Microsoft, is that correct?
[taps 'No']
[hourglass]
Hi! I'm Bob! Would you like to buy a Kin, by Microsoft?

Re:This is the reason

[0100010001010011]

First WM7 gets Angry Birds, and it's all over.

Re:This is the reason

[Gruturo]

You know, initially, going through your comment, I was like "wtf, why is this modded funny, idiot /. mods", but I kept reading and suddenly it was all clear

Re:This is the reason

[sonamchauhan]

Probably as much as you did

Re:This is the reason

[node 3]

None of those are what Windows Mobile 7 is trying to compete with.

Clearly, WM7 is going after the market hole left behind by Kin.

Re:This is the reason

[Lanteran]

Replace every WM7 in that comment with android, and you get a comment based a tiny bit more in reality.

Re:This is the reason

[Anonymous Coward]

Please, for the love of god, put the crack pipe down. It's doing permanent damage.

Re:This is the reason

[wall0159]

You forgot the punchline:

>> WM7 -- life without walls (TM) :-P

Re:This is the reason

[HumanEmulator]

Apple routinely surveys their developers in the iOS program and Window Phone 7 isn't even a category for "other platforms" you can develop for. It's 15 minutes of questions that basically ask: "When do you plan to start developing for Android? What do you like about them? What can we do to make you happy?" The Android battle isn't even just Apple vs. Google anymore now that Amazon is planning an Android app store.

Even so it could be the competition, but I'd put my money on the recent anti-trust investigation as the reason Apple's slowing opening up.

Re:This is the reason

[Nursie]

I hope they're paying you well.

I don't see windows mobile making a splash myself. Everyone and their grandmother now loves iPhones, and android has taken a lot of the geeks and the 'I don't like apple' types. Outside of the US of A Nokia still rule the roost.

Good luck with that.

Re:This is the reason

[JxcelDolghmQ]

You misspelled "Android."

Re:This is the reason

[beelsebob]

There's no opening up going on here. Apple's allowed this kind of thing for a very long time, there's a public API for doing it, it's called ExternalAccessory.framework.

Re:This is the reason

[iinlane]

I thought the reason is that BodyMedia has an innovative product and a potential killer app at their hands. I would like to believe that even big companies are made of reasonable people (Ballmer is an exception not a rule).

Re:This is the reason

[hey]

Killer... of the user they are monitoring?

Re:This is the reason

[gtall]

Sweet spot? Between iPhone and Android? The iPhone is geared toward consumers and Android toward business, at least if I read the reviews correctly. There's a sweet spot between consumers and business? Why would I want a phone integrated with Office? I'm somehow going to edit PPTs, .docs, and spreadsheets? Maybe you mean with the calendar? That's some integration you have there.

You wish to port games between the Xbox360 and a phone?

"This means it's going to be the game changer and has a really good possibility of getting a significant market share in the mobile market."

Oh, I get it, you are from the marketing dept. at MS.

Re:This is the reason

[sarkeizen]

None of those are what Windows Mobile 7 is trying to compete with They're going after somewhere between iPhone and Android, which is a sweet spot
Doesn't "competition" require two parties? Leaving aside for the moment the ludicrous idea that MS doesn't want the money from current iPhone or Android users but rather on the seeming logical impossibility of the statement. Either MS is entering a market where there is no competition - in which case they are not "competing" with anyone. Or they are trying for the dollars currently going to either the iPhone or the Android - in which case it's more correct to say they are competing with *both*.
Even while Microsoft is now targeting more mainstream users it doesn't mean its not a good platform for business users. Integration with Office and other tools is great and WM7 doesn't have the childly feel that i associated with iPhone
I can't say anything about Mobile 7 but historically MS's integration with office has actually sucked pretty badly. Both in email synchronization which was so bad in the last generation of devices. Not only did we in IT drop them and move to iPhones but urged many of our existing Blackberry users to do the same. .Viewing MS documents has been only passable at best and illustrated by the number of better document readers/editors which exist on the WM platform itself.
The only good thing I have to say about the WM platform (or WinCE as it was called) over the past fifteen years was that there was a fair amount of developer tools available for free (even MS's eVC and eVB). However these days that's hardly a selling point.
XNA might be a selling point in the sense that it might be easier to port games over. Although XNA works well in moving a game using a gamepad from a windows PC to a XBOX360 - it's not clear that the same transition is reasonable between an XBOX and a phone. However as far as I can see the game market for the iPhone and other devices is rather different (puzzle games, novelty games that leverage some part of the UI ie. motion) that it probably doesn't matter.

Re:This is the reason

[Macka]

They're going after somewhere between iPhone and Android, which is a sweet spot

What sweet spot? The iPhone and Android overlap, there's nothing in between. If there were and there was nothing in that space already, it would be dead zone.

Re:This is the reason

[Amorya]

Vote parent up, 'tis true.

Sadly it requires specific hardware (an authentication chip) inside the device, but I'd wager that's how this example was made.

Re:This is the reason

[Macka]

From the announcement it looks like a real competitor for iPhone

No multi-tasking, no cut and paste. And how many apps does it run? Applications sell smart phones, not operating systems.

Re:This is the reason

[Americano]

Android is geared towards business?! How come every person with a corporate phone that I've ever met has a Blackberry?

I think Android & iOS are pretty direct competitors in the consumer handset space, and both would love to make inroads in business, but they have to beat RIM at that game.

None of which changes the idiocy of the point that the GP is trying to make; there's no 'sweet spot' between iOS and Android.

Re:This is the reason

[jDeepbeep]

game changer.... market share

BINGO!

Re:This is the reason

[StuartHankins]

Thanks, I started my morning laughing. Well done.

Re:This is the reason

[grub]

They're going after somewhere between iPhone and Android, which is a sweet spot

WM7 will forever be known as "Windows Mobile Taint".

.

Re:This is the reason

[jedidiah]

Agreed. Android seems to be targeted at Carriers and perhaps power users.

Re:This is the reason

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy shit, the WP7 astroturfing machine has been terrible the past few days. Does ANYONE believe these posts are genuine?

Re:This is the reason

[zuperduperman]

s/WM7/Android/g

Seriously - Jobs suddenly realized that his Flash hatred had put him out on a limb and every single other mobile platform was going to support AIR within months. Already the Android market is awash with new games all developed using Flash and AIR. These things are actually cross platform - build once, deploy to WP7 (when AIR arrives, soon), Android, Blackberry ...

Apple was facing losing it's premium position in the App market and seeing apps get developed first for all their competitors and only coming to iOS later. They had to loosen their restrictions and let AIR apps in or see themselves relegated to second place.

Steve Jobs made a stupid decision, a bad gamble which he lost. Now he's trying to make up for lost ground.

Nothing new here.

[Anonymous Coward]

Any Made-For-Ipod certified company can design gadgets that talk via bluetooth back to the iPhone. So nothing new here.

Re:Nothing new here.

[EkriirkE]

e.g. the Nike step thingy that's been there since basically v1 (?)

Re:Nothing new here.

[lk]

Nike is not allowed to use the internal radio thingy (which is not bluetooth), even to connect to it's own nike+ sensor. The app which does that is developed by Apple and ships with the iOS - but it's so buggy, Nike went ahead and shipped another Nike+ app to the AppStore which uses the GPS + accelerometer as a pedometer.

Re:Nothing new here.

[interval1066]

I liked the iPod as a music player but the lack of audio bluetooth was always a source of confusion and a deal breaker for me. I swore off wired headphones when bluetooth came out. Why didn't Apple include built-in audio bt? Then I figured out that consumer convenience took a back seat to the lucrative license fees third parties paid Apple to make add-ons for the platform including plug-in bluetooth modules. I`ve been able to get exactly what I want and give nothing to Apple.

Re:Nothing new here.

[keytoe]

No, you can't. You get the audio profiles only as a third party developer. Not even HID. This is indeed news.

Re:Nothing new here.

[Anonymous Coward]

you get exactly what you want ... at the glory hole!

Re:Nothing new here.

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a company known as Opticon that is in the process of manufacturing a half-dollar sized barcode scanner that will pair with the iPhone over Bluetooth. It's a pretty slick little product.

Isn't it just the APIs released already though?

[BoxedFlame]

They released autodetect APIs for wifi and bluetooth a long time ago. Their selling point was for ad hoc gaming connections, but this sounds like the same thing really...

not so tight grip

[stang]

IIRC, Apple announced that they would be opening the bluetooth stack up for devs as part of the iOS 3.0 release. A couple of minutes of lazy googling didn't find a reference, so again, IIRC.

Re:not so tight grip

[jonwil]

They opened it up. But every bluetooth device you want to talk to has to be built from scratch with a special Apple hardware lock (just like the special hardware lock in dock connector devices)
Wanna write (and put in the App Store) and app to talk to your LEGO Mindstorms NXT brick over Bluetooth from an iPhone? You can't because the NXT doesn't have the "Apple Approved" hardware lock.

Re:not so tight grip

[sznupi]

If only they would enable (essentially...) few of the more straightforward and basic bluetooth profiles - for example net access via BT; no, not what strikes people first when they hear "iPhone tethering" - would be nice to have iOS gaining access via BT and one of so called "feature phones." Which would suddenly make iPod Touch virtually as good as iPhone to quite a few people and for much better price. And why Apple won't do it.

(yes, there's WiFi - but a phone working as such access point will typically drain its batteries much faster, and is not one of the most basic and inexpensive ones anymore)

Re:not so tight grip

[deman1985]

I can attest to this. It has been "open" since iOS 3.0, with the caveat that all iPhone accessory devices have to include the Apple-provided authentication chip.

Re:not so tight grip

[Sockatume]

My understanding was that it was a non-standard protocol over bluetooth. I'm not sure how one is meant to implement a "hardware lock", whatever that is, over radio. It has to be software. Similarly there's nothing but licensing stopping you assembling a compliant dock connector accessory.

Re:not so tight grip

[Sockatume]

You mean, the "authentication chip" from the headphones that turned out to just be the controller for the remote and mic?

Re:not so tight grip

[jonwil]

My understanding is that as part of the "made for ipod" type program, you get the ability to buy (and put into your device" the special Apple hardware chips that will allow the iPhone/iPad/etc to recognise your accessory as valid (if your device doesnt have the chip, the handshake will fail and the phone wont recognise the device).

Apple could easily add the same requirement for Bluetooth devices.

Re:not so tight grip

[Anonymous Coward]

You can write an app to talk to a LEGO Mindstorms NXT brick over Bluetooth from a non-jailbroken iPhone using documented APIs. You can't put it in the store though because Apple would reject it even without a reason. Here's a demo video of just this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_83jqQRl0qE

Re:not so tight grip

[Anonymous Coward]

No, this is just fiction.

Re:not so tight grip

[hitmark]

Makes think of their "special" macbook air optical drive that was basically you bog standard usb optical drive with a custom firmware to pull a Apple handshake. Its because shit like that i forgo anything Apple.

Re:not so tight grip

[hitmark]

And then there is the extra utility of the obex related profiles vs trying to pull a file transfer over wifi. Even with ad-hoc one have to configure tcp/ip and some kind of transfer protocol that both parties can handle (ftp, http, smb, perhaps ssh, are likely candidates). With obex its basically a issue of pairing and send (or even just send, in the case of single files quote often).

That Apple (and some carriers like Verizon) loves to neuter Bluetooth makes a whole lot of people, and tech bloggers, think that all it is good for is the earpiece.

Re:not so tight grip

[sznupi]

Though quite possibly it's more frustrating if you're used to full BT functionality in every handset on the market... (well, "every other" once iPhone arrived)

Re:not so tight grip

[Anonymous Coward]

No. The iOS ExternalAccessory.framework will only allow connecting to hardware which authenticates itself as Apple-approved. Additionally, Apple will refuse to publish your app unless you manufactured the hardware in question (or, recently, if you have permission from the manufacturer to publish an app using their hardware).

Again, iOS is bureaucracy in computer form.

Bluetooth Keyboards

[ClaraBow]

can now be used with iphone, which qualifies as non-audio uses!

Re:Bluetooth Keyboards

[countSudoku()]

Whoopee-T-freaking-DO! Apple is fast becoming a Mee-Too company. How about an SD card slot, or a wired Ethernet mini-jack, or an open app store, or an on-screen keyboard that does not suck? I guess not today. The iPhone is a unique, limited, and interesting product that many non-technical people are in love with. Dopes. It's just a wide-screen iPod with a shitty phone and camera shoved in. I'll keep my dumb phone, thanks.

Re:Bluetooth Keyboards

[NatasRevol]

Don't want: SD card slot, mini-ethernet (for a mobile phone?), unmoderated app store.

Confused: on-screen keyboard that doesn't suck? The android one is basically the same as the iPhone one. What are you trying to say?

Many other uses

[SuperKendall]

As was pointed out elsewhere, the iPhone can currently use a bluetooth connection for gaming.

However, there are other device uses too - the TomTom iPhone car dock uses bluetooth to send improved GPS data (the dock has a stronger GPS receiver) to the iPhone. In theory at one point they were saying other applications could make use of it, but I'm not sure if anything came of that...

The issue with bluetooth has more been the iPhone does not support some of the more popular bluetooth data profiles like file sharing - but ever since the SDK supported Bluetooth device makers have been able to do whatever custom protocols they liked.

Re:Many other uses

[Anonymous Coward]

Apps can use external hardware, so long as...

1. The external hardware uses the proprietary Apple lock-out chip (Enforced by the ExternalAccessory.framework on non-dev firmware)
2. You manufactured it OR you got approved by the HW manufacturer (Enforced by App Store review process)

Win Phone 7 - Everyone Can Laugh At It Together

[Anonymous Coward]

With most of the cellphone world angrily fighting over the actually relevant cellphone OSes(in sales order):

1. Android
2. RIM
3. iPhone

Microsoft and their crappy WP7 have found their place in the cellphone world - something for everyone to laugh at together.

Re:Win Phone 7 - Everyone Can Laugh At It Together

[Anonymous Coward]

THis is complete lie.

This list is for 1st Quater sales in the USA only.

World wide market share is RIM, iPhone, Windows Mobile, Andriod

As for sales world wide iPhone is still beating Andriod and the ony reason Android beat iPhone in the 1st quater was because people where waiting for the iPhone 4 to come out

Re:Win Phone 7 - Everyone Can Laugh At It Together

[NatasRevol]

Don't forget the iOS on the iPad & iTouch. That might make a little difference. You know, 20+million or so devices.

Re:Win Phone 7 - Everyone Can Laugh At It Together

[Nursie]

Eh, not so much - you might want to take a look at the pie chart here

Nokia still capture 40% of the market with Symbian.

You point still stands though I suppose. But the order is -

1. Symbian
2. RIM
3. Android
4. iOS

Re:Win Phone 7 - Everyone Can Laugh At It Together

[Nursie]

Umm no. Check your figures before calling people out like that. The worldwide smartphone market is led by Nokia, then RIM, then Android, then Apple, with windows mobile pulling in only 5% of sales.

And given Nokia has apparently been actually losing market share in recent years, any assertion of information on the state of either sales or install base that misses them out is just plain false.

Re:Win Phone 7 - Everyone Can Laugh At It Together

[froggymana]

Actually, I'm fairly certain that Nokia (Symbian) would be in first place there for world wide usage.Smartphones They even have a pie chart....

Re:Win Phone 7 - Everyone Can Laugh At It Together

[jeffasselin]

And just to provide real numbers to the discussion:

http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1372013

Symbian, RIM, iPhone, Android, Windows in order of platform.

The Marketing Version Of Turrets

[RingBus]

It's like you have some bizarre version of Turrets Syndrome where instead of screaming obscenities you blurt out an endless stream of Microsoft marketing talking points.

Re:The Marketing Version Of Turrets

[rsborg]

It's like you have some bizarre version of Turrets Syndrome where instead of screaming obscenities you blurt out an endless stream of Microsoft marketing talking points.

Astroturfer Syndrome?

Re:The Marketing Version Of Turrets

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple has the reality distortion field, but what this guy has is just— sad.

Re:The Marketing Version Of Turrets

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're going to insult someone you could at least spell it properly, it's "Tourette's."

Re:The Marketing Version Of Turrets

[Anonymous Coward]

Why?

Re:The Marketing Version Of Turrets

[socsoc]

You're referring to Coprolalia, not Tourette's.

Re:The Marketing Version Of Turrets

[Anonymous Coward]

cause cocaine says so
--the comicjk cocaine troll

Re:The Marketing Version Of Turrets

[phantomfive]

lol most hilarious comment I've read all week. +5 hilarious

Re:The Marketing Version Of Turrets

[bemymonkey]

Turrets? WTF is turrets?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourette_syndrome

Re:The Marketing Version Of Turrets

[Gilmoure]

Gotta' watch out for them when you're on the trench run.

Re:The Marketing Version Of Turrets

[cgenman]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fz2_NkyTv8E

Paranoia and clichés

[theolein]

You know, not everyone who posts something that isn't mindlessly, absolutely pro-Apple/Steve Jobs/iPhone/iPad etc works for Microsoft.

Some of them work for Google.

Re:Paranoia and clichés

[tqk]

You know, not everyone who posts something that isn't mindlessly, absolutely pro-Apple/Steve Jobs/iPhone/iPad etc works for Microsoft.

Some of them work for Google.

Some of them aren't terribly fond of any of the above. Yeah, busted.

Which of these does Android lack?

[SanityInAnarchy]

If I understand you, I could wait for a WM7 phone which has everything you mention, or I could just get it now in an Android phone.

So why should I wait, and why should I trust Microsoft over Google? And, for that matter, why would Apple be afraid of Microsoft's vaporware, when they can be afraid of Google's reality?

Re:Which of these does Android lack?

[rahvin112]

You should wait so you can be denied the ability to cut/paste.

Android is the future, WP7 will be just as still born as Kin was. Well let me correct that, I doubt it will be as bad as kin, at best though it will sell as good as the palm pre with a modest early adopter then a steep falloff in demand. It's going to be either the 4th or 5th OS behind (not in any particular order) Android, iOS, Blackberry and maybe even Palm.

It was a nice try though I will admit that, it would have been a game changer 3 years ago. This is what happens when you let a product stagnate (windows mobile) because you are focused on everything else (xbox, antivirus, crm, etc). Windows Mobile was the number one smartphone OS several years ago. Then Crackberry came along and displaced them to second, then Apple and Android beat them to death. The best part of this is that WP7 won't run all the millions of Windows Mobile software out there because they wanted to create the app store model and take a cut of everyone else's software sales. They threw away the one major advantage they had (a massive existing software base) in some stupid plan to mimic Apple. If I was the COO of the mobile division I would be polishing my resume.

Re:Which of these does Android lack?

[CastrTroy]

You forgot Windows Mobile 6/6.5. Windows phone 7, like Windows 7/Vista, is facing huge competition from the fact that there are already millions of handsets out there with an operating system that many users are perfectly happy with. People don't necessarily have a need for the newest gadget. Just as many people are fine with Windows XP, because it runs on older, cheaper computers, there will be many of us who aren't running out to buy phones with 1 GHz processors in them, because we couldn't be bothered to spend hundreds of dollars on a phone, or get locked it into contracts where you have to sign away your first born. It will take years for Windows phone 7 to grab the market share that Windows Mobile has. Looking at the smartphone article from wikipedia shows that most sales are still going to symbian phones, which nobody even talks about. At least not in North America. Apple, which everybody probably thinks is the biggest, is still actually behind RIM in new sales. Even looking at total handsets shows that Windows mobile isn't doing that badly (although obviously dropping), especially considering it gets no publicity.

Re:Which of these does Android lack?

[NatasRevol]

Because they have five phones from HTC which are basically the same?

http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/11/windows-phone-7-handsets-the-tale-of-the-tape/

Oh, that's probably not a good reason to wait.

Re:Which of these does Android lack?

[cheekyboy]

Who buys Rim, corps, or people who have not heard of iphones.
Who buys nokia? Kids, buy those $29 to $79 phones, either being 2G (like c2), or some other old crap. But also millions of 3rd world customers who for them $29 could be one weeks spare cash.

Who buys WinMob? those who got tricked into buying somethey thought looked like a Blackberry, or fancy nokia copy.

Who would buy a beta phone as version 1.0.0.0.0 with who knows how many upgrades, or will they say, sorry cant upgrade to 1.1 as
you have some wierd hardware missing.

There is zero compelling reason to get this, it doesnt act as a remote for Xbox, or receive streamed neflix from xbox, or play mini xbox games.

Uhh, guys?

[nathana]

This is a non-story, at least how it is written.

As part of iPhoneOS (now iOS) 3.0, in June *2009*, Apple announced that hardware manufacturers would be able to have their hardware directly interface with their iPhoneOS applications, either through the dock connector OR through bluetooth. They have an official set of APIs built into the OS specifically to facilitate this.

I think it was cool that they did this over a YEAR AGO, but hey, that story doesn't make for as sexy a headline as "OMG Apple suddenly loosening their Death Grip on their iPhone hardware?!?!?!"

-- Nathan

P.S. -- No Apple apologist here; in fact, I'm generally very critical of the locked-down nature of the iDevices. But come on...let's strive for accuracy here.

Re:Uhh, guys?

[MBCook]

I remember them opening the dock connector, I didn't know it applied to bluetooth also.

Does anyone know of any other special purpose bluetooth devices that connect to the iPhone (i.e. not keyboards, headsets, etc)? Perhaps this is the first one to make it to market?

Some of the disability related stuff the iPhone can do (such as bluetooth connection to a wireless pocket braille display) seems more interesting though. I wonder how well it's known just how accessible the iPhone is. I was quite impressed when I first read an article about it.

Re:Uhh, guys?

[Anonymous Coward]

well, the AR Drone can connect, but that's through wifi.

Re:Uhh, guys?

[Wingman 5]

Nike+ works with the iPhone, but it works with all iPods really (But there are special things the app from nike can do on the touch and iPhone that it can't do on the other models)

Re:Uhh, guys?

[Anonymous Coward]

The only one I'm aware of is the TomTom car kit which acts as a gps receiver, charger, and a hands free kit at the same time. It has to be connected both via the dock connector and via Bluetooth at the same time to function, but it's not entirely clear which features are using which connection. Possibly it only uses Bluetooth for the hands free function via the standard Bluetooth profile.

Re:Uhh, guys?

[daBass]

I am working with a hardware company on this. The main issue we are having is that the whole program is tailored to high-volume manufacturers; little guys like us are below the Apple radar.

To apply for the program, you need to supply a lot of information, including company turn-over and a whole lot more that should be none of their business.

Then to make it work, you must integrate a chip supplied by Apple that does the authentication. That's great if you are starting from scratch and intend to send millions of products. It's a pain if you already have a working design with thousands of devices out in the field with bluetooth, but not Apple's chip.

That's what's stopped us from signing up and doing it. Luckily, in our business, people would be buying mostly tablet devices that are exclusively used for the purpose. Android here we come, which is a shame as iOS is a much nicer platform to create something that works well and looks good in very little time.

Re:Uhh, guys?

[Kolila]

Correct - it has been possible to develop non-audio, non-HID Bluetooth products for the iPhone for over a year. However, until very recent releases of iOS (around 4.1 onwards), the iOS Bluetooth stack was too buggy to really be that usable for most such devices. The main thing holding back the development of these products now is, as others have pointed out, the difficulty of buying Apple's authentication chip. In order to get hold of these, you first need to prove to Apple that you are a serious volume producer. However, other devices are beginning to appear, such as this universal remote control: http://www.gear4.com/product/_/29/unityremote/

Re:Uhh, guys?

[Anonymous Coward]

...meanwhile, I still cannot send a file to a bog-standard bluetooth device. In other words; the iPhone is useless for BT devices I already own.

iPhone 3GS, latest firmware - the last Apple device I will ever acquire.

Re:Uhh, guys?

[hitmark]

So its not just a case of opening up for serial data over bluetooth, one need a special "handshake" chip at the other end?

And people wonder why i have no love for Apple...

Re:Uhh, guys?

[StuartHankins]

Well, people wanted a "trusted platform", and here's one of the issues with doing that. It appears Apple wants to authenticate devices that pair with iOS. No different from your Palladium or trusted computing, the schemes in place for your XBox (which is nothing more than a low-end PC with a TPC device) etc. But because it's Apple people are whining about it.

Re:Uhh, guys?

[hitmark]

Heh, i never liked the "trusted" (by who exactly?) computing thing so don't bunch me with whoever your talking about.

anonymous coward

[Anonymous Coward]

Roving Networks offers an ad-hoc serial to bluetooth device that is iPhone ready.

http://www.rovingnetworks.com/apple.php

Re:anonymous coward

[BobboBrown]

That Roving Networks product only gives you firmware to cover the Apple devices' "unique discovery and pairing sequence" - you still need to join the Made For iPod program to be allowed to buy authentication co-processors.

Personally I think that if you're smart enough to make a device that does something useful and communicates over Bluetooth, then you're smart enough to handle the Apple authentication sequence. I've done it, which proves that you don't need to be very smart at all!

I guess that this product might be for people who don't want to communicate over Bluetooth, but if they join the MFi program, then they can use serial or USB as they see fit.

So I vote a fail for Roving Networks - I just don't see who that product could be useful for.

Of course it will open up further

[Anonymous Coward]

With every little step Apple takes towards opening up its devices or, well, doing anything, there is guaranteed media coverage.
Of course they will keep doing it.

Every time the iphone gets "new features" ...

[drolli]

...I get more and more happy i decided (even forgetting about them being late with 3g support) against buying one, as nice as it is (me = happy user of a E71/E63; the E71 could do a lot of things in 2006 which the iphone seems to learn slowly because Apple teamed up with the providers to fuck the users as hard as possible - sorry transferring contacts, appointments, data by BT and connectign to any BT device i bought or ever tested *is* a mandatory feature; not to mention that the E71 could communicate with my palm from 2003 by infrared.....).

Nike + iPod Sport Kit

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone know of any other devices for the iPhone that allows non-audio Bluetooth transmission of data?

This, I believe, was the first device to do so. After that, Apple opened up Bluetooth to Enterprise customers so that enterprise devices could communicate with enterprise software via bluetooth. You won't see any of this stuff on the app store though.

Re:Nike + iPod Sport Kit

[Anonymous Freak]

Nike+ uses the same (unlicensed) frequency, but it is not Bluetooth. The Nike+ iPod adapter is not a Bluetooth adapter.

Apple's way vs Android way

[mikespice]

TFA says: "Its health sensors will be one of the first devices, other than ear buds, that link to smartphones with Bluetooth short-range communications."

I find this fascinating given that I've had an app in the Android Market, called Heart Rate Monitor, that has been around for almost a year and does just that. It talks via bluetooth data to a bluetooth heart rate chest strap. My app is just one of many that can talk to these bluetooth devices, called Zephyr HxM.

I wonder if Apple will allow generic access or if this was a partnership. I only develop for Android but an iPhone developer friend says that bluetooth access for apps is still not available.

Astroturfus Redmondia

[symbolset]

A fine specimen too - noun/verb agreement, excellent sentence structure, near perfect reproduction of the mimicked speech. I hope you all didn't frighten him away. We don't see them much in these parts any more. They weren't able to reproduce during the Vista campaign, and the remainder were hunted to near extinction during the short life of the Kin.

Data over Bluetooth

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait, third parties couldn't do this before on the iPhone? What a joke! I'm glad I'm a Symbian Developer where I don't have to face this sort of idiotic draconian policy, worst I've got to deal with is Certs.

what blue tooth you have

[net28573]

All the better to eat you with my dear.

Reminds me of

[AHuxley]

http://www.redpark.com/news.html
"connect an iPhone or iPod Touch to serial devices such as medical or scientific instrumentation, point of sale devices, industrial process control equipment, networking devices, and building automation equipment. The cable enables the attached device to communicate with an application running on the iPhone."

Slaves!

[tqk]

Ho. Ly. Crap.

You Apple buyers actually think this is reasonable behaviour on the part of a vendor, and you accept this sort of abuse, willingly?

Care to explain why? Apple == ritual self-abuse, it seems. Are you people crazy?

Re:Slaves!

[cerberusss]

It totally depends on the buyer whether this is acceptable or not. Not everyone can get worked up about this sort of behavior from a vendor. Some people just care about the basic workings.

I personally don't give two shits. What I do care about though, is that my 2 year old iPhone 3G now is a very slow phone because of the updates. That got me thinking about not buying Apple phones again.

N900 Does

[ZeroNullVoid]

Yup, I had to say it.

The Nokia N900 is a very open device.

Re:N900 Does

[GameboyRMH]

Damn, beaten...

So the iPhone doesn't allow Bluetooth keyboards? Or mice? Or DS3s? Or Wiimotes? Or notifier watches/bracelets? Or BT networking? Or BT OBEX/FTP? Or software that makes your phone emulate any of those devices?

Poor iPhone-using bastards...

Bluetooth for data

[Anonymous Coward]

My iPhone 4 works with my Apple bluetooth keyboard (I got it for the iPad, but it's convenient to use with the iPhone when my 8-year old has stolen the iPad for Plants v. Zombies). Does that count?

PS3 Remote

[nobodyman]

Perhaps someone will finally make a proper bluetooth remote that works with the PS3? I find it hilarious that Sony doesn't allow you to use BD Remote with the most popular Blu-ray player on the market.

Cube Guy

[G4Cube]

Apple is ramping up a .edu tour with bluetooth enabled sensors that test stuff and send to i Pad and iPod for graphed data collection.

Yes there are other products

[Venerence]

In response to the original article, the upcoming iControlPad (made by the developers of Pandora, no, not the radio) is bypassing the apple patent troll by making it controlled by bluetooth (Source). Also don't buy one until I have bought one, limited supply demands that I'm first.

Re:Yes there are other products

[Anonymous Coward]

Specifically, I think they're emulating a BT keyboard and mapping the pad inputs to keyboard buttons. There's no way they could get approved to purchase External Accessory lockout chips.

Meanwhile - in other body-phone news

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2010/10/10/disconnect_cell_phone_interview/index.html

Recent studies have tied cellphone use to rises in brain damage, cheek cancer and malfunctioning sperm. She reveals the unsettling fact that many new cellphones now come with the small-print warning that they are to be kept at least one-inch from the ear (presumably for safety reasons) and many insurance companies refuse to insure cellphone companies against health-related claims. Most troubling of all, science has shown that children and teenagers are particularly susceptible to cellphone radiation, raising questions about its effects on coming generations.

How are you supposed to keep that iPhone on your body for the "body area network" yet 19 mm away?

Re:Every time the iphone gets "new features" ...

[Anonymous Coward]

I find this comment really ironic. The E71 is a castrated version of the E61 - a really fine phone that didn't have a camera (feh!) but did have wifi. Wifi scared American cell providers (Skype! Skype! - oh noes!) so the E71 was created for them.

E71 = E61 + camera - wifi

So much for "talk to everything".

Re:Every time the iphone gets "new features" ...

[hitmark]

And much of that was available on the Sony Ericsson T610 i got back in 2003/2004 (a featurephone). Bluetooth on US sold phones have been raped by carriers for ages, and is one reason why Nokia is a virtual no show in that market (they refused to let the carriers neuter phone features like voip and bluetooth).

And this is why i groan each time i read a US tech blog talking about mobile tech from a US == world perspective...

The "nuts and bolts" of it please...

[st2000]

Gaawk (me choking on, well, opinions)... I am sure I am not the only one. That there are people interested is how Apple has implemented Bluetooth. For instance, I am rather sure HID [Human Interface Device] Bluetooth keyboards work w/iPods but SPP [Serial Port Protocol] Bluetooth keyboards (if there is such a thing) do not. While, I believe, SPP keyboards should work with RIM products. The Bluetooth keyboard I am using w/my iPod is 3rd party. Further, I would be very surprised if it had an Apple authentication chip inside. I am also rather sure A2DP [Advanced Audio Distribution Protocol] Bluetooth headphones work with iPods even with out a authentication chip. I bought A2DP headphones for a Sony phone and when iPod included this feature in a FW upgrade the phones worked with the iPod. What I (and I believe others) want to know is what Bluetooth devices work and/or how to get them to work with an iPod. (1) What Bluetooth protocols are supported? (2) Do you need an authentication chip for any of them? (3) Can an application gain access to Bluetooth SSP? (4) Can an application gain access to Bluetooth HID? (5) Will any Bluetooth keyboard work w/an iPod? [Let's keep this branch of comments restricted to the facts - sort of like the "wiki" branch off of this slash-dot story.] ...thanks

Re:Every time the iphone gets "new features" ...

[StuartHankins]

This is trusted computing. People wanted it, the industry pushed it hard, and now it's here. It's the same story you get with various other implementations of TPC.

We want OBEX!

[Anonymous Coward]

Give it up smooth!

Re:Every time the iphone gets "new features" ...

[drolli]

A close inspection yields my phone is actually and e61. No wifi sounds disgusting.

Nike

[pgn674]

The Nike shoe system transmits step information over Bluetooth, I believe. My iPod Touch 2nd generation came with an app from Apple called "Nike + iPod" that uses Bluetooth. The app can be enabled in Settings > Nike + iPod > On. There may also be a related Bluetooth remote out there to control music playing ( >|| , + , - , |<< , >>| ).

Re:Every time the iphone gets "new features" ...

[RMH101]

My T68i did transfer of data/contacts etc by BT and IrDA years before that. Prior to that I was sending email by phone/IrDA/palm in the mid 90s, too.
Are most US phones crippled deliberately?