Slashdot Mirror


Mesh Networking Comes To Bluetooth, Which Could Set Off a New Wave of Smart Buildings (geekwire.com)

One of the most widely used technologies in mobile computing is getting an important upgrade that could accelerate the development of the smart home and industrial internet. From a report: The Bluetooth Special Interest Group, the Kirkland, Wash.-based group that enforces compatibility among the billions of devices that use the short-range Bluetooth wireless technology, plans to announce Tuesday that the standard now supports mesh networking. Mesh networks connect a variety of access points and devices across a distributed network, rather than the one-to-one connection that currently exists between your smartphone and that headset that makes you look ridiculous. This approach dramatically improves the range and reliability of a wireless network, since information can be relayed across several different devices rather than having to stretch between two far-apart devices. And if part of the network goes offline, mesh technology has the capability to route around that outage and still carry out its original mission. Wi-Fi networks have also been getting in on this mesh networking act, which has an additional bonus: mesh networks are much easier to set up than traditional wireless networks.

70 comments

  1. Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Billions of unprotectable devices now connected?

    What could possibly go wrong?

    1. Re:Obligatory by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      What could possibly go wrong?

      With their dollars in hand, the people will fund this creation.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    2. Re: Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well someone could join their phone to this and directly connect every device to a fantastic 4G direct internet connection, which is GREAT

    3. Re:Obligatory by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      Well, they will until the security incidents get ugly enough.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    4. Re:Obligatory by gnick · · Score: 1

      Only if the security incidents affect them directly. If the incident is somebody using the network for a DDoS, the owners likely won't notice or care.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    5. Re: Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Well some blackhat could join their phone to this and directly connect every device to a fantastic 4G direct internet connection, which is NOT SO GREAT

      FTFY

      (For those too deaf to hear the whoosh)

    6. Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, they will until the security incidents get ugly enough.

      It's never stopped them before...

    7. Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the Mexicans will pay for the firewall.

    8. Re: Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He thinks that smartphone connections to the Internet are 'direct', LOL

      You moron, ALL wireless companies use a proxy server setup. It makes it that much easier for them to log all your web traffic, snoop on your email, and inject ads into everything.

  2. Cool technology != "Smart Buildings" by captaindomon · · Score: 1

    New axiom: Any mention of a cool new technology will be accompanied by a prediction of "Smart Buildings" where all the magic is built into the drywall...

    --
    Just because I can hook a shark from a boat, I do no offer to wrestle it in the water.
    1. Re:Cool technology != "Smart Buildings" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really though, mesh networks over bluetooth are an idea that has been begging to be realized for years now. The difficulty of such a concept up to this point has been one of the biggest single stumbling blocks TO all these supposed "smart buildings". I am envisioning a system of photocells, pressure sensors, possibly LIDAR devices (also coming way down in price very quickly these days), cameras and microphones all used to infer things about the user's psychological state and [removed because any positive speculation will be met with tons of paranoid FUD]

    2. Re:Cool technology != "Smart Buildings" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, where else would you put it? You put the power generation/distribution in the floor panels, the spyware in the light bulbs, and the data routing in the drywall. I thought everyone knew that.

  3. I look ridiculous? by glenebob · · Score: 2

    :(

    1. Re:I look ridiculous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're holding it wrong.

  4. How secure will it be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The password will always be '1234'.

  5. TFTFY by Thud457 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Mesh Networking Comes To Bluetooth, Which Will Set Off a New Wave of Botnets

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:TFTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mesh Networking Comes To Bluetooth, Which Will Set Off a New Wave of Botnets

      I'm sure you meant virus/malware botnets, because everybody loves cynicism, but my first thought on reading about this was using to implement a self-organizing swarm of robots. There are a lot more interesting use-cases when your robots don't have to rely on the presence of a fixed base station.

    2. Re:TFTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah - the batteries on all those blue tooth devices will die from constant transmissions long before much harm can be done.

  6. Smart House by gary_johnson_53 · · Score: 1

    I think I may go with hard to set up local network for anything where financial data etc is. For entertainment, a mesh could be great. This is a reminder that you should be careful selecting your smart home software. http://garyjohnsoninfo.info/mu.... There are so many issues with smart houses. Lock in to a specific vendor, security, obsolescence . For example see https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-... excerpt "LIMITATION ON REMEDIES; NO CONSEQUENTIAL OR OTHER DAMAGES. Your exclusive remedy for any breach of this Limited Warranty is as set forth below. Except for any refund elected by Microsoft, YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ANY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, if the Software does not meet Microsoft's Limited Warranty, and, to the maximum extent allowed by applicable law, even if any remedy fails of its essential purpose."

    1. Re:Smart House by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      I think I may go with hard to set up local network for anything where financial data etc is.

      I had CAT5e in my previous house. I moved 4 years ago and before I moved in I ran CAT6 to the rooms I knew I would have computers in them. All of my servers and desktops are on copper. My firewall blocks traffic between the copper and the port to the WiFi router. The only thing that the WiFi connects to is the internet. Phones, tablets and computers that are not on copper are the only things that connect to the WiFi.

    2. Re:Smart House by gary_johnson_53 · · Score: 1

      Am I missing something ? How do you computers that are on copper {hard wired, not wireless} connect to the internet?

    3. Re:Smart House by suutar · · Score: 1

      sounds like his home net has two subnets, copper and wifi; everything can reach the internet through the firewall but wifi and copper can't talk to each other. I have a similar setup but I don't prevent wifi from reaching copper because that's where the fileserver and the printer are.

    4. Re: Smart House by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks, Got to set up subnets

  7. So our background-RF powered chips need BGP? by swb · · Score: 1

    Mesh networking seems to run counter to the trend towards very low power when you simultaneously need a sophisticated routing algorithm to keep your mesh up and forwarding traffic.

    1. Re:So our background-RF powered chips need BGP? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Yes, this is what I'm working on now. Mesh complicates routing which complicates battery life. But often you need the mesh just to avoid the necessary canopy of other wrieless devices to talk to. Ie, Zigbee devices assume that they can talk to your electric meter, so they're leaf nodes in that sense, but the electric meters will be considered the canopy (they're meshed, using PLC, cellular, etc).

      Most consumer things are pretty dumb about power and require periodic recharing of batteries. Sensor networks that have to be left unattended for years or decades are much more challenging. But if this is in a home, then presumably you can use the power from the home in some cases (ie, a sensor on the fridge, or the residents can change the batteries once a month.

    2. Re:So our background-RF powered chips need BGP? by swb · · Score: 1

      And not only will you have the CPU overhead of a routing protocol to manage the mesh, now you also need a security structure to handle joining the mesh, validating routing updates, validating the inevitable certificate hierarchy involve in securing everything and so on.

  8. ZigBee & Z-Wave. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So what happened to Z-wave and ZigBee? They "route around" and are mesh too.

    1. Re:ZigBee & Z-Wave. by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 2

      Z-wave never scaled very well, it works best for very small networks. Zigbee on the other hand performs well and has been growing by leaps and bounds. Thread enjoys some technical advantages over Zigbee, such as adding routers as needed, but lacks the Zigbee application layer that allows different devices to talk a common language. The future is interesting indeed.

    2. Re:ZigBee & Z-Wave. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      Zigbee on the other hand performs well and has been growing by leaps and bounds.

      And, as I hear it, BLE / "Bluetooth Low Energy" / "Bluetooth Smart" - a different networking protocol from original Bluetooth in the lower layers but sharing some of the upper layers, or at least the upper layer design approaches - was largely created (absorbed into the Bluetooth standard from its inventors, with their gleeful cooperation) in reaction to ZigBee's success.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    3. Re:ZigBee & Z-Wave. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of the biggest issues with Zigbee is that it's experiencing situation to when pre-802.11b and pre-802.11n devices hit the market. Zigbee is an open protocol but the different vendor implementations and extensions are causing compatibility issues. Also, there are some USB Zigbee radios available but the code and API isn't being shared which is hurting BSD, Linux, and Windows home automation solutions. Z-wave and Z-wave Plus are closed protocols but have quite successful inter-operability.

    4. Re:ZigBee & Z-Wave. by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 1

      Z-Wave is controlled by a single closed source vendor, which makes for good compatibility but also a single point of failure in as much as it's sole source. The Zigbee devices weren't as compatible as would be liked in the early days (say 2006-2012) but at this point it's pretty good. I've done some work in that market and haven't experienced interop as being an issue when people used a good stack.

  9. Wrong takeaway. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    " Which WOULD Set Off a New Wave of massive, realtime creeping surveillance. "

    And we all know how well the IOT is managed, this is going to be an awesome apocalypse!

  10. Cisco got the technology... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When I worked at Cisco in 2013, we were testing IP phones on the wireless network. One neat feature was to start a call on the fourth floor, take the elevator down, and go out into the parking lot without ever losing the connection. Never mind that a half-dozen access points seamlessly handled the call, including one AP inside the elevator and an AP in the parking lot.

    1. Re:Cisco got the technology... by ls671 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I have this technology too!

      I simply use openvpn and the call stay up while hoping between network with different public exit IP addresses. No need for Cisco proprietary stuff and it works for hoping between any kind of wireless network even if the networks use completely different providers.

      https://slashdot.org/comments....

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    2. Re:Cisco got the technology... by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      That is interesting, I was deploying Cisco Callmanger + Unity + WLC and Cisco wireless phones (wifi) in like 2003 and you could do that.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    3. Re:Cisco got the technology... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      That is interesting, I was deploying Cisco Callmanger + Unity + WLC and Cisco wireless phones (wifi) in like 2003 and you could do that.

      IIRC, The main selling point for that product line was to have an integrated wireless controller inside a switch that could be activated with a software license key.

    4. Re:Cisco got the technology... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I worked at Cisco in '04 you could unplug the intercom outside the front door, plug any old laptop into the jack and be live on their network. No port security, no device scanning, no nothing.

  11. ZWAVE by dknj · · Score: 1

    is fucked.

  12. Bluetooth and "ease of connectivity"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last I heard Bluetooth didn't have the greatest track record of securing their devices. Making them quickly and easily build mesh networks with each other would be idiotic if they haven't properly secured their devices against the spread if viruses.

  13. Yes! Longrange Bluetooth! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good thing it designed for than and not through "security through short range".

  14. Is there a corollary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to Betteridge's Law that involves headlines containing "could" or "might"?

    1. Re:Is there a corollary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FEAR NO MAN!

      I'll make you a MASTER of LLAP-Goch, ...the Secret Welsh ART of SELF
      DEFENCE that requires NO INTELLIGENCE, STRENGTH or PHYSICAL courage. The
      FANTASTIC SECRETS of the SECRET world-famous method of SELF DEFENCE, kept
      secret for centuries because of their DEADLY POWER to MAIM, KILL, SMASH,
      BATTER, FRACTURE, CRUSH, DISMEMBER, CRACK, DISEMBOWEL, CRIPPLE, SNAP and
      HARM are now revealed to YOU in the English Language by a LLAP-GOCH
      master AT HIS OWN RISK, PROVIDED you promise to MAIM, CRUSH, DISEMBOWEL
      and so on ONLY in SELF DEFENCE. (This is just to cover ourselves, as you
      will understand.)

      WHY "At his own risk?"

      BECAUSE if his fellow masters of LLAP-GOCH DISCOVER his IDENTITY, they
      will PUNISH HIM SEVERELY for revealing the DEADLY secrets he had promised
      to keep SECRET, without giving them a piece of the ACTION, and also
      BECAUSE of the TERRIBLE risk of PUNISHMENT he runs under the Trades
      Description Act.

      WHAT is LLAP-GOCH?

      IT is THE most DEADLY form OF SECRET self-DEFENCE that HAS ever been
      widely advertised and available to EVERYONE.

      WHY ALL the CAPITALS?

      Because THE most likely kind OF person TO answer THIS sort OF advertise-
      ment HAS less trouble under-STANDING words if they ARE written in BIG
      letters.

      WHAT is LLAP-GOCH again?

      It is an ANCIENT Welsh ART based on a BRILLIANTLY simple I-D-E-A, which
      is a SECRET. The best form of DEFENCE is ATTACK (Clausewitz) and the
      most VITAL element of ATTACK is SURPRISE (Oscar HAMMERstein). Therefore,
      the BEST way to protect yourself AGAINST any ASSAILANT is to ATTACK him
      before he attacks YOU... Or BETTER... BEFORE the THOUGHT of doing so has
      EVEN OCCURRED TO HIM!!! SO YOU MAY BE ABLE TO RENDER YOUR ASSAILANT
      UNCONSCIOUS BEFORE he is EVEN aware of your very existence!

      No longer need you feel WEAK, helpless, INDECISIVE, NOT fascinating and
      ASHAMED of your genital dimensions. No more need you be out-manoeuvred
      in political debate!! GOOD BYE HUMILIATION, wisecracking bullies, Karate
      experts, boxing champions, sarcastic vicars, traffic wardens; entire
      panzer divisions will melt to pulp as you master every situation without
      INADEQUACY. PROTECT YOUR LOVED ONES. You will no longer look pitiful
      and spotty to your GIRL FRIENDS when you leave some unsuspecting passer-
      by looking like four tins of cat food! They will admire your MASTERY and
      DECISIVENESS and LACK OF INADEQUACY and will almost certainly let you put
      your HAND inside their BLOUSE out of sheer ADMIRATION. And after seeing
      more of your expert disabling they'll almost definately go to bed with
      you, although obviously we can't ABSOLUTELY guarantee this, still it's
      extremely likely and would make learning LLAP-GOCH really worthwhile al-
      though legally we can't PROMISE anything.

      Why WELSH Art?

      LLAP-GOCH was developed in Wales because for the average Welshman, the
      best prospects of achieving a reasonable standard of living lie with the
      acquisition of the most efficient techniques of armed robbery.

      HOW do I learn?

      No, you mean "How do YOU Learn." I know already.

      HOW do You Learn?

      You receive ABSOLUTELY FREE your own special personal LLAP-GOCH Picture
      Book with hundreds of PHOTOGRAPHS and just a very few plain, clear and
      simple, easy to understand words. Only a FOUR-SECOND WORK-OUT Each Day!
      And you will be ready to HARM people!

      * DEVELOP UP TO 38" BICEPS
      * GROW UP TO 12" TALLER
      * LOSE UP TO 40" OF FAT IN YOUR FIRST WORK-OUT!
      * PROLONG YOUR LIFE BY UP TO 1,000 YEARS
      * GO TO BED WITH UP TO ANY LUDICROUS NUMBER OF GIRLS YOU CARE TO THINK OF
      PROVIDING YOU REALIZE THIS STATEMENT IS QUITE MEANINGLESS AS THE PHRASE
      "UP TO" CLEARLY INCLUDES THE NUMBER "NOUG

  15. mesh or hardwired AP's to the same network? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    mesh or hardwired AP's to the same network? did they have something unifi controller in the back end?

    1. Re:mesh or hardwired AP's to the same network? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      did they have something unifi controller in the back end?

      Controller in a switch on the backend. Worked pretty well. My boss's boss's boss wanted to fire me because a report showed that I used 75% of the wireless bandwidth through the controller. When he walked into the lab, he found 30 laptops with different 11ac wireless cards running the Cisco channel from YouTube. It just so happened that his interview at a Cisco Live event was running on all 30 laptops and that dazzled him from firing me on the spot. The kicker was that YouTube used 75% bandwidth while 300+ users had no issues using the wireless network at the same time.

    2. Re:mesh or hardwired AP's to the same network? by ls671 · · Score: 1

      did they have something unifi controller in the back end?

      Controller in a switch on the backend. Worked pretty well. My boss's boss's boss wanted to fire me because a report showed that I used 75% of the wireless bandwidth through the controller. When he walked into the lab, he found 30 laptops with different 11ac wireless cards running the Cisco channel from YouTube. It just so happened that his interview at a Cisco Live event was running on all 30 laptops...

      Streaming the same thing by yourself on 30 different laptops at the same time, that is quite an achievement...

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    3. Re:mesh or hardwired AP's to the same network? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Streaming the same thing by yourself on 30 different laptops at the same time, that is quite an achievement.

      I wanted to create cardboard cutouts that look like console TV sets and taped over the laptop screens. My boss vetoed the idea because he wanted a professional lab look instead of a department store look.

    4. Re:mesh or hardwired AP's to the same network? by MountainLogic · · Score: 1

      Man you are lucky it wasn't kitten videos or worse.

    5. Re:mesh or hardwired AP's to the same network? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Man you are lucky it wasn't kitten videos or worse.

      We had this in the loop instead.

      Cisco Gangnam Style Versus
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXYPf-hcajo

    6. Re:mesh or hardwired AP's to the same network? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      C.D. Reimer isn't my legal name.
      I have copyrights in the name of C.D. Reimer.

      Ladies and gentlemen, this is what 50k$ a year buys you in Silicon Valley.

    7. Re:mesh or hardwired AP's to the same network? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your boss's boss is an idiot.

      Any boss who walks in with the intent to fire you for that without saying "why is...." first is an idiot and not fit to run the place.

  16. RIP 2.4GHz ISM by thegreatbob · · Score: 2

    Hark, a shiny! Let us use it to jam 2.4GHz ISM band to the point that it's completely unusable!

    In all seriousness, unlicensed spectrum needs some.. help. I know it doesn't make any money for anyone directly, but still... ISM gets a whopping ~380 MHz of bandwidth in bands under 10GHz, 350 of which is in 2.4/5.8GHz. All the acronyms (FHSS, etc.) in the world can't save you from the fact that everyone else is already using the band.

    --
    There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
    1. Re:RIP 2.4GHz ISM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. I can't comprehend the big deal everyone is making over net neutrality when no one is even thinking about something the FCC has unquestionable control over, RF spectrum. Instead of auctioning off more spectrum to the same limited set of companies that control wireline and wireless communications, why not free up swaths of spectrum across multiple bands so the people are free to communicate amongst themselves? Imagine if Ma & Pa ISPs could set up low cost fixed wireless for last mile delivery, there might actually be competition for ISP services and the fears that people cling to net neutrality to solve might not get a foothold as people would have an actual choice.

  17. For the 3rd year in a row by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've sadly tried my hand in the BLE domain and bluetooth group is all hype and not much follow through. We must be coming up to some convention where they are going to tell us that stuff is almost here.

    like:

    https://www.bluetooth.com/news...

    There already are some mesh implementations by other folks but we don't even have a full BLE 5.0 stack yet. And no one seems to mention the old - faster, further, better battery life. Pick one.

    So, lots of talk and then you have to wait on someone else to deliver it. It really reminds me of when Intel would show a 'computer concept' and then assume that someone else will actually implement it.

  18. 'Smart buidings' are more dangerous than 'AI' by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Never mind worrying about so-called, over-hyped, mostly fake 'AI' nonsense 'taking over the world', or 'robots shooting us dead in the streets', or whatever the hell it was that Musk was on about yesterday, what we really need to worry about is so-called 'smart buildings', absolutely saturated with poorly designed and poorly secured 'IoT' nonsense getting hacked into, turning whole buildings against their occupants. It'll be the new 'ransomware': 'Pay us X amount of bitcoins, or we don't allow the building to let people leave/breathe/out of the elevators/(insert whatever mischief they can accomplish, here)'.

  19. IoT, whether you want it or not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every time there's a story about internet-connected gizmos that shouldn't need to be on the internet, some smartass will say "If you don't want it online, don't give it your wireless password," as if the companies making this crap won't try to route around that. Well, here it is. Put this in anything with so much as an LED and eventually they'll all find their way to the internet. Have fun putting Faraday cages around everything.

  20. IoT is just 5 years away for the past 15 years by MountainLogic · · Score: 1
    like:

    AI is just 5 years out for the 50 years

    Fusion is just 10 years away for the past 60 years

    Cure for cancer...

    Travel to Mars...

    The real problem with IoT is that nobody is willing to share data and cooperate so it is all just a bundle of orphaned plastic junk the connects with nothing (sound and fury signifying nothing). Where is the I in IoT? Until I can ping my door bell from any connected terminal there is no Internet in the Internet of Things.

    1. Re: IoT is just 5 years away for the past 15 years by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

      AI is here, it is replacing more and more jobs everyday. to the point we can now predict in 50 years there will be no jobs.
      Fusion and solar power are kinda the same thing, given the sun is a really big fusion reactor.

      mesh networking is waiting for the hardware.
      I'm kinda sickened by the responses on here. The only difference between a decent mesh network setup and a standard network connection is no one controls the wires, its still your responsability to secure your hardware. Where did all the cryptoanarchists go dammit.

    2. Re: IoT is just 5 years away for the past 15 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where did all the cryptoanarchists go dammit.

      Rounded up and sent to re-education camps, probably.

    3. Re: IoT is just 5 years away for the past 15 years by MountainLogic · · Score: 1
      With apologies to Steve McConnell:

      AI is an algorithm in a clown suit. It’s less predictable, it’s more fun, and it comes without a 30-day, money-back guarantee.”

      Sorry, but what is being touted as AI ain't either. What is being pushed today as AI is little more than an unbaked solution to a badly under-determined system of linear equations.

  21. They already tried that once by Hentes · · Score: 1

    This is not the first attempt at Bluetooth mesh networking, I'm curious if they managed to solve the problems that made scatternets unviable. They need to get their tech a LOT better, because they may have a niche in point to point communication, but once they move into networking they will have to compete with ad hoc wifi, which already works pretty well.

    1. Re:They already tried that once by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "which has an additional bonus: mesh networks are much easier to set up than traditional wireless networks."

      Is the author having a laugh?

  22. This seems unnecessary! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who cares about a mesh bluetooth network? The range is so short and the protocol is so slow compared to other widely available tech.

    Now, if mesh bluetooth also means that I can finally stream audio source from one device to multiple end points and they are sync'd then please, take my $$$

    1. Re: This seems unnecessary! by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

      have you tried transferring data between two bluetooth version 4 devices recently?

      bandwidth is running at 24mbps now, typically faster than wifi through a router. very pleased to have 100MB videos transfer to my laptop from the phone in just a few seconds. long gone are the version 2 3mbps days.

      if not.
      buy new stuff cheapscate.

    2. Re:This seems unnecessary! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, if it sucks balls like that thanks for the warning. I suppose if you want to use something like two battery-powered speakers in stereo, both identical devices, you'd better have one be the bluetooth receiver and send the other half of the audio to the other one via a wire (mono jack 6.35mm for instance, because that's pretty and is also the cable used for guitars)

  23. One to Many by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    I for one look forward to no longer having issues pairing 1-1 with a device.

    Not sure if issues pairing with multiple devices at once will be an improvement, but at least I won't have issues pairing 1-1 anymore.

  24. Say it Right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's known unofficially as "Crisco Callmangler".

    Just a fun name, never had any serious trouble with the product.

  25. BLE or classic Bluetooth by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    It's not completely clear to me from TLA whether this builds on BLE (Bluetooth Low Energy a.k.a. Bluetooth Smart), though the reference to the 4.0 level of the standard, the many instances of the word "Smart" in the article, that it's a mesh, and the nature of the protocols all suggest it's BLE.

    If so, it will be interesting to see how they keep it from eating up the devices' batteries. BLE devices get a couple years out of a coin cell by spending about 99.5% of their time "asleep", drawing roughly three orders of magnitude less current (~5 uA rather than ~5 mA) than when awake and with the radio on. Typically only a clock using a watch crystal is running during that time.

    (Yes, that 99.5% isn't rhetoric. An advertisement takes about 5 ms, so a configuration of one advert per sec comes out to a duty cycle of about 1/200.)

    They get away with that because they have a distinction between centrals (which have line power or (like smartphones) big batteries with frequent recharging) and peripherals (little battery powered devices that must only sip electrons). Peripherals can transmit when they feel like it. But centrals have to spend a lot of time listening, and the receiver (which has a lot to do) is (counterintuitively) slightly more power hungry than the transmitter.

    If you try to build a mesh network out of what were formerly peripherals, not only do they have to spend several times as much battery power forwarding other devices' messages than they do handing their own (if everybody is equally chatty), but if the scheduling isn't set up right (or while listening for new players) they may need to leave the receiver on for substantial periods listening to the crickets chirp. That would just KILL battery life.

    So I await the opportunity to peruse this addition to the spec. with bated breath.

    (But not held breath. Even without this, the BLE v4.1 standard was 2,841 pages of some of the crummiest prose I've had the misfortune to have to try to understand. And I may be the only person to successfully implement a T1/T2/T3 framer from just the Bell standards and a logic analyzer bitstream capture.)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  26. Is it new? by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    As noted in summary, we already have it in WiFi. WiFi mesh networking did not bring a revolution of usages, why would it be the case with Bluetooth mesh networking?

  27. Re: IoT is just 5 years away for the past 15 year by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

    assuming you are referring to the "AI" being touted by the likes of google and facebook then i absolutely agree.

    But the AI that is replacing jobs and started the latest "craze" is not accessible/available to your average developer, its too valuable at the moment. And certainly isnt appearing in any how to blogs by people seeking work in the field.

    Even IBMs Watson is outdated now.

  28. ue boom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't this what the UE Boom PartyUP mode does?