• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Will Bluetooth Be Dead By 2006?

Bluetooth was hyped, scarecly implemented, and not widely accepted. Personally I think it was a great idea, it was just poorly marketed which ultimately will cause its demise. Once Intel starts putting some marketing dollars behind WUSB, Bluetooth will be an afterthought.
 
Bluetooth implementation sucks in Windows. I couldn't get it to work at all in Windows 2000, and XP implementation is hit-and-miss.

However, Bluetooth works great in Mac OS X. I keep my Bluetooth Sony Ericsson T610's contacts sync'd to my PowerBook and my iPod via Bluetooth. Completely seamless. I also surf the net via that phone thru Bluetooth. I can even use my phone as a remote control for the PowerBook via Bluetooth. Range is over 20 feet.

I also have a Sony Ericsson HBH-65 wireless Bluetooth headset. Great for talking on the phone while driving, while keeping both hands on the steering wheel. Voice activated dial and call answering too.
 
Hmm. Let's compare wireless technologies for the common USB applications.

Wireless Technologies

WiFi
Bluetooth
WUSB (UWB)

Common USB cables to be replaced with some wireless technology.

Mouse
Keyboard
Printer
USB flash dongle
Digital Camera
PDA Sync

I can't think of many others, but please add some and we can analyze.


Mouse - WiFi and WUSB both draw 5x to 10x current of Bluetooth. WiFi and WUSB are much more expensive radios than Bluetooth.

Keyboard - See above.

Printer - Probably the best argument for WUSB, but WiFi is here today and my guess is that you will see WiFi enabled printers (with integrated printserver) sooner and cheaper than WUSB. Bluetooth printers are already available, but the integration of Bluetooth into desktops has been the adoption hurdle here.

USB Flash dongle - Wireless flash drives are a pretty cool application, but very dependent on the mainstream wireless technology in the PC. Since Bluetooth is lagging and WiFi requires too much cost/power, there is no good solution here. I don't expect any wireless USB drives taking off any time soon.

Digital cameras - Decent argument for WUSB. WiFi works too, and has the advantage of a larger install base. Intel pushing it could fix that.

PDA Sync - Since WiFi serves other purposes in PDA (as does Bluetooth), I don't see PDA makers putting another radio into PDA's.

So, the real "killer apps" for WUSB are printers and Digital camera's, and maybe digital camcorders. In other applications, WUSB has some serious technical hurdles in both current consumption and existing install base. Intel can fix one of those two issues, but not the second.

WUSB, IMO, is a result of Intel being pissed about the deadlock of UWB. I'm not so sure it's going to be all it's cracked up to be. Kinda like Bluetooth isn't 😉

In regards to the article...

That?s quite an improvement over the 12 megabits per second that Bluetooth delivers.
Click to expand...

Even better when you consider that Bluetooth only delivers 1Mbps symbol rate (about 700kbps max asynchronous data)... you'd think that someone claiming the death of Bluetooth would at least research all the technologies.

The faster part is the key. WUSB is being set up as a counterpart to 802.11, handling the device to device transfers WiFi doesn?t cover; like the movement of audio and video files between PCs and cameras, MP3 players and the like.
Click to expand...

Ok, raw video from a camcorder perhaps, but audio? Methinks that WiFi's rates of about 30Mbps these days can handle movements of audio files.

While Bluetooth keyboards, GPS units and other accessories are becoming more popular, again, it?s not clear if WUSB will attack these markets either. In all likelihood it?s more of a when will they do it rather than a will they do it question.
Click to expand...

Again, WUSB is based on UWB. This is not a low power technology for keyboads and such. It bums me out when people write articles claiming the death of technologies which they don't seem to grasp.
 
You used the word "common" in your post so let's discuss what the common consumer would want these devices for since that's what's needed for widespread adoption:

Mouse/Keyboard- no way. This is fine for enthusiasts but average consumers don't care and don't want to worry about batteries for these. Any extra cost would be completely unjustified.

Printer-no way. WTF for? Average people put their printer in their computer desk, run the wire and leave it there for years. Who's moving their printer?

USB flash dongle-I can sort of buy this but there are data security issues

Digital Camera-I can buy this

PDA Sync-I can buy this
 
I use bluetooth all the time with my iPaq 2215, but the interface and actual use of bluetooth is just SOOOO clumsy. Its time for something better. The real annoying thing is the inability to remove devices once they have connected. Like if I reflash my Pocket PC it roconnects and sets up a new partnership... however I cant remove the old partnership... so now my PocketPC is now called iPaq9 instead of iPaq... 1-8 have all been used by now.
 
hopefully wusb will introduce some wireless gaming headsets.. does anyone know if there are already some wireless gaming headsets?
 
probably, blues too slow for anything but pda's and cellphones that require low power transmit. its too slow for %#@ headsets really..
 
Here in the UK, mobile phones with bluetooth arent exactly costing the earth compared to other phones but a bluetooth headset added onto the price makes it less attractive. Also considering the amount of time most people will use the headset is minimal... its not worth the price.

If people were informed of the benefits of bluetooth, perhaps more people would take it up. I havent went bluetooth simply because the price premium over basic wireless for a PC isnt worth it (Cordless MX Duo specifically). Wireless headphones + wireless mic (or headset)... i havent seen a pair i like yet and I doubt bluetooth would make it that much better over existing technologies.

Compared to whats on offer these days, Bluetooth seems to offer no tangible advantage whether it be in home or business applications.
 
Originally posted by: Elcs
Here in the UK, mobile phones with bluetooth arent exactly costing the earth compared to other phones but a bluetooth headset added onto the price makes it less attractive. Also considering the amount of time most people will use the headset is minimal... its not worth the price.

If people were informed of the benefits of bluetooth, perhaps more people would take it up. I havent went bluetooth simply because the price premium over basic wireless for a PC isnt worth it (Cordless MX Duo specifically). Wireless headphones + wireless mic (or headset)... i havent seen a pair i like yet and I doubt bluetooth would make it that much better over existing technologies.

Compared to whats on offer these days, Bluetooth seems to offer no tangible advantage whether it be in home or business applications.
Click to expand...
The SE T616 and T610 in North America and T610 in Europe and Asia was one of 2003's most popular phones, partially because of Bluetooth.
 
I'm switching cell phone providers because Sprint keeps pushing toy phones w/o BT.

Setting the phone next to the computer and having your address book synced, and backed up, and your schedule pop over is money. Using the phone in your pocket as a GPRS modem for the laptop isn't bad either. UWSB adds nothing but higher battery drain to these applications. Typical big numbers obsessed thinking.
 
BT is a great thing... when it works. Windows implementation of it is just terrible. Played with it on OS-X though and it just simply worked... HELLO MS!! Please make a universal BT manager that makes the whole deal as painless as the Win-XP wiFi manager... thank you!
 
It's not dead now? hehe The range stinks, it loses connection a ton, need I add to that list? Watching a VP use a bluetooth remote and get mucked up in their presentation sealed the deal. I have a BT mouse, but that's the end of it. The tech is dead as a doornail and was poorly implemented to begin with. We need an implementation like it, god knows having a printer that accepts wireless printing would be perfect, but we need it with money backing it and for it to be far better done than bluetooth. If MS gets behind one of the technologies, or MS and Intel together, that would be perfect.

As for BT, this mouse is the last BT item I'll touch forever.

 
Does anyone have an estimate on how much it costs to implement BT, WiFi (and in the future, WUSB) into portable devices?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top