Arne Hess Stresses the Need for a Bluetooth Priority Profile

[Ekkie Tepsupornchai]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.theunwired.net/?itemid=3017' target='_blank'>http://www.theunwired.net/?itemid=3017</a><br /><br /></div><i>"...there is one thing in the Bluetooth standard which annoys me: there is no priority of devices. For instance if I walk to my car, for sure I have my phone connected to my headset... If I start the car, my car kit turns on and normally connects with my phone, if it isn't connected to another Bluetooth headset. If [the headset] is connected, [the car kit] doesn't connect. And here I see the problem: I have to turn off my headset before I start my car..."</i><br /><br />Arne of The::Unwired hits on a great point in this short editorial of his. I'm not getting into a phase with Bluetooth where multiple devices may be competing for the same resources/profiles and I'd love to see additional intelligence designed to recognize when this happens and then resort to a priority chain to determine which competing devices should be connected and disconnected. What are your thoughts?

[JonnoB]

This is an obvious shortfall of the BT implementation... and it is not just headset profiles, but any profiles where you have more than one device. For example, if you were using an A2DP stereo solution in your home stereo and also had a headset... or had dial-up networking from more than one device or more than one GPS solution, etc.

[RogueSpear]

I was an "early adopter" of Bluetooth and have gotten to the point where I really couldn't live without it. I have it in my trusty old iPAQ 3975, SE S710 phone, a RoyalTech GPS, three mice, a keyboard, my Prius, a Logitech headset, and needless to say all of my desktop and laptop PCs.

Something that drives me nuts is precisely what was described above with the head vs. car, but more annoying still is the constant tug of war on my headset between my cell phone and my laptop. I'm probably going to develop brain cancer from this, but I have that Logitech headset on all the time. I find it much easier to take calls at my desk and still continue to be productive with the headset on. At the same time, I've grown to rely on my headset tethered to my laptop for listening to CBT titles, yakking on BitWise, or even listening to CNN Pipeline - all without bothering the other people in my office. I would just kill for a headset that could maintain an active connection between two devices, easily switching between one or the other just by pressing a single button.

[Sven Johannsen]

Not sure this isn't an implementation issue, rather than a capability issue. Car BT kits already have the ability to connect to multiple phones, and switch to whatever phone currently requires support (is ringing), or to use phones in priority order for outgoing calls.

I would think it may just be an implementation issue on the phone to allow connection to more than one handsfree device, and to service a particular device on demand. By that I mean if a call comes in, it is routed to the headset that you push the answer button on. Cetainly the serial profile is designed to handle more than one connection simultaneously, and it would seem the HID is as well (mouse and keyboard), so why wouldn't the handsfree allow it, iff so enabled. Maybe, hopefully, it is just a lack of foresight in the stack developers, who didn't envision folks having a BT headset and a built in BT set in the car.

I could be dead wrong though. Doesn't seem that A2DP can handle multiple headsets. That's a shame too.

[RogueSpear]

My Toyota Prius can pair with multiple phones (mine and my wife's), but it will only establish a connection with one at a time. If we're both getting in the car, it always selects my phone since it's at the top of the list of devices. On a side note - while I love my car and couldn't imagine buying anything else, the Bluetooth implementation was clearly tacked on as an afterthought. It works yes, but it's not very elegant and what's worse is that I think it's only BT V1.1. Version 1.2 had been out for quite some time when the 2005 models rolled off the line.

I remember all of the hype from the Bluetooth SIG back in the late 90's predicting that the technology would be ubiquitous at some point in the future. If they believed their own words, then why did nobody envision scenarios like this? Well I certainly still love the technology and hope they continue to improve and innovate.

[Richard76]

I would have to agree that I have come to rely on BT for a variety of uses. For most of these uses, I have come to live with the limitations but with one exception.

Being a 'Road Warrior' I make full use of any one of my BT headsets while driving. However, I also quite frequently require the use of my BT GPS. Herein lies the problem.

I recently purchased an HP iPaq hw6515 with a built-in GPS, even though I already own a Globalsat BT338 GPS. Besides the fact that I do like the iPaq with its keyboard and easy one-handed useability, it will not play nice with my iGuidance navigation program. In fact, it won't play at all.

Now, HP tells me that in order to use the built-in GPS with a 'voice navigation' program, I will have to buy a new software program from them for about $129. So, with iGuidance already installed on my iPaq it is just easier to pull out my Globalsat GPS and use it via BT. However, when I do this I can no longer use my BT headset.

So, off to the store I go to by a single earbud headset because I really don't like trying to use the stereo headset that came with the iPaq for just talking on the phone. I purchased a Plantronics earbud with a short boom mic that works fine but, when it is plugged in to the iPaq the external speaker on the iPaq stops working. So, in order to listen to the voice prompts or, even hear the phone ring you must be wearing the earbud at all times.

Class, today's word is 'compromise'.