Ekkie Tepsupornchai
06-03-2006, 12:00 AM
<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.bluetooth.com/Bluetooth/Press/SIG/BLUETOOTH_SIG_AIMS_TO_IMPROVE_HEALTHCARE_EXPERIENCE_THROUGH_INTEROPERABILITY.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.bluetooth.com/Bluetooth/...OPERABILITY.htm</a><br /><br /></div><i>"The Bluetooth SIG today announced the formation of a Medical Devices Working Group. This team, made up of 19 member companies including IBM, Intel, Motorola, Nonin Medical, Philips Electronics and Welch Allyn, will work together to create and ratify a Bluetooth Medical Device Profile that will expand the use of Bluetooth technology into the medical, health and fitness markets. The new profile will ensure a comprehensive, yet easy, user experience and optimized interoperability between health-related devices and personal consumer electronics products such as mobile phones, PCs and PDAs where Bluetooth technology is already common."</i><br /><br />I like Bluetooth! I really do! But when it comes to medical equipment, I'm not sure I like the thought of broken connections, re-executing the pairing process because a prior partnership is failing, or seeing everone's favorite "Bluetooth Stack Overflow" issues (though admittedly I only see that on Pocket PC devices). The primary use cases that the SIG group is targeting with this new profile appear to be much more tame than the critical ER-type of situations, but still I wonder if the users would be getting enough real value from a wireless implementation to justify the potential usage execution headaches that they might have to deal with. What are your thoughts?