Bluetooth, my initial reaction...

[Steven Cedrone]

So I decided to get myself a Bluetooth dongle for my PC...

I have read all of the recommendations from members, and decided to try a different approach...

Since I feel that Bluetooth should work like WIFI(who cares who makes it, plug it in and it should work), I brought my daughter with me to the store, put out the different boxes, and let her decide which I should buy (I think it was a packaging thing :wink: ). Anyway, she chose an Actiontec dongle...

I came home, read the manual (yes, I READ the manual), and set out to make it work...

I installed the software, connected the dongle, and things went downhill from there...

Needless to say, 1 hour and 1 software update later, I am still having problems...

I'll get it working, but I just can't say Bluetooth is ready for prime time yet. Bluetooth, at least from my limited exposure, is a confusing kludge of software and hardware that seems to be (AFAIAC) about 2-3 years away from being main stream. I would tend to think that something better will come out before then...

If you can't open the box and plug in the device and have it work, it will never be accepted by the masses...

Just my .02

Steve

[Sven Johannsen]

I agree with your assessment of BT's maturity, however...ignoring the advice hear shows substantial lack of judgment on your part ;)

I started with an Ambicom dongle and CF card for my Axim. Frustrating is a kind way of putting it. Got a bit better when I got a Socket BT CF card and the difference is in the support software. Was actually able to get that to sync and such. Still didn't care for the Ambicom desktop environment, so I bought a Billionton BT dongle. That desktop software did what seemed natural to me. I now have a BT icon in the system tray and I know it is in the background waiting to work.

Last acquisition was and HP 2215 with built in BT and the associated built in wizard. After I had set up a partnership once in AS, I opened the wizard on the 2215. It asked what do you want to to. I said sync. It said with which one of these..I selected my main PC, clicked go, it walked me through pairing and sank, (sync'd. sunk?). Since then I pop up the BT manager on the PPC and chose sync or internet or whatever and it just does it.

The failing is in the software support provided by the various companies. I expect the good stuff is licensed and adds to the price of the hardware. Being a nation in which cheaper is always the first choice (regardless of quality, utility, effectiveness, etc.), guess what.

[Leo the 3rd]

Well the implementation of Bluetooth for me on my Mac using the Apple provided drivers and a D-Link DBT-120 all is well. I'm using a Bluetooth mouse, keyboard, PPC 2215 and SE T610 all working together and happily. Total time to set things up was less than 15 minutes (keyboard required me to run a firmware updater and install software). I can now iSync (Apple free sync software for address book & calendar) my T610, surf at a distance with the keyboard.

Now I have tried setting up my DBT-120 with my laptop and it worked fine on Win2K (I am still having problems getting the thing to work with XP - ActiveSync won't move off COM1 and I can't get the dongle to move down below COM10). Of course now that I ran the updater on my Mac, Win2K won't see the dongle. I assume the Widcomm 1.4.1.6 drivers have an issue and won't see the updated dongle.

So for now I'll have to keep a wired sync connection with my PC, but I can easily do wireless with the Mac.

[Steven Cedrone]

I agree with your assessment of BT's maturity, however...ignoring the advice hear shows substantial lack of judgment on your part ;)

Dats me, I aint two smart... :wink:


I started with an Ambicom dongle and CF card for my Axim. Frustrating is a kind way of putting it. Got a bit better when I got a Socket BT CF card and the difference is in the support software. Was actually able to get that to sync and such. Still didn't care for the Ambicom desktop environment, so I bought a Billionton BT dongle. That desktop software did what seemed natural to me. I now have a BT icon in the system tray and I know it is in the background waiting to work.


But you shouldn't have to keep buying dongles until you find a HW/SW combination that works...

They should all work... :roll:

guess what.

I'm screwed??? :wink:

Steve

[shawnc]

If you can't open the box and plug in the device and have it work, it will never be accepted by the masses...
Steve

Well said!

[Steven Cedrone]

Still playing with it. The dropped connections and instability are killing me!!! :twak:

This is ridiculous, in order to have a cable replacement technology that works, you shouldn't have to "tweak" for hours! If you are going to replace cables, you need to be as easy to use. Plug in a cable, and it works (O.K., you may have to configure the peripheral once)...

It has to be that easy!!!

If I plug in a Bluetooth device, my computer should recognize it, configure it, and make it available for use. Period!!!

It will be interesting to try other dongles, but regardless of the fact that I can make the dongles work, I think Bluetooth is lame... :roll:

Steve

[JvanEkris]

It has to be that easy!!!

If I plug in a Bluetooth device, my computer should recognize it, configure it, and make it available for use. Period!!!

It will be interesting to try other dongles, but regardless of the fact that I can make the dongles work, I think Bluetooth is lame... :roll:

SteveSteve,

Although i agree with you wholehartely that Bluetooth has to be easy to install, and that in practice it is a nightmare, it is only in part the problem from the bluetooth product itself. I'm the first to admit that bluetooth has introduced a lot of problems (a standard should reduce incompatibility issues, not introduce them).

Most of the time it is a problem of the drivers, not the bluetooth product itself. Be aware of the fact that most bluetooth applications are a nightmare to set up. This is the problem when drivers and application-layer are completely integrated (or in tech-term: screwed up like spagethi).

One positive exception is Plugfree for the desktop by Siemens/Rappore (http://support.fujitsu-siemens.de/DriverCD/_DriverSteuerung/GB/LIFEBOOK/SSeries/LIFEBOOK_S6010_WinXP.htm), which works in combination with all CSR-based dongles (for a list see the CSR website (http://www.csr.com/products/qual-modules.htm)), if you use the Siemens drivers. The graphics are great :).

Also Widecomm has great drivers, so that is something to look for. Somebody having the worst possible drivers is 3Com. Although the hardware is supurb, the drivers aren't worth the bandwith you used to download them.

Another trick is to use Linux. Linux has Bluez, a standard bluetooth implementation that works with 90% of the available products ( 8O ), proving that the problem is in the drivers, and not in the hardware........

Jaap

[rpommier]

I hear you, BT isn't at all as seamless as it should be. A couple of months ago I took the bluetooth journey.

Unfortunately, certain combinations just work better together than others. I tried the Ambicom and couldn't get network access to work with my 2210. The Belkin is great and has excellent range to boot.

Roderick

[Steven Cedrone]

One positive exception is Plugfree for the desktop by Siemens/Rappore (http://support.fujitsu-siemens.de/DriverCD/_DriverSteuerung/GB/LIFEBOOK/SSeries/LIFEBOOK_S6010_WinXP.htm), which works in combination with all CSR-based dongles (for a list see the CSR website (http://www.csr.com/products/qual-modules.htm)), if you use the Siemens drivers. The graphics are great :).

Also Widecomm has great drivers, so that is something to look for. Somebody having the worst possible drivers is 3Com. Although the hardware is supurb, the drivers aren't worth the bandwith you used to download them.

My whole point is that I shouldn't have to hunt for alternative drivers, the drivers that come bundled with the hardware should work (or at least have comprehensive instructions so that installation is not overly difficult)...

This is far from what I would call a wireless cable replacement technology...

As far as your suggestions go , I'll try them, thanks!!!

Steve

[Janak Parekh]

Steve -

It'll get better once BT is actually integrated into the OS. But that's gonna take some time. :(

--janak

[QYV]

It'll get better once BT is actually integrated into the OS. But that's gonna take some time.

If that's the case, then why am I having such a hard time (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=18352) with WM 2003, which has Bluetooth support built-in? :evil:

[Janak Parekh]

If that's the case, then why am I having such a hard time (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=18352) with WM 2003, which has Bluetooth support built-in? :evil:
I'd guess that (a) the OS doesn't support all the profiles yet; (b) hardware manufacturers haven't optimized their WM2003 drivers yet.

You guys should realize that when WiFi first came out, around 7-10 years ago, it was a nightmare to configure, interoperability was nil, and it was extremely expensive and slow to boot. Give it a chance to standardize. :)

--janak

[JvanEkris]

My whole point is that I shouldn't have to hunt for alternative drivers, the drivers that come bundled with the hardware should work (or at least have comprehensive instructions so that installation is not overly difficult)...
I agree. However, Bluetooth is stuck with a sloppy standard as its basis, and a louse certification-procedure. To make things worse, only about 50% of the products stating they are qualified are actually qualified. So it is a bit of a mess right now. I fought Bluetooth for weeks, getting it to work (I was one of the first two customers to get the Loox to actually sync through bluetooth.....). It is verry depressing if you look at it.

Steve -

It'll get better once BT is actually integrated into the OS. But that's gonna take some time. :(

--janakMy thoughts exactly. At least at the part of the incompatibility issues at the transport layer. However, the drivers became available last christmas for developpers to integrate them into their drivers, allowing them to be ready for XP SP2. However, i haven't seen much updates from any supplier to accomodate this :(.

If it makes you feel better, at the bluetooth conference in Amsterdam a couple of months ago, the 5-minute rule was included in the standard. Although completely non-measurable, it is a good idea. A customer (monkey-level or Phd. in Astrophysics ???) should be able to set up any bluetooth equipment in 5 minutes.......

Jaap

[Steven Cedrone]

My PC has com ports 44 -> 52 assigned to Bluetooth. Activesync will not give me these choices for a serial connection. How the *&^% do I get this to work??? :roll:

Steve

[Kati Compton]

I don't know, but maybe you should edit your post so it's more mobile-friendly. :razzing:

[Janak Parekh]

I don't know, but maybe you should edit your post so it's more mobile-friendly. :razzing:
You mean AAAA...!!!!? ;)

Back ontopic: Steve, I think there's a way in the driver to tell it what COM ports to use, but I haven't tried in a while. (And yes, ActiveSync is stupid about this -- why'd they limit it? :?)

--janak

[Steven Cedrone]

I don't know, but maybe you should edit your post so it's more mobile-friendly. :razzing:

Happy??? :wink:

Steve

[Steven Cedrone]

Back ontopic: Steve, I think there's a way in the driver to tell it what COM ports to use, but I haven't tried in a while. (And yes, ActiveSync is stupid about this -- why'd they limit it? :?)

If there is, I can't find it... :roll:

Steve

[Julio]

Hello,

Haven't tried this myself...but it might help....

From reading previous posts (especially on FirstLOOX.org) on getting activesync to work over BlueTooth, what you have to do is create an Internet connection between the desktop and the PPC. Assign the bluetooth network its own network address (like 192.168.2.0) and assign both the PPC and the desktop an address in this network. Then, sync the PPC over the bluetooth network as if it were an ethernet network. You will probably have to set the WINS address to be the desktop address in this bluetooth network.

hope this helps some...

Julio

[JvanEkris]

Julio,

It depends on the combination of the device (or better the drivers that came with it) and PocketPC. Ipaq's are much more comfortable with syncing through a virtual serial connection. This immediatly adds a pass-through connection for internet as well. Normally, the bluetooth manager on the PC has some way of assigning a port-nummer to a specific bluetooth connection. Most of the time it is possible to change it from there as well.

The way you have described is hard for the Ipaq's (= non-Loox), since it's bluetooth implementation is lacking the bluetooth network protocol. There are absolutely fabulous manuals for working around this ommission at the geekzone (http://www.geekzone.co.nz/content.asp?contentid=449). This si however, the hard way. Basically you use the RAS-connection from activesync.

Jaap

[ChristopherTD]

I must agree that BT is not ready for prime time. I spent a very unsatisfactory evening trying to get BT to sync my iPaq 5450 with my Thinkpad. Nothing I did could get it to work and I work as a software developer, so I don't think that it was for lack of technical expertise.

It culminated in a spontaneous hard reset which didn't please me either.

Fortunately WiFi sync works perfectly, especially with WM2003.

[freitasm]

It'll get better once BT is actually integrated into the OS. But that's gonna take some time.

If that's the case, then why am I having such a hard time (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=18352) with WM 2003, which has Bluetooth support built-in? :evil:

Not quite. Microsoft created a Bluetooth driver, but neither Toshiba or HP are using it. Only Dell. So, it's not integrated - at all.

[freitasm]

When you read about "fake" Bluetooth products in Europe it's not because they're not Bluetooth. Au contraire.

The fact is that 50% of these Bluetooth devices do not have a Bluetooth SIG certification - they're not tested. If these devices are sold there's nothing to guarantee that they were tested and approved.

That's why so many problems with brands never heard of before. Try the tested and good ones: TDK, Belkin, DLINK, Bluetake. Try to avoid 3COM all you can. And don't buy anything with strange names - or if there's no Bluetooth logo in the box with a certificate number. The certificate is required to be in print.

Also, people can find these problems with other devices. These days sound cards come with every computer. But before that, how many times have you tried installing a sound card on a computer and got it running first time? There are millions of hardware combination, and the OS can't handle them - how come a driver would?

Until there's OS level layer for this this will not go ahead - look at the Mac OS X. It's great (I have an iMac here at Geekzone too) - plug the dongle and use it. Unlike the sketch of Bluetooth Microsoft tried to push - and only for Windows XP. Give me a break... :devilboy:

[Steven Cedrone]

With tail between legs, I return the ActionTec dongle...

Nothing but problems with that one and no response from support. I will try one of the recommended dongles instead... :wink:

The other thing that really bothers me: if Bluetooth is supposed to be a cable replacement technology, why can't you establish a partnership with a PC without using a cable???

Steve

[JvanEkris]

The other thing that really bothers me: if Bluetooth is supposed to be a cable replacement technology, why can't you establish a partnership with a PC without using a cable???

Steve
Nobody likes a smartass
Well Steve, the trick is to replace the cable AFTER you have created the partnership in activesync. ;)

But AFAIK, that is not necessary when you use the normal Ipaq way. There are two ways to sync through bluetoth: With RAS, the only way for the Loox. With RAS the partnership is necessary because the PocketPC has to know the name of the machine he is going to sync with, because the RAS is designed for a network, normally consisting of more then one PC (i.e. activesync uses the partnership name, and looks on the network to find a machine with the same name, and starts syncing with it). Sync the HP way, replace the physical serial cable with a virtual one. Like InfraRed, it is not necessary to have that info when you connect directly to the PC. As long as the Ipaq knows which COM-port to sync with (i.e. the bluetooth serial port of the Ipaq), and activesync on the PC expects traffic from a virtual serial port of it's bluetooth driver, it should work in theory (but in theory, the titanic could not sink either, so expect some discrepancy there :)).

Jaap

[clinte]

Most of the time it is a problem of the drivers, not the bluetooth product itself. Be aware of the fact that most bluetooth applications are a nightmare to set up. This is the problem when drivers and application-layer are completely integrated (or in tech-term: screwed up like spagethi).

Also Widecomm has great drivers, so that is something to look for. Somebody having the worst possible drivers is 3Com. Although the hardware is supurb, the drivers aren't worth the bandwith you used to download them.

Jaap

Apparently USB Bluetooth adapters from Belkin, Dell (internal Bluetooth), TDK, 3COM, Billionton, PenBlue, Acer, AnyCom, GoalRay, and several others all use the same WidComm drivers and software. It seems that all that's different is the license file that's shipped with one set of drivers or another, and that that license file is generated on a per-build basis. So essentially, even if there are newer drivers out there that are KNOWN to fix your issues, you can't get them, because unless your manufacturer puts out a build of those drivers with a customized license file, you can't even install them.

more
http://weblog.infoworld.com/foster/2003/09/28.html

Updated software and drivers are a real problem for a lot of Bluetooth users.

[clinte]

When you read about "fake" Bluetooth products in Europe it's not because they're not Bluetooth. Au contraire.

The fact is that 50% of these Bluetooth devices do not have a Bluetooth SIG certification - they're not tested. If these devices are sold there's nothing to guarantee that they were tested and approved.


There are not many who have the knowledge of Bluetooth like you have freitasm. Thanx dude.

Every product or technology can be faked: Puma, Nike, Bluetooth, WiFi etc....

Bluetooth Qualified Product List (almost 1200 at the moment, changes daily)
http://qualweb.bluetooth.org/Template2.cfm?LinkQualified=QualifiedProducts

Wi-Fi certification products
http://www.wifialliance.com/OpenSection/certified_products.asp?TID=2

Bluetooth market maturing, growing fast: Bluetooth shipments ‘to reach 70m in 2003’
http://www.itweb.co.za/sections/quickprint/print.asp?StoryID=137453
Bluetooth, Wi-fi expected on 25 million vehicles within 5 years
http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS2150004408.html

[JvanEkris]

It'll get better once BT is actually integrated into the OS. But that's gonna take some time.

If that's the case, then why am I having such a hard time (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=18352) with WM 2003, which has Bluetooth support built-in? :evil:

Not quite. Microsoft created a Bluetooth driver, but neither Toshiba or HP are using it. Only Dell. So, it's not integrated - at all.AFAIK, As i understood it, they are using the framework and the transport layer. But most of the people have stripped the Microsoft top-layer and modified their own old profiles on top of it to keep things working on their own machines. So part of the problem should be solved, however certainly not all of it.

Jaap

[JvanEkris]

Apparently USB Bluetooth adapters from Belkin, Dell (internal Bluetooth), TDK, 3COM, Billionton, PenBlue, Acer, AnyCom, GoalRay, and several others all use the same WidComm drivers and software. It seems that all that's different is the license file that's shipped with one set of drivers or another, and that that license file is generated on a per-build basis. So essentially, even if there are newer drivers out there that are KNOWN to fix your issues, you can't get them, because unless your manufacturer puts out a build of those drivers with a customized license file, you can't even install them.

more
http://weblog.infoworld.com/foster/2003/09/28.html

Updated software and drivers are a real problem for a lot of Bluetooth users.That amazes me even more. The 3Com implementation has been update half a year ago, but did not even come close to the current Widecomm implementation. I don't understand what they are doing. In the technical oriented BT forums a lot of discussion about these drivers is also about bugs in this implementation that were never seen in Widecomm stacks. So something isn't done nicely at 3Com......

Jaap

[jeffmd]

I have 0 problem getting my pda to connect to my t68i using ambicoms bt cf, but damn, laptop/pc is a whole different ball game.

Ive gotta install like 5 different software packages, and then hope the bluetooth finder (which never remembers a trusted device most of the time if you close it) has the perfect mix of drivers and settings. I escentialy need to install the bluetooth finder, sony ericson drivers, sony ericson dialup setup tool.. and then play with it for 2 hours untill the phone is trusted, connected, the sony software can see it to create a dialup, and that the dialup can connect to the phone.

[Steven Cedrone]

Well, I did go out and get myself a Belkin Dongle. Still have the same problem, the first available COMM port is 43... :roll:

I really need to find out why... :?

This is frustrating, to say the least. But it appears to be a problem with my computer and not the dongle/software...

Steve

[ppcsurfr]

I agree with your assessment of BT's maturity, however...ignoring the advice hear shows substantial lack of judgment on your part ;)

I started with an Ambicom dongle and CF card for my Axim. Frustrating is a kind way of putting it. Got a bit better when I got a Socket BT CF card and the difference is in the support software. Was actually able to get that to sync and such. Still didn't care for the Ambicom desktop environment, so I bought a Billionton BT dongle. That desktop software did what seemed natural to me. I now have a BT icon in the system tray and I know it is in the background waiting to work.

Last acquisition was and HP 2215 with built in BT and the associated built in wizard. After I had set up a partnership once in AS, I opened the wizard on the 2215. It asked what do you want to to. I said sync. It said with which one of these..I selected my main PC, clicked go, it walked me through pairing and sank, (sync'd. sunk?). Since then I pop up the BT manager on the PPC and chose sync or internet or whatever and it just does it.

The failing is in the software support provided by the various companies. I expect the good stuff is licensed and adds to the price of the hardware. Being a nation in which cheaper is always the first choice (regardless of quality, utility, effectiveness, etc.), guess what.

Ever wonder why your Billionton BT Dongle seems to work well with yor h2215?

It seems that both use the Widcomm drivers. :-)

Mabuhay! ~ Carlo

[JvanEkris]

What kind of driver is included with the dongle ??

Jaap

[freitasm]

Well, I did go out and get myself a Belkin Dongle. Still have the same problem, the first available COMM port is 43... :roll:

I really need to find out why... :?

This is frustrating, to say the least. But it appears to be a problem with my computer and not the dongle/software...

Steve

Have a look at this http://www.geekzone.co.nz/forums.asp?ForumId=8&TopicId=422

[denivan]

Well, I did go out and get myself a Belkin Dongle. Still have the same problem, the first available COMM port is 43... :roll:
I really need to find out why... :?
This is frustrating, to say the least. But it appears to be a problem with my computer and not the dongle/software...
Steve

The most frustratring part of computers, something new doesn't work because of windows, you don't know why, the microsoft knowledge base is a maze and your only solutions seems to be....reinstalling windows from scratch...

You have my sympathy, Steve, I'm glad my dongle worked first time around. (although activesync works flaky, but LAN access works like a charm, and that's what I need the most)

Kind regards,
Ivan

[Steven Cedrone]

Well...

After a little registry hac...er, I mean, "tweaking"...

I just completed my first successful Activesync over Bluetooth... :way to go:

Man, what a PITA...

It wasn't a pretty process, but at least it works!!! I am in the process of building a new PC, I really want to see the software install and work on the first shot!!! That would restore my confidence in this technology...

Steve

[Steven Cedrone]

What kind of driver is included with the dongle ??

Jaap

Both the ActionTec and the Belkin had the same: WIDCOMM...

This seems to be an issue with my PC more than anything else...

I was actually very surprised, the software that was included with both almost looked identical - well, aside from Corporate Logo's that is... :wink:

The updated version of the software from Belkin looks quite a bit different though (I think ActionTec is a little behind in that regard)...

Steve

[JvanEkris]

What kind of driver is included with the dongle ??

Jaap

Both the ActionTec and the Belkin had the same: WIDCOMM...

This seems to be an issue with my PC more than anything else...

I was actually very surprised, the software that was included with both almost looked identical - well, aside from Corporate Logo's that is... :wink:

The updated version of the software from Belkin looks quite a bit different though (I think ActionTec is a little behind in that regard)...

SteveYou'd be surprised. In practice there are only three major software suppliers for the drivers, and two major hardware suppliers. So, if you'r a bit technical you can make anything work with anything as long as you are pragmatic.

You could try this manual (http://h18007.www1.hp.com/support/files/handheldiPAQ/us/download/15121.html). It should work for most Ipaq's, perhaps you missed a step.

Jaap

[JvanEkris]

Hi Steve,

I see that you'r getting irritated at bluetooth. I digged around on our board (i'm afraid that it is in Dutch, so giving you a link wouldn't help much:() to find similar cases. But having such a strange portnumber is not a known case :(.

One of the biggest things is getting the drivers to work in the first place. Unfortunatly, a large problem is that a lot of bluetooth drivers conflict amongst eachother. Before the Widecomm drivers can do their work, the old drivers have to be removed. This could cause the high portnumber (the other bluetooth drivers could have installed their own ports, and widecomm just continues from that point on). The best results have been made by a "format c:", but less drastic measures could do the trick as well, like removing all bluetooth drivers by hand.

Jaap

[Steven Cedrone]

One of the biggest things is getting the drivers to work in the first place. Unfortunatly, a large problem is that a lot of bluetooth drivers conflict amongst eachother. Before the Widecomm drivers can do their work, the old drivers have to be removed. This could cause the high portnumber (the other bluetooth drivers could have installed their own ports, and widecomm just continues from that point on). The best results have been made by a "format c:", but less drastic measures could do the trick as well, like removing all bluetooth drivers by hand.

Jaap,

Thanks!!! I think the problem must have been with something else I installed in the past. The first time I installed the Bluetooth software I came up with those port numbers. I am just curious what the heck may have caused the problem in the first place...

But at least it works now!!!

Steve

[JvanEkris]

Well,

Lets say that bluetooth isn't science/technology but more magic, or an unknown artform. The real trick to get bluetooth to work is to install bluetooth under a full moon, when the owl has cried 7 times (not 6 or 8 ), standing on one hand upside-down, drinking some strange herbal thee and singing strange songs all at the same time. At least that was the first time it worked for me (well i was really drunk and PO at the same time, but that's a minor detail). But since it looks silly in your manual and it is a legal minefield in the US when the installation-procedure goes awry somewhere (can you see the headlines: moderator severely injured when installing bluetooth dongle), it isn't printed in the manual ;)

Well, a lot of bluetooth applications depend on creating virtual serial ports to communicate to the rest of your PC. Most of them just check the highest reserved port and start from there. But what you see, and what really happens are two totally different stories. As i understood it, although drivers are inactive, they can claim serial ports in case they become active again. You can't see them in your hardware-listing, but the drivers are still (partially) present, claiming ports. Removing the drivers sometimes helps, but sometimes it doesn't. Most of the time you need to go into the registry to kill the entries by hand. However, finding them is sometimes very hard. So a lot of people start by formatting their harddrive.....

Jaap

[Steven Cedrone]

Lets say that bluetooth isn't science/technology but more magic, or an unknown artform. The real trick to get bluetooth to work is to install bluetooth under a full moon, when the owl has cried 7 times (not 6 or 8 ), standing on one hand upside-down, drinking some strange herbal thee and singing strange songs all at the same time. At least that was the first time it worked for me (well i was really drunk and PO at the same time, but that's a minor detail). But since it looks silly in your manual and it is a legal minefield in the US when the installation-procedure goes awry somewhere (can you see the headlines: moderator severely injured when installing bluetooth dongle), it isn't printed in the manual ;)

:rotfl:

It didn't work for me until I started chanting and burning incense... :wink:

Most of the time you need to go into the registry to kill the entries by hand. However, finding them is sometimes very hard. So a lot of people start by formatting their harddrive.....

Well, like I said, it wasn't easy (or pretty), but I got it working... :way to go:

Steve

[JvanEkris]

Ah,

Missed that last line in your previous post:), congratulations !!

Welcome to the dark order of bluetooth Voodoo-priests :)

Jaap

[Steven Cedrone]

Here's a funny side note...

I was contemplating my navel last night and had a thought: somewhere in the vast amounts of crap on my desk there was a Socket Bluetooth CF card (the old version that is not 1.1 compliant). So I said to myself: "Self, let's give it a shot". I was having a bad day, and nothing would save it - except being able to go downstairs after a three hour fight with technology and smashing something (the card) with a six pound sledge...

I paid the daughters a small bribe, showed them what to look for and waited. Soon enough, I had it in my hand! I grabbed my old and faithful 548, sync'd it with my PC, downloaded the updated drivers and slowly pulled it from the cradle...

With trembling hand I turned on Bluetooth. I Scanned for Bluetooth devices and found my desktop. I paired the two. So far, so good. I chose ActiveSync and waited...

I didn't have to wait for too long. ActiveSync opened up and the 548 sync'd on the first shot. I stared at my PC, unblinking...

Damn, that was easy! I put away the card, gave the kids the 548, and went to bed early. So much for a night of fighting with Bluetooth... :wink:

Guess I'll have to find something else to smash... :lol:

Steve

[JustinGTP]

See! I told you bluetooth is underestimated! I think it will cool just to get a 548 or the 565! :)

-Justin.

[Thinkingmandavid]

so we have a lot of bluetooth threads and I am wondering how many of them are actually connected and the same?

[JvanEkris]

Well,

IMHO, this was one user who needed help on a specific problem with a specific machine with a specific driver. Most other threads are about "does this work" or "is bluetooth dead". Although very funny to read and write, the practical use is precisely zero, null, nothing. IMHO, this thread helped one person a lot, and hopefully other people as well. I don't see much "my bluetooth device does not seem to work with...." threads here that resemble this one a lot.

Besides, one moderator was heavily involved, so i recon he knows how the search function works and he would heve merged it with another thread if it resembled it too much ;).

Jaap

PS: What happened to that nice avatar Steven had ?? This one is a bit on the dark side isn't it ?? He now became "The evil moderator from Hell :devilboy: ??"

[Steven Cedrone]

PS: What happened to that nice avatar Steven had ?? This one is a bit on the dark side isn't it ?? He now became "The evil moderator from Hell :devilboy: ??"

Halloween... :wink:

The beanie will be back next week...

Steve

[JvanEkris]

PS: What happened to that nice avatar Steven had ?? This one is a bit on the dark side isn't it ?? He now became "The evil moderator from Hell :devilboy: ??"

Halloween... :wink:

The beanie will be back next week...

SteveThank god,

I was starting to worry ;) Halloween is something that has gone quite past me.......

Jaap

[Steven Cedrone]

With tail between legs, I return the ActionTec dongle...

Nothing but problems with that one and no response from support. I will try one of the recommended dongles instead... :wink:


YeeHaa!

ActionTec support just emailed me on my problem! I sent the question on Thursday October 2nd, not a bad turnaround time, eh?

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 4:47 PM
To: Cedrone, Steven (IT)
Subject: Actiontec Response for CallID: 00188012

Steven,

DO NOT reply to this email. This is a send only account.

The reponse to this issue is below:
=================================================================
I will forward your request for Bluetooth support.
=================================================================
If this solution did not correct your issue please click this link
http://support.actiontec.com/email_support/support_form.php?callid=00188
012

Thank you,

Actiontec Electronics


Many days late and many dollars short!

How lame!

Steve

[Janak Parekh]

8O And it's not even a reasonable response... why did they even bother?

--janak

[Steven Cedrone]

8O And it's not even a reasonable response... why did they even bother?

--janak

I have no idea! But, I was having a bad morning until I received the email! When I finally got done laughing, I just had to post! :lol:

Steve

[JvanEkris]

They have probably investigated it very thoroughly, and company policy probably dictates that you tell the customer what progress is made (none) before they trash your request.....

Jaap

[JonnoB]

BT and Fast User Switching. Whenever I switch between active desktops, the Bluetooth Stack crashes. I am using the latest Widcomm stack available for the IOGear USB BT dongle.

Also, on another topic... why won't ActiveSync stay active if I switch desktops?