Replacing the MS Wireless Desktop Bluetooth modem

[dkackman]

I bought the MS Bluetooth wireless desktop just after it hit the market. It was my first venture into BT and gave me geek bragging rights around the office for a few days.

Well months have past, and aside from the poor battery life in the mouse, it's worked fine, but now I just got an iPaq 1945, my first new device with BT.

So I try to get it to sync over BT. Nothing.
I try to browse my desktop. Nothing.
I try to use my desktop's internet connection. Nothing.

So after some google-ing I realize that the MS bluetooth stack is junk, and only supports a couple of profiles. :devilboy:

So what I want to do is replace the MS bluetooth receiver with one that has better drivers. One I'm looking at is the DLink. It uses the Widcomm stack which apparently has wide profile support. Another option I'm considering is taking my MS stuff home (where I have WiFi so no need to BT internet sharing) and replacing it with the Logitech BT desktop.

Anybody got suggestions for a good desktop bluetooth modem? The two main profiles that I want to be able to make use of are the HID and LAN profiles (for the ketboard/mouse and sharing my internet connection with my iPaq).

Anybody using the MS desktop hardware with a non-MS modem?
Are there any sites out there that have a comparison of profile support?

Any tips or experiences are appreciated.

cheers,

don

[Eitel]

Do a search on Geekzone. There are instructions on how to use your MS BT adapter with the latest Widcomm drivers.

I have my MS BT adapter working great with my iPAQ 4155 and my Sproint T608 phone.

[dkackman]

I just did a search on geekzone and only got 3 hits, none of which look correct.

I did some more googling and there are instructions out there for making this work. However they range from changing some entries in an inf file to hacking the binary image of a dll using a hex editor.

Where did you get the widcomm stack from and if you can remember or find the instructions you used please post.

Thanks!

[Eitel]

Found them (http://forum.gsmhosting.com/vbb/showthread.php?s=07ea63d6fc564c9438b8dac9e053d297&threadid=95594&perpage=15&pagenumber=1)

[freitasm]

I just did a search on geekzone and only got 3 hits, none of which look correct.

I did some more googling and there are instructions out there for making this work. However they range from changing some entries in an inf file to hacking the binary image of a dll using a hex editor.

Where did you get the widcomm stack from and if you can remember or find the instructions you used please post.

Thanks!

That's why we removed the references to this hack. Users have to source a third party stack, change some dll using an hex editor and install.

Because we know this may cause problems with copyright owners, we have decided to remove postings in our forums with these instructions.

You can find them on gsmhosting.com as pointed by Eitel.

[Vulcan]

Something just seems wrong when you have to hack a progarm just to get it to work and somehow you end up in trouble for doing it.....One of those things in todays world that just leave you shaking your head....

[freitasm]

Something just seems wrong when you have to hack a progarm just to get it to work and somehow you end up in trouble for doing it.....One of those things in todays world that just leave you shaking your head....

I had the chance to talk to a Widcomm person during the Bluetooth Americas 2003 (my report here (http://www.geekzone.co.nz/content.asp?contentid=1968)) and I see why this is the way it is.

Unlike NVIDIA which distributes the hardware AND software for their graphic cards, Widcomm distributes software only.

Companies like Bluetake, DLINK, Dell, TDK, Belkin buy the hardware from one manufacturer (lets say CSR), and the software from Widcomm.

The software is licensed to work with a certain range of MAC addresses (yes, Bluetooth has MAC addresses). This means that TDK buys the software, integrates, perform system testing, regression testing, acceptance testing and gives support for the whole package.

Another company buys the software and does not provide support, updates, or documentation.

Would be fair to have all the investment put in by TDK, Belkin, DLINK, Dell, Bluetake or any other company gone through the drain because of these small companies that are only there to sell goodies without giving anything else? Would be fair to allow users buying El Cheapo Bluetooth adapter to benefit of using the very good software other companies offer, for free?

No, I don't think so. This is how it works... In NVIDIA's case it doesn't matter because their software will run on their hardware - regardless of who is reselling it. But they already make money on hardware. This is different in the case of Widcomm, XTNDConnect, BlueSoleil, etc...

When someone downloads the Dell 1.4 drivers, hack into it to use with El Cheapo adapter, they're actually using copyrighted material without a licence. Easy as this.

[Vulcan]

The real criminals are the companies that release products that clearly do not work/perform as advertised.....They should be required to refund every purchasers money. This refund should come from the companies that make the product themselves rather than forcing a retailer to eat it.

[freitasm]

Agreed. But when these companies are based in some remote country, send a batch of products that CompAmerica (just a made up name) sells and then go out of business, what can a user do?

Majority of users will see the Bluetooth product (sometimes even using the trademark without being licensed to do so) in the shelves and buy the product without really thinking about support, drivers, manual, etc.

At least the Microsoft Bluetooth dongle has an upgrade path (or so MS says) with XP SP 2 coming out soon. TDK, Belkin and DLINK offer this. But what about the others?

[Vulcan]

Trouble is that it is not always the no name companies doing this....This thread started off with the fellow having trouble with his MS bluetooth gear...I guess I just expect better from a company like MS as they have the resources to release a fully working product. I guess I am just tired to getting burned...I read product reviews and hear how great the latest widget is and I happen to be in the market for that item....So I buy it and find out that there are a ton of issues with it and I am left holding the bag.

[freitasm]

Some reviews are rigged... Have a look on Google for this: http://groups.google.co.nz/groups?hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&newwindow=1&safe=off&threadm=be09aeca.0312282043.3e97c736%40posting.google.com&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dpalm%2Bscam%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26hl%3Den and only show the good things.

I reviewed the MS Keyboard and said it's good in terms of functionality but don't buy now - or until the required profiles are there. Others know about this but try finding another reviewer that said anything about the lack of profiles.

[Vulcan]

I saw an example first hand....A friend has a computer hobby website....Did it for fun for several years but his hit counter in the last year has really jumped up. He was able to pimp himself to several hardware companies to get free stuff to review. After the review he gets to keep the products but in his reviews he never tells the readers this. I had a long talk with him about this practise but I was not able to get him to see that he was in a conflict. I think it is OK to take a free sample for review but it should be disclosed in the review as well as the fact that you will be personally keeping the item after the review. I wish there was a Consumer Reports style of website for review....They don't except anything for free but rather buy a retail product off a stores shelves. Their reviews are OK for blenders and stuff but they don't "Get" computers.

[Vulcan]

I read that thread....sad! I am thinking about buying that new Logitec MX900 Bluetooth optical mouse with build in bluetooth hub....I think I will wait until I hear from somebody to test it in the real world first.

[freitasm]

Most of the companies that send things to Geekzone expect the items returned. The ones that I didn't send back were used in giveaways.

The Logitech Hub is a good option - it's running the Widcomm software, so it's the same as TDK and others. And it does support all important profiles (LAN, dial-up, serial, OBEX, HID). It seems to be a good one.

I'm still trying to have one for review.

PS. Pretty cool avatar you're using.

[Vulcan]

I don't think that the mx900 is availible for sale yet....Last time I check on the Logitech site they were talking early 2004. I do like the rechargeable battery...I currently have the first generation Logitech cordless optical mouse and I am very happy with it but it is a battery eater.

Thanks....I have used that avatar for a long time.

[freitasm]

I looked for it at Fry's, Compusa, and other places but couldn't find. But there are review units available and I'm in the queue... But have to wait for the Australian folks to move :?

I have a Logitech Cordless iTouch. I've replaced the batteries on my keyboard only twice in four years, and my mouse every three months. And I use this every day...

[dkackman]

Companies like Bluetake, DLINK, Dell, TDK, Belkin buy the hardware from one manufacturer (lets say CSR), and the software from Widcomm.

The software is licensed to work with a certain range of MAC addresses (yes, Bluetooth has MAC addresses). This means that TDK buys the software, integrates, perform system testing, regression testing, acceptance testing and gives support for the whole package.

Another company buys the software and does not provide support, updates, or documentation.


I originally bought the MS bluetooth desktop right as it hit the market, and admitedly without research. Early on I had great hope for bluetooth as a means to achieve pervasive connectivity in a highly mobile, highly networked world. I wrongly assumed that since interoperability is the raison d'etre for bluetooth, that it would all just work.

However, as subsequent experience has shown, this assumption couldn't be more wrong. I wonder if the business model described above is the core reason for what is beginning to look like the eventual failure of bluetooth to catch on.

The original promise of this technology was that devices would form ad-hoc networks of functionality on demand, with little or no end-user configuration. However, if this level of interoperability is dependent on a stack of three companies for each connecting device (the modem reseller, the modem manufacturer, and the author of the bluetooth stack) I don't see how bluetooth can ever be made to work, without a protean effort on the part of the entire industry.

If I were to blame anyone for my personal experience with bluetooth (other than myself for being a naive early adopter) it would be MS on the one hand for not truly supporting the technology with their product. But I would also have to blame the bluetooth supply chain industry for devising a business model that appears to be crippling this otherwise promising technology.

don

[freitasm]

This is a good post from an end-user's point of view. Well said!

[dkackman]

Found them (http://forum.gsmhosting.com/vbb/showthread.php?s=07ea63d6fc564c9438b8dac9e053d297&threadid=95594&perpage=15&pagenumber=1)

FYI. I got it working. Took me a couple of tries though. Thank God for restore points.

Can now active sync, use the keyboard/mouse combo, and share my desktop's network connection to my 1945.

Thanks for the info. This has been a very good learning experience.