...Or Is Intel Really Giving Up On Bluetooth?

[Janak Parekh]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/69/35687.html' target='_blank'>http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/69/35687.html</a><br /><br /></div>From the conflicting-news department, here comes the counterpoint to Ed's <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=24758">earlier article</a>. The Register is reporting that Bluetooth will be integrated in Intel's next-generation Centrino chipsets.<br /><br />"Intel plans to integrate Bluetooth onto its next-generation Wi-Fi sub-system, it has emerged. Speaking during his IDF keynote, Sean Maloney, Intel general manager of the company's Communications Group, revealed the chip maker is to offer a 'specially designed low-power... integrated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi device'. The module, he said, will be 'going into production later this year'."<br /><br />So, take your pick -- Rob Enderle reporting that Intel is ditching Bluetooth, or the Register reporting that Intel is adopting it more. ;)<br /><br />Here's my take on the situation: UWB is potentially a long-term competitor to Bluetooth, but it's years and years away: probably 5 years, from what I've heard. There are still problems of interference, let alone FCC approval. Bluetooth, on the other hand, is here and is here now. As for US carriers, they might be turning around: Sprint recently started <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=22306">selling the T608</a> and Verizon <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=24476">may be getting</a> a new Motorola phone with Bluetooth. The GSM carriers already carry several models.<br /><br />From a different perspective: long-term, Intel is adopting UWB to act as "Wireless USB", but USB is built around the PC -- it's primarily a "host"-based protocol, not a peer-to-peer protocol. Intel knows this, and is deliberately doing so because they want to sell their PC chipsets with "wireless USB". On the other hand, Bluetooth is device-centric: you can use Bluetooth for your cell phone to talk to its headset. Somehow, I don't see myself installing USB drivers on my cell phone to use a wireless headset anytime soon. Unless, of course, the cell phone ran a full-blown desktop OS. ;) Long-term, if anything, Bluetooth challenges the desktop-based hegemony -- if we're carrying a collection of smart devices in our pockets, do we need Intel's core competency at all? (We might only use Intel's XScale products, and acquiring that ARM technology was a very smart move on their part.) Moreover, Bluetooth is becoming simpler to use -- I had almost zero problems pairing my devices a few years ago, and it's gotten better, not worse, since.<br /><br />And of course, 5 years down the road, no one really can predict which short-range wireless technology will win. While Bluetooth is slow now, for all we know Bluetooth 4 will be out and will provide the performance benefits of UWB without its downsides (especially interference). Bluetooth 2.0 is already around the corner. I guess Ed and I will just have to place bets to see who wins. :lol: Let's make a poll and see what you, as a readership, thinks.

[Ed Hansberry]

http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/hansberry/2003/20031016-bluetoothdead.gif

:lol:

[Duncan]

So let's see:

On one hand we have the Register article in which definite plans from Intel, with definite dates, backed up by actual quotes are given.

On the other hand we have the assertions of a 'professional pundit', who thinks that an under-specc'ed Ferrari laptop that goes vroom is cool, and reaches unsupported conclusions without referencing anything actually *said* by anyone from Intel.

Gee - how *should* I vote...! :lol:

[Jonathon Watkins]

Gee - how *should* I vote...! :lol:

Hey, that's what they invented fences for! :wink:

[Duncan]

Hey, that's what they invented fences for!

As my English teacher was fond of saying - 'Those who sit on fences get splinters in their bums'. :)

[Janak Parekh]

:lol:
Admit it Ed, you post "Bluetooth is dead" articles just so that you can use that nifty piece of clipart. :lol:

--janak

[Jonathon Watkins]

I think he photoshopped that Bluetooth logo right onto that coffin.

Look Ma, no wires. :lol:

[Ed Hansberry]

Admit it Ed, you post "Bluetooth is dead" articles just so that you can use that nifty piece of clipart. :lol:
Maybe I'll make it my avatar...

[sponge]

Whether it works, or it's dead are 2 different things. BT may be used by a lot of people, but now unsupported.

[Janak Parekh]

BT may be used by a lot of people, but now unsupported.
Care to define what you mean by "unsupported", considering new BT products are coming out every day?

--janak

[johncruise]

Whether it works, or it's dead are 2 different things. BT may be used by a lot of people, but now unsupported.

Check this out http://www.bluetooth.com/products/ first before you say that.

intersting.... Toyota Prius is bluetooth enabled already :-) Nifty

[Janak Parekh]

intersting.... Toyota Prius is bluetooth enabled already :-) Nifty
Great point! Cars are the next great frontier for Bluetooth. From what I'm hearing, people are leaving Verizon in increasing numbers because they want a handsfree solution that's compatible with their car, and that might be the reason why Verizon might be releasing a Bluetooth phone. :)

--janak

[mobile]

I use my Bluetooth devices every day for many different things using nearly all the profiles offered. Works great! Really don't know how many cables I'd have to lug around if I didn't have BT. In addition, I've set up several systems with BT for my clients, and none of them seem to have any problems. There are, or maybe were, bad implementations out there. If you buy the $12 dongle, maybe you shouldn't expect to get the same functionality as with the $40-50 dongles. After all, when you buy a Kia you don't expect to get a BMW, do you? Or, in Ed's case, an Audi ... :wink: ... and whatever you do, don't buy Microsoft's BT products ... at least not until they provide all the "necessary" profiles.

Just like USB went from 1.1 to 2.0, BT will see performance improvements.

Bluetooth is not dead, it's just starting ... :lol:

/// mobile

[klinux]

Listening to what Rob Enderle has to say? Got to be kidding me right?

[jonathanchoo]

World rejoice, WiFi is dead! Why? Because none of my mobiles have them (although the previous four has Bluetooth) and none of my PDAs have them (because I don't have use for them - and my mobiles don't have them and they did not make WiFi headset). And there are no WiFi hotspots on my favourite park, my favourite beach and on the train, on the bus, pretty much anywhere in I have been... And the overhyped T-Mobile/Starbuck's WiFi is so expensive with their pitiful £5.50 :roll: an hour deal not to mention overpriced and tasteless coffee (go Coffee Republic!).

But with Bluetooth and a GPRS mobile I can connect easily from anywhere on this planet. Bluetooth is the future 0X . Just because American mobile carrier's are reluctant (or is this the fault of FCC?) to introduce Bluetooth mobile devices that does not mean its dead. It just means they are being ignorant to the fact that Bluetooth is a useful PAN device (which most of the World thankfully already realise a long time ago).

[farnold]

Hm, Bluetooth is dead? I don't think so...

Janak & the other mates from PockeyPCThoughts... I think you should have seperated the votes between North America and the rest of the world... I'm pretty sure that this is almost a regional aspect... while all around the world people are more and more using Bluetooth some very old-fashioned regulations in the States prevent a broader development...

[denivan]

If Ed was european he'd probably say that WiFi was dead. At least in Belgium there are very few hotspots and people really don't know what the technology is all about, WiFi afaik is mostly used here indoors for wireless routers, not for hotspots like in the US.

[Ramin]

intersting.... Toyota Prius is bluetooth enabled already :-) Nifty
Great point! Cars are the next great frontier for Bluetooth. From what I'm hearing, people are leaving Verizon in increasing numbers because they want a handsfree solution that's compatible with their car, and that might be the reason why Verizon might be releasing a Bluetooth phone. :)
Hmmm... I wonder if Ed's car will ever be Bluetooth enabled? :mrgreen: http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/images/avatars/13182758613fa3d6eb42919.jpg Long live Bluetooth! 8)

:idea: I think it would be great if all cars had integrated GPS receivers and Bluetooth radios which could work with our Pocket PCs.

[Janak Parekh]

Janak & the other mates from PockeyPCThoughts... I think you should have seperated the votes between North America and the rest of the world... I'm pretty sure that this is almost a regional aspect... while all around the world people are more and more using Bluetooth some very old-fashioned regulations in the States prevent a broader development...
Nothing to do with regulations, all to do with stupidity. Anyway, it'd be hard to separate by region, as Ed and I are both American. ;)

--janak

[Ed Hansberry]

Nothing to do with regulations, all to do with stupidity. Anyway, it'd be hard to separate by region, as Ed and I are both American. ;)

I'm American. You may not be. Last I heard, NY was its own country. http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=218171&highlight=#218171

:wink:

[Janak Parekh]

I'm American. You may not be. Last I heard, NY was its own country.
Are you saying the feds messed up on my passport, then? That it should be revoked? {looks around} Hang on, there's a knock at the door. I'll be right back.

:lol:

--janak

[farnold]

OK then, yanks :D have a look at a thread at Arne Hess' thread at PPCW under http://www.ppcw.net/index.php?itemid=1808 about the WiFi frustration in Europe... sounds familiar to your BT frustration in the States doesn't it :lol:

[Duncan]

Nothing to do with regulations, all to do with stupidity. Anyway, it'd be hard to separate by region, as Ed and I are both American.

I always thought the problem could be seen as a consequence of a lack of regulation. Surely BT has suffered in the main due to the CDMA/GSM split in the US? - something not allowed to happen elsewhere.

I know, I know... mentioning regulation to an American is like a red rag to a bull...!

Mind you - following on from what farnold says - I have two PC and one gadget magazines beside me - all bought within the past week and all with articles/columns complaining about our shoddy, fractured, non-roaming WiFi services in the UK (where standard cost for WiFi use is about £6 per hour! 8O )... so I reckon our national wireless providers (and governments) have lessons to learn from each other on this!

[Janak Parekh]

I always thought the problem could be seen as a consequence of a lack of regulation. Surely BT has suffered in the main due to the CDMA/GSM split in the US? - something not allowed to happen elsewhere.
What I meant is that it's not directly due to regulation. I guess you could say the lack of regulation gives carriers in the US more power to determine "appropriate" phones. Of course, that segues into a different discussion regarding the advantages and disadvantages of cellular regulation...

shoddy, fractured, non-roaming WiFi services in the UK (where standard cost for WiFi use is about £6 per hour! 8O )... so I reckon our national wireless providers (and governments) have lessons to learn from each other on this!
Sounds like it. ;)

--janak