or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › CSR proposes Apple use its chips for wireless iPod headphones
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

CSR proposes Apple use its chips for wireless iPod headphones

post #1 of 53
Thread Starter 
Wireless technology group Cambridge Silicon Radio (CSR) has approached Apple Computer with the idea of installing its Bluetooth wireless microchips into future generations of the iPod music player, according to a new report.

The chips would allow Apple to manufacture iPods with Bluetooth wireless headsets, an increasingly popular feature of mobile devices among consumers, writes the The Independent.

Following a bullish trading update on Thursday, which showed sales of CSR's Bluetooth chips rising faster than expected, the company confirmed to the The Independent that it had approached Apple with the idea. Its chips are already being installed in more than 60% of all new devices that are given official Bluetooth design accreditation, the report states.

Apple documents pertaining to iPods with similar wireless communication capabilities surfaced on the Internet last November. The documents depict iPods that can transmit information wirelessly to other media devices or a computer.

One patent filing made by Apple describes a handheld music player that includes a wireless transmitter which can "transmit a continuous music feed to one or more personal tuning devices that each include a receiver capable of receiving information from the transmitter over the wireless connection."

Analysts have also vouched their belief that "Apple is trying to figure out how to make a wireless iPod" be it via Bluetooth or WiFi. While such a device is "likely still on the drafting table," UBS Investment Research analyst Ben Reitzes said a wireless iPod could be ready for the market by the end of 2006.

Although a Bluetooh-enabled iPod would not allow users to directly tap into the company's iTunes Music Store, it would do away with the need to use a USB or FireWire cable when performing small synchronizations with iTunes on a Mac or PC.
post #2 of 53
Yea the way foward. Me personly would love an ipod that could transmit
music to my Airport Express rather than transmit from my Mac that way I could see what music will be played next etc.

G5 2GHZ Power Mac, iPod Shuffle (1st Gen),iPod Nano (2nd Gen),iPod (5th Gen), Apple TV, Apple TV 2G x2, iPad 2,iPhone 4S, rMBP 15" 2.6

Reply

G5 2GHZ Power Mac, iPod Shuffle (1st Gen),iPod Nano (2nd Gen),iPod (5th Gen), Apple TV, Apple TV 2G x2, iPad 2,iPhone 4S, rMBP 15" 2.6

Reply
post #3 of 53
Well, announcing to the world that you are trying to do business with Apple and leaking what a possible product feature will be, is an absolute GUARANTEE that you either a) are not doing any business with Apple whatsoever, and b) you never will.

I suspect this is just some idiot CEO's attempt to drum up some business from Apple's competitors. Leak you tried to sell to Apple which gets Apple's competitors to call you.

This is just a sleazy sales technique. Nothing more.
post #4 of 53
I suspect we won't see this until bluetooth connections in cars are very common. Remember to keep the headphones charged every day would just be a pain in the rear end, and there really isn't a huge market of nice Bluetooth headphones yet, and many of the ones available are fairly heavy.

Steve is going to do his best to make sure the user experience doesn't suck (note he let Belkin manufacture the suctastic CF reader). Also, how many rivals offer this functionality in their players? one has to figure that Apple will follow on this rather than lead, simply because rival companies will likely try to jump ahead of the curve simply to have the feature line item, regardless of usability.

On a side note, I'm wondering if Apple won't release a "Nano Tubby edition" that is a bit thicker but incorporates a 8GB 1" drive to attract people who need a bit more space, but like the smaller form factor over the full size 20GB iPod.
post #5 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by ChevalierMalFet
I suspect we won't see this until bluetooth connections in cars are very common. Remember to keep the headphones charged every day would just be a pain in the rear end, and there really isn't a huge market of nice Bluetooth headphones yet, and many of the ones available are fairly heavy.

Also audio quality is a big factor, how good is wireless audio? anyone? It seems that good wireless audio would be quite pricey... the whole thing just seems highly unlikely.
"Any idiot can make things complicated. It takes a genius to make them simple" -Albert Einstein
Reply
"Any idiot can make things complicated. It takes a genius to make them simple" -Albert Einstein
Reply
post #6 of 53
Nothing wrong with wireless audio. The music I stream on my Airport Express is
superb. Seriously, really is excellent. Apple will design a device where the headphones will be charged via USB when charging the iPod I suspect.

G5 2GHZ Power Mac, iPod Shuffle (1st Gen),iPod Nano (2nd Gen),iPod (5th Gen), Apple TV, Apple TV 2G x2, iPad 2,iPhone 4S, rMBP 15" 2.6

Reply

G5 2GHZ Power Mac, iPod Shuffle (1st Gen),iPod Nano (2nd Gen),iPod (5th Gen), Apple TV, Apple TV 2G x2, iPad 2,iPhone 4S, rMBP 15" 2.6

Reply
post #7 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by jimbo123
Yea the way foward. Me personly would love an ipod that could transmit
music to my Airport Express rather than transmit from my Mac that way I could see what music will be played next etc.



Here it is. Enjoy.

post #8 of 53
great mock up.....
----------------------------------------------------
guys...remember: BATTERY......bluetooth probably drains the hell out of the ipod/headphones.
-----------------------------------------------------
one thing to suport the bluetooth deal is that they cahnged all their lines to include bluetooth 2.0

----------------------------------------------------

i recently got a bluetooth headphone form motorola...and it's sort of a hazzle because it needs to be paired....i use it for my pw and for my phone and i have to make a quick configuration...apple would have to do something easier.

--------------------------------------------------------

the best motorola headset can hold up to 8 hours talk time and about 120 standby. so take the mic out and you probably get 10-12 hrs i gues....thats right about the same amount for the ipod. the diference is the charging. once they do it it will porbably not come standard, because that is something to profit from. i would do it as to small headsets, conected by a small thin rope, behind the head. so that you son't loose them.

i would only put the BT in the higher end models so that you don't compromise space in the nano/shuffle
post #9 of 53
just one error in the mock up....the headphones...the nano has the port inthe bottom because the screen takes up the space. but otherwise good job.
post #10 of 53
If those are 1 inch thick, that must mean they are like 8 inches wide. That's HUGE! That's more than they are now.

J/K
post #11 of 53
erm, if that is 1 inch thick, what is it like a foot tall?
post #12 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by hkbaq
great mock up.....
----------------------------------------------------
guys...remember: BATTERY......bluetooth probably drains the hell out of the ipod/headphones.
-----------------------------------------------------
one thing to suport the bluetooth deal is that they cahnged all their lines to include bluetooth 2.0

----------------------------------------------------

i recently got a bluetooth headphone form motorola...and it's sort of a hazzle because it needs to be paired....i use it for my pw and for my phone and i have to make a quick configuration...apple would have to do something easier.

--------------------------------------------------------

the best motorola headset can hold up to 8 hours talk time and about 120 standby. so take the mic out and you probably get 10-12 hrs i gues....thats right about the same amount for the ipod. the diference is the charging. once they do it it will porbably not come standard, because that is something to profit from. i would do it as to small headsets, conected by a small thin rope, behind the head. so that you son't loose them.

i would only put the BT in the higher end models so that you don't compromise space in the nano/shuffle

Apple is now incorporating Bluetooth 2 in its machines.

It uses much less power, but is also much faster. It also has more range, and is much more secure. So think along this new standard rather than the old Bluetooth.

What might not be practical with Ver. 1 is with ver. 2.
post #13 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by tak1108
If those are 1 inch thick, that must mean they are like 8 inches wide. That's HUGE! That's more than they are now.

J/K


Sorry ... I meant 0.3 inch wide. Forgive me ... Damn these European !!! ;-)
post #14 of 53
One compalins about the mock-uped iPod is one foot tall and another complains about battery time.

Can´t you see the one is the solution to the other?
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #15 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by hkbaq
just one error in the mock up....the headphones...the nano has the port inthe bottom because the screen takes up the space. but otherwise good job.

These are not nano. and , yes... I forgot the dock connector on the bottom !! ;-)
post #16 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by Anders
One compalins about the mock-uped iPod is one foot tall and another complains about battery time.

Can´t you see the one is the solution to the other?


ehehehehe !!!

Picture this ... The removable caps could contain a autonomous battery that would be charged when the iPod is docked , and once it's playing on it's own the battery in the cap would handle netwouking chips inside it. That way the iPos battery would not be drained when streaming....

And the two tone lower part could come in colours ...



post #17 of 53
So do they sell them by the twelve pack so you can listen continuously for 6 hours?
post #18 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by ChevalierMalFet
So do they sell them by the twelve pack so you can listen continuously for 6 hours?

LOL !Nuclear fusion , man, Nuclear fusion ! LOL...

seriously...Of course that if the caps contained a self powered battery they would be bigger (taller) and wouldn't look as proportionate as depicted....
post #19 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by European guy
LOL !Nuclear fusion , man, Nuclear fusion ! LOL...

seriously...Of course that if the caps contained a self powered battery they would be bigger (taller) and wouldn't look as proportionate as depicted....

Not necessarily. Button lithium rechargable cells are small yet would do the trick. Use two as in a camera.

Nice mock-ups!
post #20 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by jimbo123
Nothing wrong with wireless audio. The music I stream on my Airport Express is superb.

That's over WiFi, not Bluetooth.

Certain wireless audio doesn't work particularly well (yet), like wireless speakers.
post #21 of 53
european guy... cool i want the iPod Mini design to stage a dramatic comeback for the 40gb and 60gb iPod. big nice color screen... plays videos, along with the announcement of the iTMS movie store...!!!!!!
post #22 of 53
That's good. I have the logitech bluetooth headphones for the iPod, but I would love to see Apple intergrate some form of wireless technology in, granted battery life does not suffer. Maybe the upcoming wireless usb standard being developed.
"I'll either make this world a better place or bring it to its ruin. Destiny will determine that"
Reply
"I'll either make this world a better place or bring it to its ruin. Destiny will determine that"
Reply
post #23 of 53
Let's get crazy....

post #24 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by European guy
Let's get crazy....


Uh yeah. I think we're starting to overflow our cups.

Welll, why not 3D projected in space in front or above?
post #25 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by BWhaler
Well, announcing to the world that you are trying to do business with Apple and leaking what a possible product feature will be, is an absolute GUARANTEE that you either a) are not doing any business with Apple whatsoever, and b) you never will.

I suspect this is just some idiot CEO's attempt to drum up some business from Apple's competitors. Leak you tried to sell to Apple which gets Apple's competitors to call you.

This is just a sleazy sales technique. Nothing more.


You are so absolutely right. Cigar for you sir.

I can even picture Steve's face when he read this news item... not pretty.
post #26 of 53
my post made no sense whatsoever upon a quick re-reading. move along...nothing to see here.
post #27 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by sunilraman
my post made no sense whatsoever upon a quick re-reading. move along...nothing to see here.

It's ok, we're used to it.
post #28 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by hkbaq
great mock up.....
----------------------------------------------------
guys...remember: BATTERY......bluetooth probably drains the hell out of the ipod/headphones.
-----------------------------------------------------
one thing to suport the bluetooth deal is that they cahnged all their lines to include bluetooth 2.0

----------------------------------------------------

i recently got a bluetooth headphone form motorola...and it's sort of a hazzle because it needs to be paired....i use it for my pw and for my phone and i have to make a quick configuration...apple would have to do something easier.

--------------------------------------------------------

the best motorola headset can hold up to 8 hours talk time and about 120 standby. so take the mic out and you probably get 10-12 hrs i gues....thats right about the same amount for the ipod. the diference is the charging. once they do it it will porbably not come standard, because that is something to profit from. i would do it as to small headsets, conected by a small thin rope, behind the head. so that you son't loose them.

i would only put the BT in the higher end models so that you don't compromise space in the nano/shuffle

Something like that would be superb. Does everyone agree this should be the way foward?

8)

G5 2GHZ Power Mac, iPod Shuffle (1st Gen),iPod Nano (2nd Gen),iPod (5th Gen), Apple TV, Apple TV 2G x2, iPad 2,iPhone 4S, rMBP 15" 2.6

Reply

G5 2GHZ Power Mac, iPod Shuffle (1st Gen),iPod Nano (2nd Gen),iPod (5th Gen), Apple TV, Apple TV 2G x2, iPad 2,iPhone 4S, rMBP 15" 2.6

Reply
post #29 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by jimbo123
Something like that would be superb. Does everyone agree this should be the way foward?

8)

Well Jimbo, as I think I almost understood him, sort of. So, is he saying that we should have a Bluetooth headphone that recharges seperately from the iPod? Or what?

Because those exist now. There are at least three. I'm not sure if they are made FOR the iPod though. Read it over a month or more ago.

Bluetooth always has to be paired. I'm not sure if he understood that or thinks it's just for that device. I don't see the problem with charging. That would be no different than it is now.

If, as I THINK he's saying, a headphone for built-in Bluetooth, that's idle speculation until Apple produces one WITH Bluetooth.
post #30 of 53
Originally posted by jimbo123
Something like that would be superb. Does everyone agree this should be the way foward?


hmmm.... an iPod that uses some sort of wireless technology to stream music to your stereo, other parts of the house, or to your wireless headphone, that uses the same wireless technology to synchronise Tunes, contacts and calendar info quickly and seamlessly with your mac or windows or linux(?!!!) pc? which recharges easily and has long battery life?

most definitely. this is the next step in the iPod evolution, besides a PSP-size/quality screen for watching videos

in a sleeker, tougher iPod-mini-esque form factor BRING IT ON, APPLE, BRING IT MATE. BRING IT.

the only problem is that current 802.11g and bluetooth flavours to not offer these sort of benefits just yet.... what new wireless technology could apple use??
post #31 of 53
how awesome also would it be for said iPod Video where you can either watch it on the go, or just hook it up easily to your tv to watch standard definition... said videos sync and previewed and organised seamlessly using iTunes with Video

fuck intel's viiv** and M$ media center bullshit. fuck a standalone divx-player device thingy. an iPod Video would be way better. way..

**i do hold out hope that an intel chip of some sort
[as demonstrated at intel idf playing h.264 with just something like a 1ghz xscale(?) IIRC]
might make the iPod WirelessMedia 60gb and 80gb a reality in the near future.
post #32 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by sunilraman
Originally posted by jimbo123
Something like that would be superb. Does everyone agree this should be the way foward?


hmmm.... an iPod that uses some sort of wireless technology to stream music to your stereo, other parts of the house, or to your wireless headphone, that uses the same wireless technology to synchronise Tunes, contacts and calendar info quickly and seamlessly with your mac or windows or linux(?!!!) pc? which recharges easily and has long battery life?

most definitely. this is the next step in the iPod evolution, besides a PSP-size/quality screen for watching videos

in a sleeker, tougher iPod-mini-esque form factor BRING IT ON, APPLE, BRING IT MATE. BRING IT.

the only problem is that current 802.11g and bluetooth flavours to not offer these sort of benefits just yet.... what new wireless technology could apple use??

I disagree the 'g' standard is more than adequate to stream music to a Hi Fi
proof in this is the Airport Express connected to a Hi Fi.

54mb band width is sufficent to stream music.
Just think if you can stream music by iPod then If you have a computer which already has Airport Express or equivalant then you could put songs on the ipod from your computer! or vice versa also sync with iPhoto etc
all of a sudden you have a mini PDA!!

Possibilities are endless. Just need to have good battery life.

G5 2GHZ Power Mac, iPod Shuffle (1st Gen),iPod Nano (2nd Gen),iPod (5th Gen), Apple TV, Apple TV 2G x2, iPad 2,iPhone 4S, rMBP 15" 2.6

Reply

G5 2GHZ Power Mac, iPod Shuffle (1st Gen),iPod Nano (2nd Gen),iPod (5th Gen), Apple TV, Apple TV 2G x2, iPad 2,iPhone 4S, rMBP 15" 2.6

Reply
post #33 of 53
fair enough. but would 802.11g handle wireless streaming to headphones* alright? and yeah, battery life??
as in the 802.11g transmitter/receiver would have to be in tha wireless headphone set itself as well as the iPod....

maybe its too much at this stage to hope for a "one size fits all" wireless solution. 'round the corner maybe, in santa steve's goody bag. christmas 2006. i'll try to be a good boy by then......
post #34 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by sunilraman
fair enough. but would 802.11g handle wireless streaming to headphones* alright? and yeah, battery life??
as in the 802.11g transmitter/receiver would have to be in tha wireless headphone set itself as well as the iPod....

maybe its too much at this stage to hope for a "one size fits all" wireless solution. 'round the corner maybe, in santa steve's goody bag. christmas 2006. i'll try to be a good boy by then......

WiFi is crazy overkill for audio. Even 11Mbs is overkill. Even USB 1.1 or Bluetooth 1.2 is enough for full fidelity stereo.
post #35 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
WiFi is crazy overkill for audio. Even 11Mbs is overkill. Even USB 1.1 or Bluetooth 1.2 is enough for full fidelity stereo.

But 'g' is Apple standard anyway. And the range is better than blue tooth.
Also would WiFi data rate not be quicker than Blue Tooth..

So maybe ditch the Bluetoth headphones and concentrate on transmitting music
over a wirless network.

G5 2GHZ Power Mac, iPod Shuffle (1st Gen),iPod Nano (2nd Gen),iPod (5th Gen), Apple TV, Apple TV 2G x2, iPad 2,iPhone 4S, rMBP 15" 2.6

Reply

G5 2GHZ Power Mac, iPod Shuffle (1st Gen),iPod Nano (2nd Gen),iPod (5th Gen), Apple TV, Apple TV 2G x2, iPad 2,iPhone 4S, rMBP 15" 2.6

Reply
post #36 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by jimbo123
But 'g' is Apple standard anyway. And the range is better than blue tooth.
Also would WiFi data rate not be quicker than Blue Tooth..

So maybe ditch the Bluetoth headphones and concentrate on transmitting music
over a wirless network.

But it doesn't matter. Any rates higher than what is needed is wasted.

Anyway, Apple is standardizing on Bluetooth 2.

http://www.radio-electronics.com/inf...etooth_edr.php
post #37 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by jimbo123
I disagree the 'g' standard is more than adequate to stream music to a Hi Fi
proof in this is the Airport Express connected to a Hi Fi.

54mb band width is sufficent to stream music.

And sufficient for streaming "DVD quality" MPEG-2 video with DTS audio to EyeHome.
post #38 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by sjk
And sufficient for streaming "DVD quality" MPEG-2 video with DTS audio to EyeHome.

Now you're talking about something else. video is always much more bandwidth intensive. It's also much more sensitive to interference. Whenever I am at a Sony press conferance where they show their TV Anywhere, it suffers from interference. So have every other demo from Samsung, Pioneer, HP, and the others I've seen.
post #39 of 53
Sure, but I don't understand how your response relates to my agreeing with jimbo123's comments.
post #40 of 53
Quote:
Originally posted by sjk
Sure, but I don't understand how your response relates to my agreeing with jimbo123's comments.

It wasn't intended to. I was agreeing with your contention, and simply noting that your statement changed the area that the last few posts had gone into. Then I brought up some problems with wireless video.

Was that a problem?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › CSR proposes Apple use its chips for wireless iPod headphones