I don't have any bluetooth enabled equipment yet, but today I saw a really nice variation of bluetooth useage: A colleague was able to control his PowerPoint presentation (on a PC with Win XP) with his Nokia 7650 (Next / Previous Page etc, even cursor movements).
When a good Bluetooth keyboard and mouse arrive, I will use them. Also, when I find the appopriate cell package for high speed (100+ Kbps) wireless access, I'll get a bluetooth phone and use that too. I don't see too much other use for it, except for the wireless tablet/pen.
I bought the Palm Tungston T and I can not get blue tooth to work with it. It crashes my computer every time I try to sync. Argh. I even went to the genius bar and we could not figure it out. So far bluetooth does not empress me. <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
I went ahead and bought one of the blue tooth adapters so I could sync my T68. Aside from that its was useless. I proptly returned the adapter once I came to the conclusion that the phone and particularly the service it was attached to sucked. Have not had much use for it since. Unless you really need to have your laptop available while on the road, and even then there are better alternatives available, its not that usefull. All tasks can be performed just as easily without it. There are non Bluetooth wireless mice, keyboards, trackballs available that work very well, just check the Logitech web site.
<strong>wow i didn't realize you could get that kind of range with bluetooth...</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's all about how strong you make the amp for the radio signal. There are two "standard" ranges, 10m intended for peripherals and 100m intended for basestations and the like.
Wow, I didn't expect that there are so many bluetooth sceptics out there.
And it seems that development of Bluetooth-complient devices kind of slowed down - none of the upcoming Nokia phones will feature it. But Nokia's implementation nver worked well anyway.
I personally think Bluetooth is the perfect solution for wireless peripheral connectivity. But from what I read so far there is still much work to be done.
[QB]And now I have a P800, loading up with images, pictures and ringtones, as well as files. It's more then cool, it's now part of my techsphere. I mean, there's nothing you can do with IR you can't do with a floppy, right Snazlord? Who needs IR, eh?
QB]<hr></blockquote>
Let me put my previous rant against bluetooth in perspective. Obviously it's a better technology (i.e. simpler/easier to use, more convenient, maybe with more possibilities, etc) than infrared. I have no quarrel with that.
But my current decision point, and i suspect that this is similar for many, is: i currently have infrared - to get bluetooth costs $50 - is that worth it?
If i had neither, or it would cost the same to get either, then obviously i'd get the bluetooth over infrared. My only point is that i don't think that the $50 dongle (which will use up one of my USB ports and hang out of my TiBook) is worth the $ at this point.
FYI, a friend of mine just got the bluetooth headset for his T68i - it's pretty slick. don't think i'll get it quite yet, but it is pretty cool. I suppose when i'm driving and i get a call, it would be easier to just don a wireless headset than to attach the wired earbud to the phone with that ridiculously difficult plug thing on the T68i, and then worry about the cord catching on my jacket and pulling the earbud out of my ear every time i turn my head...
I don't have a cell and probably won't for a long time, because I'm poor. However I'm getting the MiniPB 12" and looking forward to playing with other peoples' equipment.
3 very cool things I see for BlueTooth, in order of coolness:
1) Wireless headphones. But is there enough bandwith?
2) Wireless Internet on the road with a laptop. But isn't it expensive?
3) Wireless printing. I could go for that.
BT still seems immature though. What's taking so long?
Oops I forgot to add the coolness of having all these rays of radiation shooting through your head. We're already all mutants! I can't imagine what it'll be like next century. Maybe we'll all have to wear helmets? <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Once again, BT may be "kewl," and may actually be useful if A) you don't have infrared or you really need to be on-line on the road. Other than that, (which i suspect is most people), it's just a neat, overpriced, toy.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's less of a neat, overpriced toy than infrared is. Bluetooth is a lot more capable than infrared. You said you could do anything I mentioned with IR rather than BT, but you can't. I leave my phone on my belt clip and use my BT wireless headset to make calls using voice activated dialing. Doing this with IR is completely impossible for at least a couple different reasons, two of them being IR is line of sight, and IR doesn't support voice.
IR doesn't do anything BT can't do, and BT has a wider range and isn't line of sight. There's nothing about IR that would make it preferable to use over BT.
Wireless surfing with a cell phone would cost mucho $$$. Just imagine your cell phone bill with wireless internet tacked on. :eek:
I would like to see more bluetooth mice. If there was a decent bluetooth mouse, i would have got it instead of my wired MX500 for my iBooks broken trackpad (best mouse ever... period). I just dont like the way the wireless transmitter's are made now, all bulky and such. I'd much rather had a dongle to put on.
<strong>hey i'm going to get verizon and i'm wondering can I use the 270c as a modem for my powerbook? mmmm does verizon even use the 270?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, I have Verizon. The 270c is the only phone they have with Bluetooth capabilities. The phone is $150 with service, and you have to pay another $100 for the bluetooth adapter. If you want to use it as a modem you have to find the modem scripts (scripts for the P280 work perfectly).
I wouldn't recommend going that route, however. It was expensive, it's not supported by iSync, and I can only get 14.4 at best.
You said you could do anything I mentioned with IR rather than BT, but you can't. I leave my phone on my belt clip and use my BT wireless headset to make calls using voice activated dialing. Doing this with IR is completely impossible for at least a couple different reasons, two of them being IR is line of sight, and IR doesn't support voice.
IR doesn't do anything BT can't do, and BT has a wider range and isn't line of sight. There's nothing about IR that would make it preferable to use over BT.
Once again, I never said that IR is "preferable to use over BT." In fact, I believe that just the opposite is true - BT is preferable to IR.
My point is that I'm not sure that BT is $50 more preferrable to IR.
And as for your point about IR not supporting a wireless headset - duh! But most phones come bundled with an earbud. The earbud is not wireless, but it is free (usually). A decent wireless BT headset is $100 minimum. Now you're talking about a $50 BT USB dongle plus a $100 BT headset.
So again I say, YES BT is preferable to IR, ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL. BUT, BT is probably not $150 better than IR.
Spiffster you've made a good point. I have a Logitech Cordless Optical (so does everyone else in my dorm hall now that they've seen one ) and it's great but when I take it on the road the reciever is quite bulky. I wonder if Logitech will come out with a BlueTooth edition. I'll buy that. Who wants my current Logitech?
Now all we need is wireless power, and I hear they're advancing on that front too.
<strong>Now all we need is wireless power, and I hear they're advancing on that front too.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ah, the every intelligible "they."
Telsa spent a lot of time working on wireless power. Didn't work so well in terms of practicality. But regardless, if you go under some high voltage power lines with a small light bulb, you may be surprised.
Comments
I also have an iPaq with bluetooth...the phone and the iPaq saw eachother...but never could get it to connect to the net
also never got the iPaq to sinc up with my laptop through a bluetooth PC card
I do miss my wireless headset though
<strong>wow i didn't realize you could get that kind of range with bluetooth...</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's all about how strong you make the amp for the radio signal. There are two "standard" ranges, 10m intended for peripherals and 100m intended for basestations and the like.
And it seems that development of Bluetooth-complient devices kind of slowed down - none of the upcoming Nokia phones will feature it. But Nokia's implementation nver worked well anyway.
I personally think Bluetooth is the perfect solution for wireless peripheral connectivity. But from what I read so far there is still much work to be done.
[QB]And now I have a P800, loading up with images, pictures and ringtones, as well as files. It's more then cool, it's now part of my techsphere. I mean, there's nothing you can do with IR you can't do with a floppy, right Snazlord? Who needs IR, eh?
QB]<hr></blockquote>
Let me put my previous rant against bluetooth in perspective. Obviously it's a better technology (i.e. simpler/easier to use, more convenient, maybe with more possibilities, etc) than infrared. I have no quarrel with that.
But my current decision point, and i suspect that this is similar for many, is: i currently have infrared - to get bluetooth costs $50 - is that worth it?
If i had neither, or it would cost the same to get either, then obviously i'd get the bluetooth over infrared. My only point is that i don't think that the $50 dongle (which will use up one of my USB ports and hang out of my TiBook) is worth the $ at this point.
FYI, a friend of mine just got the bluetooth headset for his T68i - it's pretty slick. don't think i'll get it quite yet, but it is pretty cool. I suppose when i'm driving and i get a call, it would be easier to just don a wireless headset than to attach the wired earbud to the phone with that ridiculously difficult plug thing on the T68i, and then worry about the cord catching on my jacket and pulling the earbud out of my ear every time i turn my head...
3 very cool things I see for BlueTooth, in order of coolness:
1) Wireless headphones. But is there enough bandwith?
2) Wireless Internet on the road with a laptop. But isn't it expensive?
3) Wireless printing. I could go for that.
BT still seems immature though. What's taking so long?
Oops I forgot to add the coolness of having all these rays of radiation shooting through your head. We're already all mutants! I can't imagine what it'll be like next century. Maybe we'll all have to wear helmets? <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
[ 01-17-2003: Message edited by: Aquatic ]</p>
<strong>
Once again, BT may be "kewl," and may actually be useful if A) you don't have infrared or
It's less of a neat, overpriced toy than infrared is. Bluetooth is a lot more capable than infrared. You said you could do anything I mentioned with IR rather than BT, but you can't. I leave my phone on my belt clip and use my BT wireless headset to make calls using voice activated dialing. Doing this with IR is completely impossible for at least a couple different reasons, two of them being IR is line of sight, and IR doesn't support voice.
IR doesn't do anything BT can't do, and BT has a wider range and isn't line of sight. There's nothing about IR that would make it preferable to use over BT.
[ 01-17-2003: Message edited by: Xaqtly ]</p>
I would like to see more bluetooth mice. If there was a decent bluetooth mouse, i would have got it instead of my wired MX500 for my iBooks broken trackpad (best mouse ever... period). I just dont like the way the wireless transmitter's are made now, all bulky and such. I'd much rather had a dongle to put on.
<strong>hey i'm going to get verizon and i'm wondering can I use the 270c as a modem for my powerbook? mmmm does verizon even use the 270?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, I have Verizon. The 270c is the only phone they have with Bluetooth capabilities. The phone is $150 with service, and you have to pay another $100 for the bluetooth adapter. If you want to use it as a modem you have to find the modem scripts (scripts for the P280 work perfectly).
I wouldn't recommend going that route, however. It was expensive, it's not supported by iSync, and I can only get 14.4 at best.
[edit: fixed typos]
[ 01-17-2003: Message edited by: Ringo ]</p>
<strong>
You said you could do anything I mentioned with IR rather than BT, but you can't. I leave my phone on my belt clip and use my BT wireless headset to make calls using voice activated dialing. Doing this with IR is completely impossible for at least a couple different reasons, two of them being IR is line of sight, and IR doesn't support voice.
IR doesn't do anything BT can't do, and BT has a wider range and isn't line of sight. There's nothing about IR that would make it preferable to use over BT.
[ 01-17-2003: Message edited by: Xaqtly ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Once again, I never said that IR is "preferable to use over BT." In fact, I believe that just the opposite is true - BT is preferable to IR.
My point is that I'm not sure that BT is $50 more preferrable to IR.
And as for your point about IR not supporting a wireless headset - duh! But most phones come bundled with an earbud. The earbud is not wireless, but it is free (usually). A decent wireless BT headset is $100 minimum. Now you're talking about a $50 BT USB dongle plus a $100 BT headset.
So again I say, YES BT is preferable to IR, ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL. BUT, BT is probably not $150 better than IR.
Now all we need is wireless power, and I hear they're advancing on that front too.
<strong>Now all we need is wireless power, and I hear they're advancing on that front too.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ah, the every intelligible "they."
Telsa spent a lot of time working on wireless power. Didn't work so well in terms of practicality. But regardless, if you go under some high voltage power lines with a small light bulb, you may be surprised.