[Accounting4Speed]

So I saw these on the apple store site and thought, if this thing could run through the car like a cellphone, you think it could process through the stereo and eliminate the need for a mini stereo cable to play in the car? Anyone with some technical know how reply. This just goes to show you that bluetooth is gonna rule the world some day.

Bluetooth Headphones

[cdheaven]

as sweet as it would be for our car to have complete bluetooth functionality, i think its ONLY set up to transfer the few communication features. i dont think it can do anything with the entertainment functions. even though it would be sweet, and im sure if bmw wanted to, they could get it to work. really, with bluetooth, possiblities are endless

[Costa]

Originally Posted by cdheaven

<snip> really, with bluetooth, possiblities are endless

Being an engineer I somewhat agree, and then again I disagree. Bluetooth is not "a complete product". Instead it is a product specification, which means that implementation details are left up to vendors ... this is why we get compatibility issues like the ones we have seen with phones ie: some phones work perfectly, some partially, others not at all, others indifferently.

On the brighter side, the bluetooth framework allows for endless possibilities, provided all concerned parties can agree some common terms. For example, wouldn't it be nice if there were sub-parts to bluetooth called "phone" and "pc" for example - and then if a vendor claimed compliance to one of these, us consumers would then be able to judge whether the thing we are buying will suit our needs ... instead we buy something that says "bluetooth enabled", and have a discovery experience where we are usually left dissapointed. The worst thing is that people blame bluetooth which isn't really right either.

It is somewhat early days for bluetooth, and hopefully some standardisation around it (including terminology for vendor compliance statements) will come soon so we can be better informed when we buy ...

my 2c

[cdheaven]

well put costa. its nice to have an engineer here that can put things in technical terms, as well as break things down for us lamens.

[Costa]

Originally Posted by cdheaven

well put costa. its nice to have an engineer here that can put things in technical terms, as well as break things down for us lamens.

Thanks cdheaven. It will be interesting to see how the standard develops/grows and how the vendors in particular work together to solve some of the current issues (eg: standardisation). I think there is much potential and if the activity in the phone/computer market is anything to go by, bluetooth will certainly be the choice wireless connectivity technology for some time.

[cdheaven]

costa, what do you think about bluetooth on an ipod? not nessacarily to tranfer the actually music, but for example, what if our ipods had bluetooth and the e90 was set up to display song titles, maybe control functions. MAYBE transfew actual sound, maybe transfer files to and from itunes... i think it could be amazing

[Costa]

cdheaven - that would be pretty cool. Because the bluetooth spec is so broad, it does not preclude such possibilities. Indeed I imagine that "remote control" features like what you are suggesting will eventually become a reality. They have already done it with phones, it is a matter of time for other devices, and iPod is pretty popular.

Who knows what innovative goodies will be around in the next 3 series

[06graphite]

Originally Posted by Costa

On the brighter side, the bluetooth framework allows for endless possibilities, provided all concerned parties can agree some common terms. For example, wouldn't it be nice if there were sub-parts to bluetooth called "phone" and "pc" for example - and then if a vendor claimed compliance to one of these, us consumers would then be able to judge whether the thing we are buying will suit our needs ... instead we buy something that says "bluetooth enabled", and have a discovery experience where we are usually left dissapointed. The worst thing is that people blame bluetooth which isn't really right either.

Actually this does exist. They're called Bluetooth Profiles. There's one for data transfer, one for headsets, one for handsfree, one for object exchange, etc.... A primary reason for so many issues with bluetooth pairing is that not every vendor fully implements each profile...

It is somewhat early days for bluetooth, and hopefully some standardisation around it (including terminology for vendor compliance statements) will come soon so we can be better informed when we buy ...

my 2c

Bluetooth has actually been around for quite a while now and has some pretty solid standardisation.... Check out www.bluetooth.org if you want the details.

Getting back to the original topic though... BMW's implementation of Bluetooth supports the handsfree profile. Which is good enough for phone calls, but not music.

[Costa]

Originally Posted by 06graphite

Actually this does exist. They're called Bluetooth Profiles. There's one for data transfer, one for headsets, one for handsfree, one for object exchange, etc.... A primary reason for so many issues with bluetooth pairing is that not every vendor fully implements each profile...



Bluetooth has actually been around for quite a while now and has some pretty solid standardisation.... Check out www.bluetooth.org if you want the details.

Getting back to the original topic though... BMW's implementation of Bluetooth supports the handsfree profile. Which is good enough for phone calls, but not music.

Hi Graphite

I think we are saying essentially the same thing ...

When you say "it actually does not exist" what are you referring to ? If you mean the PC and Phone "sub-parts" - correct. I was proposing that the bluetooth standard be expanded so that instead of a vendor claiming compliance to "bluetooth with phone profiles", they could simply say "compatible with the bluetooth mobile phone standard". At the end of the day the result is the same, but from the "normal" consumer out there who is not ofey with the all of the bluetooth technical details it makes it much easier (IMO).

I know that bluetooth has been around for a while, but as a technology it is still not mature. When vendors claim compliance to Bluetooth they are usually referring to the fact that their product contains the electronics which facilitate bluetooth comms - so what. I mean I have an aerial on my crappy ten year old car (for the radio) but that does not necessarily mean I can receive GSM mobile phone calls through it - see what I am saying.

I'll spell it out - there is more to Bluetooth than just the interface - there is the software, and then there is the data formats communicated which makes it useful.

You probably know all this, but I think it is a slightly different angle.