Has anyone got a good grip on Bluetooth and these devices

I have read the wikipeadia info on blue tooth as a communications protocol but i am trying to make certain i understand it correctly.

What i would like to know is if the operating system says it supports a particular version of the protocol, then does a blue tooth device have to be able to support that operating system.

This part does not make sense to me. Surely its the operating system accomodating the blue tooth instructions and hardware and therefore the device should in fact be operating system independent.

Where i am coming from with this is as follows.

Seems like overnight and we now have quiet a few new operating systems in the tech sector outside of the historical WIndows versions and Mac Versions.

If we look at the cellular smart phone market we have the 5 big players i guess

Apple, Blackberry, Android Symbian and Windows.

So a device comes out with blue tooth compatibility to a particular version of the protocol.

Now in the input output devices we have blue tooth headsets and more recently keyboards etc. I am specifically looking at a presentation remote control.

Thing is the devices are mentioning the operating system compatability when really in my view they should not have to surely.

There is so much marketing vapor ware and mist or cloud being created to "dumb down" the complexity that one cannot get sufficient technical fact to be able to determine compatibilty unless the manufacturer of the principle instrument say cell phone actually certifies a device.

Can anyone shed some light on this among us? I did quiet a bit of searching and hit a few forums but i need to relate to someone i can relate to. So i thought i would try a few of the techies here.

I am past the days of being a blind believer and faithful early adopter. Been bitten way more than once through making logical fit assumptions. Only thing is time is also money so at the end of the day it could simply be cheaper to buy an abandon if it dont work than spend huge numbers of hours in risk management for little gain.

I am pretty much tech iggerant.
We recently entered the age of 'smart' phones and got Bluetooth devices for our vehicles. We grabbed the package that indicated it was the right device for our phones, let the sales guy set them up, pasted on window and are in business. Never heard the word 'protocol'.
Biggest problem was finding the on button. Sales guy couldn't find it either. Accidentally we found it is part of the case, doesn't look like a button. Touch and talk is all we know.

I know that I set my headset to discover mode, hit "find device" on my phone (Galaxy S droid) enter the password usually 0000 and talk. As far as bluetooth printers...I'm still in the wired world

Bluetooth technology uses radio waves, but only distances of 10 meters (33 feet). If a product has Bluetooth, that means it has a piece of "hardware", or a small computer chip that contains the Bluetooth radio and some software connect that product to some other product that has Bluetooth. This technology has been around since 1940, it was developed by the military. I don't believe that your operating system has any thing to do with it, but your hardware and the software that is installed on the device does. The software would need to be certified for the operating system that you are running on your device. I hope this helps Rob.

Rob I use one that clips on to my visor. I can not stand having them things in my ear.

Rob,

Class 1 and class 2 devices can talk to one another, but the link is only as strong as the weakest link (30 ft).

I've got a project I'm working with a friend on using some of the Roving Network devices. We used a class 1 device for the transmitter, but the Blackberry I was using only had a class 2 chip. I couldn't pickup any signal after 30 feet, which was literally line of sight, if a wall was in the way it was a shorter distance.

So...
class 1 to class 1 = 100 feet
class 2 to class 2 = 30 feet
class 1 to class 2 = 30 feet

http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Cat=3539948&k=bluetooth roving

For legacy devices that use serial ports connected to PC's, using some of the devices at the link above, you can literally match up the pins on the legacy device to the correct data channels on the bluetooth transmitter device. The communication thinks it's going over serial still as most bluetooth receivers create a virtual serial port on the PC for the legacy software to connect to.

Hope I answered your question, but feel free to PM or post here and I'll let you know all I do.

I think I missed a couple of questions, so

The protocols across various mobile devices are dependent on 1) the os developer creating API's for a developer to use the features of the chipsets used on the device. 2) the manufacture of the device actually using the circuit of the chipset (some just use what they need to and some enable all features).

As for certification of use with a device. Apple is the only one I'm aware of that has circuitry built in that may block a device from working with it's OS, keeping un-licensed peripherals from working with the apple device.

Darren Wright said:

I think I missed a couple of questions, so

The protocols across various mobile devices are dependent on 1) the os developer creating API's for a developer to use the features of the chipsets used on the device. 2) the manufacture of the device actually using the circuit of the chipset (some just use what they need to and some enable all features).

As for certification of use with a device. Apple is the only one I'm aware of that has circuitry built in that may block a device from working with it's OS, keeping un-licensed peripherals from working with the apple device.

Click to expand...

Darren you hit it on the head. Its the api thing.

See for man in the street he hears blue tooth. Yeah all good and dandy.

Its just a rf serial interface with an industry standard. Each device has a blue tooth chip to handle the communication protocol part.

But its the Api relative to the operating system that become the issue.

Man some of the device manufacturers are asleep at the wheel.

Here is what i wanted to do i think i have a solution but first let me outline my desire.

Of all the mobile kit at the moment I think the Motorola Atrix is a neat block of processing power. You gotta look at this phone. Its hard to call it a phone. Its dual core processor. Runs Android. So no big brother apple or blackberry. (they need to read your consistitution these guys) anyhow with open office app you can run a power point presentation on this device. How neat is that. But here is the thing you can output it direct from the phone through its HDMI port to a projector or compatible monitor or tv screen.

You dont have issues with being able to hook up to other computers to interchange or backup files etc.

Its got blue tooth not only for the hands free aspect in the car etc but i checked directly with the motorola tech guys today and i could hook up a logitech mini keyboard with touchpad and use that via blue tooth to remotely control the Power Point presentation.

Now that could also be playing a movie with the unit hooked up to the tv via a hdmi cable.

Of course it then has an accessory which is essentially a screen and normal keyboard which you plug the phone into and it launches a web type window which now turns the whole thing into a kinda laptop all connected either via ethernet or wi fi.

I would have gone blackberry playbook but I dont want to carry two devices. They are like apple still protecting their phone market. Given the size of the playbook i would have liked it to function as a phone with a blue tooth headset or in my car direct to the built in blue tooth hook up. That way i dont even have to take it out my bried case to use it as a phone. But they left the phone circuitry off it even on the 4G units its going to be a data device.

Thanks Darren. To come back to your issue with range and bluetooth be fair to it, it was not meant for long distance serial comms.

Man take a look at that Atrix its a real block of dynamite for a techie type. I just wish the screen was a little bigger so i could read it without my reading glasses.

Still vacillating though cause i am in denial over the eyesight thing.

Wow Rob, that Atrix is a hot-looking little machine. I really like my iPhone, but that's because I'm sold on the smart phone concept, not because it's an iPhone. I've suspected for a while that when I do replace it, I'll be doing so with an Android box, and the Atrix just took the lead in the contender's race.

I don't know how to compare the specs on the Atrix and the Droid X, but I've got the droid X and while it's a little big for a phone, I think you will be very happy with the power of the Android system.

I was travelling this week and this thing really was sweet. Could keep up on work email, FWW, etc... Was even able to check in on my flights and use it as a virtual boarding pass today.

I've got a little blue tooth thing for the car that connects to the phone via bluetooth and sends the audio out via FM, so I can connect it to the car wirelessly. That lets me listen to podcasts, music, and to use it for a hands free device with the audio coming out of the speakers.

Wonderful devices...