5 ms·

Craziest thing about Bluetooth, is that there are so many different "profiles" or features, of which some might, some might not be available on your bluetooth s

Craziest thing about Bluetooth, is that there are so many different "profiles" or features, of which some might, some might not be available on your bluetooth stack but you will be hard pressed to find out which ones are. Some dongle might just support the one you need. Some might support 2 or 5. From Wikipedia: 1 Advanced Audio Distribution Profile (A2DP) 2 Attribute Profile (ATT) 3 Audio/Video Remote Control Profile (AVRCP) 4 Basic Imaging Profile (BIP) 5 Basic Printing Profile (BPP) 6 Common ISDN Access Profile (CIP) 7 Cordless Telephony Profile (CTP) 8 Device ID Profile (DIP) 9 Dial-up Networking Profile (DUN) 10 Fax Profile (FAX) 11 File Transfer Profile (FTP) 12 Generic Audio/Video Distribution Profile (GAVDP) 13 Generic Access Profile (GAP) 14 Generic Attribute Profile (GATT) 15 Generic Object Exchange Profile (GOEP) 16 Hard Copy Cable Replacement Profile (HCRP) 17 Health Device Profile (HDP) 18 Hands-Free Profile (HFP) 19 Human Interface Device Profile (HID) 20 Headset Profile (HSP) 21 Intercom Profile (ICP) 22 LAN Access Profile (LAP) 23 Mesh Profile (MESH) 24 Message Access Profile (MAP) 25 OBject EXchange (OBEX) 26 Object Push Profile (OPP) 27 Personal Area Networking Profile (PAN) 28 Phone Book Access Profile (PBAP, PBA) 29 Proximity Profile (PXP) 30 Serial Port Profile (SPP) 31 Service Discovery Application Profile (SDAP) 32 SIM Access Profile (SAP, SIM, rSAP) 33 Synchronization Profile (SYNCH) 34 Synchronisation Mark-up Language Profile (SyncML) 35 Video Distribution Profile (VDP) 36 Wireless Application Protocol Bearer (WAPB) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bluetooth_profiles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bluetooth_profiles

nexuist 7y ago
This is a staggering amount of wheel re-invention...makes me feel relieved that we have HTTP so clearly dominant in TCP/IP land. I think Wi-Fi Direct is the way to go in the future. We've generally mastered TCP stacks and building an application that uses simple sockets is far less legwork than dealing with the intricacies of 30+ Bluetooth specifications. I should say I'm no expert on Bluetooth. Why do we still use it? Is it a matter of legacy or does it have some kind of killer feature that Wi-Fi Direct can't compete with?
- RL_Quine 7y ago
  Bluetooth LE has orders of magnitude less power consumption than WiFi. Bear in mind this is a totally distinct protocol to Bluetooth. Many products use a Bluetooth LE and Bluetooth connection in tandem to gain the capabilities of both.
jdnenej 7y ago
What really pisses me off is that with Bluetooth there is no way to use the microphone on your headphones without dropping back to horrible audio quality. It's astounding that tech companies are forcing Bluetooth when it can't even do basic things that aux did fine.

nexuist 7y ago

This is a staggering amount of wheel re-invention...makes me feel relieved that we have HTTP so clearly dominant in TCP/IP land. I think Wi-Fi Direct is the way to go in the future. We've generally mastered TCP stacks and building an application that uses simple sockets is far less legwork than dealing with the intricacies of 30+ Bluetooth specifications. I should say I'm no expert on Bluetooth. Why do we still use it? Is it a matter of legacy or does it have some kind of killer feature that Wi-Fi Direct can't compete with?

RL_Quine 7y ago
Bluetooth LE has orders of magnitude less power consumption than WiFi. Bear in mind this is a totally distinct protocol to Bluetooth. Many products use a Bluetooth LE and Bluetooth connection in tandem to gain the capabilities of both.

jdnenej 7y ago

What really pisses me off is that with Bluetooth there is no way to use the microphone on your headphones without dropping back to horrible audio quality. It's astounding that tech companies are forcing Bluetooth when it can't even do basic things that aux did fine.