4 ms·

That’s… odd? I would’ve assumed that LE was designed with both theory and practical testing - how could classic be better at everything?

• yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
  As other comments note, this appears to only examine power use under load and LE is meant to idle at extremely low power. So it's worth knowing but not super meaningful that LE isn't more power efficient when in use, because that wasn't the point. (Also this assumes that the conclusion is true in the general case, which is unknown since they didn't test many implementations and BT has painfully wide variation in implementations)
• eimrine 4y ago
  Maybe classic is engineer's creature while LE is manager's one?
  • keybuk 4y ago
    For the most part, Classic was designed by committee with many concessions to every corporate partner, retaining compatibility with their IrDA stacks, etc... ...while LE was designed by a few smart guys working together
• qbasic_forever 4y ago
  Classic isn't better at everything. This was just looking at the raw efficiency of sending as much data as fast as possible from device to device, something both classic and LE bluetooth can do. However classic cannot do quite a bit of what LE supports, for instance things like wireless multicast (i.e. air tag type scenarios) where one device broadcasts data for any other device around it. Classic is much more like a wireless serial port and requires devices to find and connect to it one at a time whereas LE doesn't have that strict requirement.