3 ms·
> ... it's a fundamental part of the Bluetooth spec... The key word being "part", so the headline is incorrect. > Without it you couldn't have Bluetooth. Whi
by throwawaykf05 12y ago
> ... it's a fundamental part of the Bluetooth spec...
The key word being "part", so the headline is incorrect.
> Without it you couldn't have Bluetooth.
While it was the main innovation in 2.0, EDR was optional in the spec.
- aceperry 12y ago'The key word being "part", so the headline is incorrect.' That's a ridiculous argument. Parsing the spec like that is meaningless. "While it was the main innovation in 2.0, EDR was optional in the spec." Can't argue with non-reasoning like that.
- throwawaykf05 12y agoYou can implement Bluetooth 2.0 without EDR, so how is it meaningless? If you explain, maybe we'll see if indeed pointing out "optional" is the opposite of "fundamental" is indeed "non-reasoning".