 |
 |
Is Mac OS X compatible with Bluetooth 2?
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
What's the difference between BT 1.1 and 2?
Thanks.
--->>>
|
|
--->>> Karate is only for defense
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MacNN database error. Please refresh your browser.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Bluetooth 2? 
Do you mean USB 2.0?
|
This is a computer-generated message and needs no signature.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
I mean bluetooth classe II...
Thank you, I'm just beginning to understand that technology.
|
|
--->>> Karate is only for defense
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Aarhus, Denmark
Status:
Offline
|
|
I think the bluetooh protocol is the same in class 1 and class 2; the difference are the range. Class 1 have a range of approx. 100m, and class 2 have a range of approx. 10m.
If you mix them, eg. a phone with class 2 and a computer with class 1, it will only work in a 10m radius.
So yes, you should be able to use class 2 on your mac.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2004
Status:
Offline
|
|
You are talking simply about two different ranges (power levels) of Bluetooth 1.1.
Actually, Bluetooth 2.0 was indeed ratified recently.
It supposedly offers 3-10x the speed (aka streaming CD-quality audio!), *lower* power consumption, and backwards compatibility with 1.1.
I'd expect support in Tiger (and Hardware in future devices), as Apple's usually pretty quick to adopt new standards.
|
|
17" 2.33GHz C2D MacBook Pro / 320GB / 2GB
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Seattle
Status:
Offline
|
|
Apple's usually pretty quick to adopt new standards.
They were pretty late in adding AGP and USB 2.0...
|
|
PowerMac G4 Gigabit 1.2GHz, 896MB, 2x 80GB WD SE, Pioneer 107, Radeon 9000 Pro 128MB
Macintosh TV
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Mountain View, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
This will be awesome if Apple makes a BT 2.0 wireless headphone for iPod. The transmission speed > 2.2 Mbps (BT 1.1 is 720 Kbps) should be fast enough for streaming audio.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Cambridge
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Skip Breakfast:
They were pretty late in adding AGP and USB 2.0...
True, but if you look who's behind AGP and USB 2.0 (Intel on both), you can understand why. Apple adopted USB 1.1 readily because it was the way to go, clearly. USB 2.0, however, was in direct competition with FireWire and USB 2.0 being an inferior technology, Apple decided to implement it later rather than sooner. I'm sure that FireWire 800's introduction also had something to do with USB 2.0's eventual inclusion.
Bluetooth, on the other hand, is a standard from a trade association. One corporation does not have a majority stake in where the technology is going. Plus, there's the whole licensing issue. Licensing Bluetooth will likely go into research on how to improve the standard while licensing USB 2.0 may go towards that or it may go into a slush fund at Intel.
edit: grammar
(Last edited by TimmyDee51; Nov 10, 2004 at 04:46 PM.
)
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2004
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Skip Breakfast:
They were pretty late in adding AGP and USB 2.0...
True.. but TimmyDee's right. This is more comparable to 802.11b and 802.11g, which Apple were VERY quick to adopt. 
|
|
17" 2.33GHz C2D MacBook Pro / 320GB / 2GB
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
