[andretan]

What can we expect from Bluetooth (referred to as BT in this post) in the future?

All intelligent comments, insights, links, news, stories welcome!
Thoughts about improving the current BT standard also welcome. You can also throw in comments on how BT *should* work for you in the future.

Reason for posting this? I'm doing research for a school project. <-- making no profit whatsoever.

Thanks for all input
-Andre

[The Godfather]

BT aims toward the lowest of the low powered electronics. 802.11b has fixed itself in the computer networking area, not aspiring to embedded stuff.

BT R/C cars, planes, choppers
BT industrial sensors
BT TV remotes
BT tele-operated robots
BT game controllers
BT medical equipment
BT guns, rifles and WMD
BT gym equipment
BT pacemakers

If anyone has real suggestions, please post them here.

[wataru]

I was reading a thread about the Nokia N-Gage over at Penny Arcade (everyone there just hated it passionately) and someone mentioned that because it uses Bluetooth you can't use it on airplanes. Is this true?

[:XI:]

Originally posted by wataru:
I was reading a thread about the Nokia N-Gage over at Penny Arcade (everyone there just hated it passionately) and someone mentioned that because it uses Bluetooth you can't use it on airplanes. Is this true?

Probably, radio interference with the planes navigation and control systems would be a bad thing. Probably the same reason you couldn't use Airport at the airport (on the plane, anyway).

[wataru]

Originally posted by :XI::
Probably, radio interference with the planes navigation and control systems would be a bad thing. Probably the same reason you couldn't use Airport at the airport (on the plane, anyway).

I understand why it might be true. I just didn't know that Bluetooth caused significant interference.

[7Macfreak]

Originally posted by The Godfather:
BT aims toward the lowest of the low powered electronics. 802.11b has fixed itself in the computer networking area, not aspiring to embedded stuff.

BT R/C cars, planes, choppers


*snip*

Are you sure about this? I mean, the range doesn't seem to be that huge. Certainly not enough for a r/c plane.

[Paco500]

Me-tooing with BT will not get it anywhere, unless it has something to offer. Putting it into R/C stuff- what's the point? The current systems work just fine.

Sony Clicker- that kind of stuff is where bluetooth should be headed. Instead of controlling your mac when you come in proximity, how about a display in a store? Say Norstrom sets up a system- you put your prefs on your phone, walk up to a kiosk, and it gives you relavent info on sales (it knows your a man, and your last 5 purchases were for Doc Martins, etc).

This is one example, and very off the top of my head, but in order for bluetooth to move forward, companies need to think outside the box.

Oooh- I have another one... In car navigation systems- you call someone- they give you an address via sms, the in car systems picks this up and sends you on your way.

[talisker]

Originally posted by wataru:
I understand why it might be true. I just didn't know that Bluetooth caused significant interference.

I'm sure it doesn't, but airlines have to either have a blanket ban on these sorts of devices (mobile phones etc) or not at all. Can you imagine the announcement otherwise: "Please ensure that all mobile telephones and radio equipment are turned off for the duration of the flight. This is with the exception of the following models: Nokia 3340 (only if seated in rows 17-23 on an Airbus A340, unless ambient temperature at ground level is in excess of 30C, in which case only in row 18), Nokia 8877 (but only if manufactured after July 2002), Ericcson P87, Motorola Z87 (Japanese model only), Sony ZZ88 (although you may access the games and address book, as long as the phone is held under a cushion whilst doing so). Seimens models may be used only if the body of the phone is held perpendicular to the direction of travel (except when crossing the equator when direction must be reversed)."

[andretan]

*bump*