Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Bluetooth kinda sucks. Why don't we have something better?

news.ycombinator.com

31–40 of 165 posts

Re: Ask HN: Bluetooth kinda sucks. Why don't we have something better?

#31

Most of the problems seem to be poor implementations, because what's the motivation for, say, a car company to get Bluetooth exactly right? How many people buy cars based on the speed with which Bluetooth connects? As evidence, sticking with a single vendor means I don't have weird stuff happen, and can in fact connect multiple pairs of AirPods to a single Apple TV unit so my partner and I can watch together in outwa…

Apple demands a hefty price for this compatibility, and its purely within their tiny ecosystem. Which is OK, they do premium hardware and software, some of it top of the notch. Some other manufacturers are trying this but they are nowhere near this level of quality.

The problem I have are the parts where they are not top of their game, ie earbuds. If your only requirement is good call quality then their products can be titled best if paired with ie iphone. But I don't care about that at all. I bought ones which sound for music significantly better than airpods pro, have much better battery life (also their case has better battery for recharging and overall stamina). When yet better ones come (or I lose mine), I will go again for the best within my budget, easily from another manufacturer since brand loyalty is rather meaningless fluff for me, only quality of specific product matters.

But - I can't connect them to any apple product via high quality variations of codecs. So instead of using aptX HD to play my flacs in phone, I would have to resort to some basic implementation and effectively cut off some quality of those flacs. I am sure some wouldn't mind, but I do.

Hence you do shopping around, because in +- apple price bracket you have tons of options for quality hardware, be it notebooks, tablets, different headphones and so on.

This opinion doesn't take into account things like apple's stand on privacy on phones, which for many puts them above rest of the market. Suffice to say for me its more a case of clever marketing than actual proper security of such an important device, especially since I am not an US person and some US laws see me as sub-human, thus US 3-letter agencies act accordingly. But maybe I am completely wrong on this part, it would actually be great since I am already spending same dollars, just for other brands. Just haven't seen a single solid proof of that, and quite a few in contrary.

Re: Ask HN: Bluetooth kinda sucks. Why don't we have something better?

#32

We do have something better! And we’ve had it for decades. It’s a cable.

Wireless wins for all my uses. I can easily bike with my Beats wireless headphones. I can easily run. I can get up from the computer while watching a YouTube show or if I'm in the middle of a video chat and still want to listen in while I make a quick tea or something in the kitchen. I've literally gone swimming with my wireless headphones. Heads up front crawl, but still. These things are awesome. Why on earth would…

And it's really fun buying a new pair every x years purely because the battery has degraded and not really replaceable. I quit buying them purely because they fairly rapidly (compared to wired headphones) become e-waste, for the slight conveniences you mentioned. All those things including swimming were done with wired headphones too, with maybe the exception of walking into the other room to get your tea.

Re: Ask HN: Bluetooth kinda sucks. Why don't we have something better?

#33
post #12

Why did Betamax lose out to VHS? Why did MiniDisc never take off? Why does the internet still rely on JavaScript? From my sideline perspective it's probably because Bluetooth was developed without knowing how successful and expansive its use would become. It was developed by mobile phone companies to connect wireless earpieces to mobile telephones, and that was it. The entire scope of the product that is Bluetooth. T…

I worked in telco in the early 2000s when Bluetooth hype was at its peak, and that's just not true: if anything, Bluetooth was hailed as the Next Big Thing because it would enable "Personal Area Networks" (PAN), a now all-but-forgotten buzzword. But don't take my word for it, here's the IEEE in 1999: Examples of applications include Collaborative Maintenance, Mobile Worker, Medical Sensing, Data Synchronization, etc.…

I worked a bunch with BT closer to the physical layer, and I have to say I was always impressed by how well specified and implemented things were up to the link layer. I think it works fantastically well. But unfortunately it's an invisible achievement, kind of how IT folks don't get recognized when things work; instead when people say "Bluetooth sucks" it's usually due to poor app profile implementations/specs.

As a result, saying "let's invent a better Bluetooth" contains a hidden trap: it requires reinventing that really good core, which is probably really expensive, which then would not leave much to build better app profiles and we would end up with a similar problem.

We should not be inventing a better Bluetooth but fixing the app profile certification. I'm not sure what the right solution there is.

Re: Ask HN: Bluetooth kinda sucks. Why don't we have something better?

#34
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wireless wins for all my uses. I can easily bike with my Beats wireless headphones. I can easily run. I can get up from the computer while watching a YouTube show or if I'm in the middle of a video chat and still want to listen in while I make a quick tea or something in the kitchen. I've literally gone swimming with my wireless headphones. Heads up front crawl, but still. These things are awesome. Why on earth would…

And it's really fun buying a new pair every x years purely because the battery has degraded and not really replaceable. I quit buying them purely because they fairly rapidly (compared to wired headphones) become e-waste, for the slight conveniences you mentioned. All those things including swimming were done with wired headphones too, with maybe the exception of walking into the other room to get your tea.

That's funny, because I've had to buy more pairs of wired cables because they frayed than I ever did wireless headphones because the battery died.

Re: Ask HN: Bluetooth kinda sucks. Why don't we have something better?

#35
The Bluetooth Special Interest Group (SIG) is responsible for publishing all the Bluetooth specs and you can download them here: https://www.bluetooth.com/specifications/specs/

Notice that everything appears to be there: very detailed specs and information about testing. However, when you try to implement one of these specs you quickly realize that you cannot do it with the spec alone. You need example code, base implementations, test suite software and test data to build conformant software. Unfortunately, the Bluetooth SIG hides these resources behind a membership wall. Guess what happens then? You get lots of implementations of these specs that are a little bit off and don't handle all edge cases.

If I were to wave a magic wand I would like to see Bluetooth SIG change to a donation based financial model and for them to make all resources freely available. Right now they make money from branding, certification and country club membership fees. No wonder the ecosystem is one big tire fire.

Re: Ask HN: Bluetooth kinda sucks. Why don't we have something better?

#37
post #12

Why did Betamax lose out to VHS? Why did MiniDisc never take off? Why does the internet still rely on JavaScript? From my sideline perspective it's probably because Bluetooth was developed without knowing how successful and expansive its use would become. It was developed by mobile phone companies to connect wireless earpieces to mobile telephones, and that was it. The entire scope of the product that is Bluetooth. T…

I worked in telco in the early 2000s when Bluetooth hype was at its peak, and that's just not true: if anything, Bluetooth was hailed as the Next Big Thing because it would enable "Personal Area Networks" (PAN), a now all-but-forgotten buzzword. But don't take my word for it, here's the IEEE in 1999: Examples of applications include Collaborative Maintenance, Mobile Worker, Medical Sensing, Data Synchronization, etc.…

I remember this too. They even talked about "smart clothes". Like, in the future you'd have CPU in your jeans or something. For what purposes I was never really sure.

Re: Ask HN: Bluetooth kinda sucks. Why don't we have something better?

#38
post #30
post #17

Have you ever bought a product because "the Bluetooth integration is so good?" I'm sure a few people have. But it's not like you choose a car or phone because of it.

When was the last time you saw a review that audited the Bluetooth implementation on a device? I couldn't even make that kind of purchasing decision if I wanted to.

I get the point but I actually see this all the time in tech reviews on YouTube. Granted they don't go beyond "it works" unless the pairing experience is notably terrible

Re: Ask HN: Bluetooth kinda sucks. Why don't we have something better?

#39
post #17

Have you ever bought a product because "the Bluetooth integration is so good?" I'm sure a few people have. But it's not like you choose a car or phone because of it.

I think the wireless pairing/device switching experience with AirPods is a big reason (not the only reason) why they are so popular.

Re: Ask HN: Bluetooth kinda sucks. Why don't we have something better?

#40

Most of the problems seem to be poor implementations, because what's the motivation for, say, a car company to get Bluetooth exactly right? How many people buy cars based on the speed with which Bluetooth connects? As evidence, sticking with a single vendor means I don't have weird stuff happen, and can in fact connect multiple pairs of AirPods to a single Apple TV unit so my partner and I can watch together in outwa…

The size of the paired devices list isn't even in the spec. It's entirely up to the manufacturer. All the spec tells you to do is store the specified info somewhere and gives an error code to be returned if you can't for some reason. 8 is typical, but there are various reasons you might want to chose 1 instead. It simplifies and speeds up reconnection, eliminates unnecessary button combos, and potentially reduces BOM cost, etc.
Post reply on HN