Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 165 posts

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

#1

Post by zachallaun »

There was a recent, highly upvoted article about the pains of Bluetooth: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32162131

Summarizing only a tiny fraction of the complaints:

- Connecting can make devices do weird stuff (play default songs, etc.)

- Pairing multiple devices leads to unpredictable behavior (random switching, switching when you don't mean to)

- Can't connect multiple headsets to one device (why do my wife and I need to share earbuds watching a movie on a plane?)

- Can't connect multiple devices to one headset (why can't I listen to music on my computer but still get calls from my phone?)

- ...

Why don't we have something better already?

I'm sure the answer spans a number of different fields/challenges. Standardization, security, adoption, regulation. Are there ongoing efforts to create a new protocol that solves for the problems so apparent with Bluetooth? Are there specific (seemingly) insurmountable roadblocks to improving the status quo?

Asking from pure curiosity. And because I spent 5 minutes getting something to correctly pair this morning.

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

#2

Post by david927 »

There's a long list of comments in that thread discussing "why" it's the case, with most simply saying "it's difficult." I disagree.

I think it's the same reason why so much of our software is poor quality: taking something from "works" to "works well" is a cost sink. It will cost you and yet doesn't add much to the bottom line to compensate.

It's sad that my family uses the available Bluetooth devices less than if there was a wire we could just plug into.

We think of technical innovation as a straight line forward but sometimes it goes back the other way.

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

#3

Post by SavageBeast »

I have spent some time wondering this same question - what I came to - Bluetooth is most likely a protocol spec where by any and all action the protocol can take is defined. The implementations are left to the vendors such that for one Bluetooth spec we get N physical/software implementations. So we're always taking a device from vendor X and trying to pair it with implementations from vendor Y and Z. We're now talking about 3 different versions of the same spec here more or less.

Cross vendor implementation of software is where I see a big potential for problems. As a protocol specification Id imagine all this has been thoroughly thought out. Where the rubber meets the road in the software, its probably not been so faithfully implemented (it works with my laptop - SHIP IT!).

Just my thinking on the backside of finally getting a new phone paired with my car.

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

#4

Post by PaulHoule »

david927 wrote: post #2

There's a long list of comments in that thread discussing "why" it's the case, with most simply saying "it's difficult." I disagree. I think it's the same reason why so much of our software is poor quality: taking something from "works" to "works well" is a cost sink. It will cost you and yet doesn't add much to the bottom line to compensate. It's sad that my family uses the available Bluetooth devices less than if t…

My experience is that better quality Bluetooth headsets can handle being paired to multiple devices, cheaper ones will drive you crazy. I have these on my head right now at the office

https://www.v-moda.com/us/en/products/crossfade2-wireless

and I have a pair of these at home

https://www.poly.com/us/en/products/headsets/voyager/voyager...

I wound up getting these after having been deeply dissatisfied with Bluetooth headphones and I think they've been a very good investment.

My current complaining is about the host devices.

My work laptop is a thin Dell Latitude, the performance of Bluetooth is great on that, in a metal frame office building I am able to listen to audio in the bathroom a considerable distance from my office. My personal computer is a huge Alienware (also Dell). Bluetooth is OK when I am sitting directly in front of it but if I go to the next room it only works if I am careful to tilt my head the right way. I think it's a poor radio and/or a badly designed antenna.

Apple devices on the other hand seem to refuse to play music over WiFi with Bluetooth. Most people don't seem aware of this because they use iPhones with cellular connections but I can't do it with my iPad and we always have visitors to our cell phone dead spot (most of upstate NY) try to play streaming music from their phone to bluetooth speakers and fail.

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

#5

Post by noir_lord »

david927 wrote: post #2

There's a long list of comments in that thread discussing "why" it's the case, with most simply saying "it's difficult." I disagree. I think it's the same reason why so much of our software is poor quality: taking something from "works" to "works well" is a cost sink. It will cost you and yet doesn't add much to the bottom line to compensate. It's sad that my family uses the available Bluetooth devices less than if t…

> It's sad that my family uses the available Bluetooth devices less than if there was a wire we could just plug into.

I specifically buy wired gaming headphones, wired mice and wired keyboards - if there is any sensible wired option I'll take it every time, I even have an extra long network cable I can throw across the living room for the laptop.

Wireless stuff is just less reliable and always seems to throw issues when you really need it to work.

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

#6

Post by david927 »

noir_lord wrote: post #5
david927 wrote: post #2

There's a long list of comments in that thread discussing "why" it's the case, with most simply saying "it's difficult." I disagree. I think it's the same reason why so much of our software is poor quality: taking something from "works" to "works well" is a cost sink. It will cost you and yet doesn't add much to the bottom line to compensate. It's sad that my family uses the available Bluetooth devices less than if t…

> It's sad that my family uses the available Bluetooth devices less than if there was a wire we could just plug into. I specifically buy wired gaming headphones, wired mice and wired keyboards - if there is any sensible wired option I'll take it every time, I even have an extra long network cable I can throw across the living room for the laptop. Wireless stuff is just less reliable and always seems to throw issues w…

We specifically got a printer that only can connect via a USB cable and it's been perfect.

But that's not the answer. Why? It's not that much data. WiFi doesn't seem to have some of these problems. Why is Bluetooth so shit?

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

#7

Post by [deleted] »

david927 wrote: post #6
noir_lord wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's sad that my family uses the available Bluetooth devices less than if there was a wire we could just plug into. I specifically buy wired gaming headphones, wired mice and wired keyboards - if there is any sensible wired option I'll take it every time, I even have an extra long network cable I can throw across the living room for the laptop. Wireless stuff is just less reliable and always seems to throw issues w…

We specifically got a printer that only can connect via a USB cable and it's been perfect. But that's not the answer. Why? It's not that much data. WiFi doesn't seem to have some of these problems. Why is Bluetooth so shit?

[deleted]

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

#8

Post by zachallaun »

noir_lord wrote: post #5
david927 wrote: post #2

There's a long list of comments in that thread discussing "why" it's the case, with most simply saying "it's difficult." I disagree. I think it's the same reason why so much of our software is poor quality: taking something from "works" to "works well" is a cost sink. It will cost you and yet doesn't add much to the bottom line to compensate. It's sad that my family uses the available Bluetooth devices less than if t…

> It's sad that my family uses the available Bluetooth devices less than if there was a wire we could just plug into. I specifically buy wired gaming headphones, wired mice and wired keyboards - if there is any sensible wired option I'll take it every time, I even have an extra long network cable I can throw across the living room for the laptop. Wireless stuff is just less reliable and always seems to throw issues w…

One of my favorite wireless devices is a Logitech gaming mouse (G903) that I use with a mousepad that is also a charging mat. It uses a low-latency proprietary wireless protocol: https://www.logitechg.com/en-us/innovation/lightspeed.html

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

#9

Post by rand49an »

david927 wrote: post #6
noir_lord wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's sad that my family uses the available Bluetooth devices less than if there was a wire we could just plug into. I specifically buy wired gaming headphones, wired mice and wired keyboards - if there is any sensible wired option I'll take it every time, I even have an extra long network cable I can throw across the living room for the laptop. Wireless stuff is just less reliable and always seems to throw issues w…

We specifically got a printer that only can connect via a USB cable and it's been perfect. But that's not the answer. Why? It's not that much data. WiFi doesn't seem to have some of these problems. Why is Bluetooth so shit?

Because WiFi is only trying to fix one problem: connect your device to a local network. Bluetooth has hundreds of different use-cases.

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

#10

Post by pwinnski »

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 outward silence.

I still cannot, as far as I know, connect a single pair of AirPods to more than one device, but that doesn't seem like a feature anybody would have considered when initial developing the BlueTooth spec. Perhaps such a feature will come soon, at least with a single vendor solution like Apple's.

Post reply on HN