271–280 of 479 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't function as a regular bt headphone. They don't even report battery life among other artificially blocked basic functions.
Which of the three battery level values should be reported in the one slot Bluetooth provides?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't function as a regular bt headphone. They don't even report battery life among other artificially blocked basic functions.
Which of the three battery level values should be reported in the one slot Bluetooth provides?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is your host idling the connection due to the silence. Just keep something playing (like a stream of almost-silence) on loop and you won't have this problem.
Yes, but I was asking if high quality or newer Bluetooth audio devices have a lower latency. I will suggest to the app developers to add optional silence. Thank you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is used to prevent devices that don’t know about those features from accidentally triggering them as they are not per spec (spec lacks way to do many things AirPods do). And AirPods do connect to non Apple devices. They are just limited to doing what BT spec allows and no more Please stop spreading FUD
Multipoint connectivity is part of the spec but apparently AirPods only support it if you pretend to be an Apple device.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but I was asking if high quality or newer Bluetooth audio devices have a lower latency. I will suggest to the app developers to add optional silence. Thank you.
Yes, there are newer Bluetooth headphones with significantly lower latencies, either through LE Bluetooth audio or through codecs like AptX LL.
From a bit further down the page > Bluetooth DID (Device Identification) Hook > Turns out, if you change the manufacturerid to that of Apple, you get access to several special features! I hope Apple gets slammed hard by some regulatory body. Apparently there's absolutely zero magic reasons why their airpods are unable to connect to non-Apple devices; pretend you're an iPhone and you're in. EDIT: read "unable to conne…
>> I hope Apple gets slammed hard by some regulatory body. They should be slammed by Bluetooth body and forbidden to use bluetooth technology for hurting interoperability.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True, but you can compare them to, say, Google, which maintains thriving OSS projects like Chromium and AOSP and generally does a way better job at publishing code and research.
I wouldn’t mention as positive example. I wouldn’t even mention them as example. Apple cooperates within WebKit well with WebKitGtk. They supported LLVM when it is in their interest. Chrome is used as proprietary web-engine to vendor lock-in the web. While often used by others, I’m not aware of a broad cooperation. Android is a shadow of Linux, merely using the Linux-Kernel, not GNU. Plus a lot of closed-source code…
There's a reason most of these projects picked AOSP over iOS, or even Chromium over WebKit. Google just engages with the community better than Apple. It's silly to pretend like they're on the same level.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's fair to say Apple's cross platform work is a couple of Android and PC apps, the Mac boot loader, and Swift. Even on this page, Apple seems more like a user of the community projects than a contributor and the Apple projects seem to be for internal use or for Apple platforms. Kind of misses the point in being cross platform the way librepod is aiming to be.
That’s not what this particular thread is about, you’re referencing the parent topic but not the current thread. This is about whether they contribute to open source or not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
is there evidence it’s for vendor lock in purposes? airpods have a pretty stellar connection for bluetooth, wouldn’t be surprised if there were performance reasons for them going off spec
Performance reasons LOL. Apple fans love plausible deniability.
Truth is, no one has the full facts so any reasons as to why this was made the way it was is pure speculation. Only a fool would move to condemn or endorse what is not yet fully understood.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If this is about lightning, what connector do you think apple should have used? USB-C came out long after lightning.
> USB-C [Aug 2014] came out long after lightning [Sep 2012]. 1 year 11 months :) The old 30-pin connector before Lightning came from 2003. Meanwhile it took until 2023 for iPhones to use USB-C. 30-pin 2003 - 2012 (2014) Lighting 2012 - 2023 (2025) USB-C AAPL utter mess - iPhone 2023 - USB-C RoW 2014 -