51–60 of 219 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't want to have to expose any of my devices to the entire internet just to use them. Sure one can firewall and block things manually, but I would prefer things were secure by default.
The protocol should allow it, even if the implementation perhaps limits users to the local network or some other more sensible security policy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> which makes the value proposition a lot less clear. Wirelessly transferring files between a phone and a computer seems like a big use case. Still no easy standard way of doing it.
Imo cloud storage like Dropbox has 95% solved this use case for years, which is why alternative solutions haven't popped up.
I worked on the design of wireless USB chips around 2008 - 2010. They worked - you really could get USB 2.0 full rate connections wirelessly and we had some neat demos. I would say the major problem it had with adoption was that wired USB also provided power . (A lot more people use usb to charge their phone than to sync their phone.) So great - wireless connectivity... but you still have to plug the device into a ca…
> which makes the value proposition a lot less clear. Wirelessly transferring files between a phone and a computer seems like a big use case. Still no easy standard way of doing it.
I worked on the design of wireless USB chips around 2008 - 2010. They worked - you really could get USB 2.0 full rate connections wirelessly and we had some neat demos. I would say the major problem it had with adoption was that wired USB also provided power . (A lot more people use usb to charge their phone than to sync their phone.) So great - wireless connectivity... but you still have to plug the device into a ca…
> which makes the value proposition a lot less clear. Wirelessly transferring files between a phone and a computer seems like a big use case. Still no easy standard way of doing it.
They might want to transfer (a better word: share) photos/videos, documents, etc. And for those they use specific apps and "the cloud". No "files" (for the sake of files), and barely any hierarchy of (folders etc).
As long as the entity they want to share magically shows up on the another device or at the other person they want to share with, they are happy. They just skip two levels of abstraction ("this photo is a FILE and I will use USB to transfer it"). Maybe a far fetched analogy but this is why most of the drivers of an automatic don't really think about clutches and how the torque of the engine's output is converted.
At least this is my perception (outside the IT bubble)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imo cloud storage like Dropbox has 95% solved this use case for years, which is why alternative solutions haven't popped up.
Needing to upload files to third party servers just to get them onto your personal computer doesn't solve the case. It just injects a middleman.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imo cloud storage like Dropbox has 95% solved this use case for years, which is why alternative solutions haven't popped up.
Needing to upload files to third party servers just to get them onto your personal computer doesn't solve the case. It just injects a middleman.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know why USB dongles are popular for manufacturers (I assume to make their product more plug-and-play friendly), but I don't think they are a better solution than bluetooth. For example, it is common that if another USB device is plugged close to a USB dongle, it can cause interference to it, which results to unstable connection and eg makes a mouse "jump", keystrokes not register etc. Finding the right place…
Bluetooth's latency is just too slow for a mouse. Heck, Bluetooth is too slow for audio, too, but most people seem to be complacent to latency.
The fact that Logitech’s current dongles are just BLE with a fancy encryption scheme tends to indicate that they really want their proprietary hardware, and bandwidth is not the reason.