Friday, February 20, 2004
...Or Is Intel Really Giving Up On Bluetooth?
Posted by Janak Parekh in "NEWS" @ 05:00 PM
From the conflicting-news department, here comes the counterpoint to Ed's earlier article. The Register is reporting that Bluetooth will be integrated in Intel's next-generation Centrino chipsets.
"Intel plans to integrate Bluetooth onto its next-generation Wi-Fi sub-system, it has emerged. Speaking during his IDF keynote, Sean Maloney, Intel general manager of the company's Communications Group, revealed the chip maker is to offer a 'specially designed low-power... integrated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi device'. The module, he said, will be 'going into production later this year'."
So, take your pick -- Rob Enderle reporting that Intel is ditching Bluetooth, or the Register reporting that Intel is adopting it more. ;)
Here's my take on the situation: UWB is potentially a long-term competitor to Bluetooth, but it's years and years away: probably 5 years, from what I've heard. There are still problems of interference, let alone FCC approval. Bluetooth, on the other hand, is here and is here now. As for US carriers, they might be turning around: Sprint recently started selling the T608 and Verizon may be getting a new Motorola phone with Bluetooth. The GSM carriers already carry several models.
From a different perspective: long-term, Intel is adopting UWB to act as "Wireless USB", but USB is built around the PC -- it's primarily a "host"-based protocol, not a peer-to-peer protocol. Intel knows this, and is deliberately doing so because they want to sell their PC chipsets with "wireless USB". On the other hand, Bluetooth is device-centric: you can use Bluetooth for your cell phone to talk to its headset. Somehow, I don't see myself installing USB drivers on my cell phone to use a wireless headset anytime soon. Unless, of course, the cell phone ran a full-blown desktop OS. ;) Long-term, if anything, Bluetooth challenges the desktop-based hegemony -- if we're carrying a collection of smart devices in our pockets, do we need Intel's core competency at all? (We might only use Intel's XScale products, and acquiring that ARM technology was a very smart move on their part.) Moreover, Bluetooth is becoming simpler to use -- I had almost zero problems pairing my devices a few years ago, and it's gotten better, not worse, since.
And of course, 5 years down the road, no one really can predict which short-range wireless technology will win. While Bluetooth is slow now, for all we know Bluetooth 4 will be out and will provide the performance benefits of UWB without its downsides (especially interference). Bluetooth 2.0 is already around the corner. I guess Ed and I will just have to place bets to see who wins. :lol: Let's make a poll and see what you, as a readership, thinks.
"Intel plans to integrate Bluetooth onto its next-generation Wi-Fi sub-system, it has emerged. Speaking during his IDF keynote, Sean Maloney, Intel general manager of the company's Communications Group, revealed the chip maker is to offer a 'specially designed low-power... integrated Bluetooth/Wi-Fi device'. The module, he said, will be 'going into production later this year'."
So, take your pick -- Rob Enderle reporting that Intel is ditching Bluetooth, or the Register reporting that Intel is adopting it more. ;)
Here's my take on the situation: UWB is potentially a long-term competitor to Bluetooth, but it's years and years away: probably 5 years, from what I've heard. There are still problems of interference, let alone FCC approval. Bluetooth, on the other hand, is here and is here now. As for US carriers, they might be turning around: Sprint recently started selling the T608 and Verizon may be getting a new Motorola phone with Bluetooth. The GSM carriers already carry several models.
From a different perspective: long-term, Intel is adopting UWB to act as "Wireless USB", but USB is built around the PC -- it's primarily a "host"-based protocol, not a peer-to-peer protocol. Intel knows this, and is deliberately doing so because they want to sell their PC chipsets with "wireless USB". On the other hand, Bluetooth is device-centric: you can use Bluetooth for your cell phone to talk to its headset. Somehow, I don't see myself installing USB drivers on my cell phone to use a wireless headset anytime soon. Unless, of course, the cell phone ran a full-blown desktop OS. ;) Long-term, if anything, Bluetooth challenges the desktop-based hegemony -- if we're carrying a collection of smart devices in our pockets, do we need Intel's core competency at all? (We might only use Intel's XScale products, and acquiring that ARM technology was a very smart move on their part.) Moreover, Bluetooth is becoming simpler to use -- I had almost zero problems pairing my devices a few years ago, and it's gotten better, not worse, since.
And of course, 5 years down the road, no one really can predict which short-range wireless technology will win. While Bluetooth is slow now, for all we know Bluetooth 4 will be out and will provide the performance benefits of UWB without its downsides (especially interference). Bluetooth 2.0 is already around the corner. I guess Ed and I will just have to place bets to see who wins. :lol: Let's make a poll and see what you, as a readership, thinks.
