Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Bluetooth Enabled iPods?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Lacero said:
Bluetooth and WiFi run in the same 2.4Ghz frequency spectrum but they are very different standards...I have never heard of them talking. I doubt very much that is possible.
The only solution in my mind if WiFi in iPods...
people! read the article! or read the translation!
The article DOES NOT say apple will come out with buetooth iPods!
Motorolo will come out with a device that connects EXISTING iPods with your car stearo via bluetooth....
The article DOES NOT say apple will come out with buetooth iPods!
Motorolo will come out with a device that connects EXISTING iPods with your car stearo via bluetooth....
Firstly - BITCH!SAukland said:
OK, here's how I picture wireless iPod headphones:
They're just like the current earbud's you get with iPod's now, but then take away most of the wire, leaving about 10" going from earbud to earbud - this goes around the back of your head and works in the same way as the string on a pair of glasses. But also, in the center of the wire there is a tiny plug. This plugs into the top of the iPod and it charges the earbuds, with a helpful little capacity meter on the iPod screen (which can also be monitored wirelessly). And, of course, you can simply plug them into the iPod, to charge them, when the iPod's docked.
Oh, we have cellphones for those thingsswissmann said:
-Luke
MacSlut said:
And YOU know that my comment wasn't necessarily directed AT you. And also I'm sure you're aware that while all of this talk of why we don't use bytes for bitrates is nice, the word "bitrate" pretty much takes care of it right off the bat, and that's great, but that wasn't the point. Since this thread deals with Bluetooth and hence data transmission, we are ultimately speaking of the transfer of bytes as a more concrete and functional discussion. The bitrate of CD quality music is a separate issue from transmitting data across an RF connection, so the point was placing the requirements of CD audio in comparison to the transmission capacity of Bluetooth 2.0, while not failing to remember the various factors that can affect transfer speed and reduce actual available bandwidth.
And the 150K/sec reference isn't a misconception, it's a loose generalization. CD drives do not read at a uniform velocity across the entire disc, meaning that any single number to refer to data handling is not constant, but variable. 1X CD-ROM drives for data purposes could indeed handle CD-audio through the IDE or SCSI connector, but for the purposes of early CD-audio, it went straight to the audio subsystem because of latency and data overhead on the bus, and because digital audio extraction was underdeveloped.
backwards....and confused
Capital "B" means "bytes", lower-case "b" means bits.
The SI prefixes are "k" for kilo (1,000), "M" for mega (1,000,000), and "G" for giga (1,000,000,000).
The "k" means nothing by itself, but using "K" by itself means degrees Kelvin. Therefore, k/sec means nothing and K/sec refers to a temperature slew rate.
It's technically wrong, but seldom ambiguous, to use "K" to mean "kilo". Therefore, the proper use "kB" is kilobytes, and "kb" is kilobits - but "KB" and "Kb" are often seen.
The binary prefix "kibi" is "Ki", as you say. The first reference has a good explanation, and many links to pages on various standards bodies (SI, IEC, IETF, NIST,...).
Ref:
IEC prefixes and symbols for binary multiples
SI brochure
Rules for using SI prefixes
Prefixes for binary multiples
matticus008 said:
Capital "B" means "bytes", lower-case "b" means bits.
The SI prefixes are "k" for kilo (1,000), "M" for mega (1,000,000), and "G" for giga (1,000,000,000).
The "k" means nothing by itself, but using "K" by itself means degrees Kelvin. Therefore, k/sec means nothing and K/sec refers to a temperature slew rate.
It's technically wrong, but seldom ambiguous, to use "K" to mean "kilo". Therefore, the proper use "kB" is kilobytes, and "kb" is kilobits - but "KB" and "Kb" are often seen.
The binary prefix "kibi" is "Ki", as you say. The first reference has a good explanation, and many links to pages on various standards bodies (SI, IEC, IETF, NIST,...).
Ref:
IEC prefixes and symbols for binary multiples
SI brochure
Rules for using SI prefixes
Prefixes for binary multiples
migue said:
I believe that uncompressed cd audio is 1411kbps.
well, just realized this was already said.
oh well.
to add substanance to this: i would rather see an ipod deck which you slide your ipod into and control via exernal controls than a loose ipod wirelessly connected via bluetooth.
Still 10 million iPods sold, remember!?B-52 Macer said:Hmm, first the announcement at MWSF that a lot of car makers will include iPod docks in the cars. Then, all of a sudden, a couple of months later, they will be unnecessary?
WHat I found strange is that some Moto rep. spills the beans on some wireless iPod/car support. WTF has Moto to do with Apple's iPods or car making?
errrrr
wouldn't music streamed over bluetooth sound....****??
mp3's are acceptable for iPods as it's portable, and you're usually listening on small (therefore lesser quality) headphones. but you wouldn't want to stream music to you're £3000 hi fi sytem, to only hear weak sounding music...?
or am i very wrong..? i hope so...
wouldn't music streamed over bluetooth sound....****??
mp3's are acceptable for iPods as it's portable, and you're usually listening on small (therefore lesser quality) headphones. but you wouldn't want to stream music to you're £3000 hi fi sytem, to only hear weak sounding music...?
or am i very wrong..? i hope so...
d.f said:
yes you are wrong
high quality stereo requires only 345kbps
http://www.radio-electronics.com/info/wireless/bluetooth/bluetooth_edr.php
bluetooth 2 is more than enough for a wireless ipod
T'hain Esh Kelch said:WHat I found strange is that some Moto rep. spills the beans on some wireless iPod/car support. WTF has Moto to do with Apple's iPods or car making?
Motorola makes electronics for cars (GPS systems, cell phone integration, ECU, airbags etc) so it's quite likely they'd be working on any interface with the iPod for the manufacturers they deal with.
http://www.motorola.com/automotive/
Way too slow for 1.0
apple would never release this using BT 1.0 because it is deathly slow. When I first got my treo 650 I used to BT sync it all the time until I started putting apps on it. It would probably take 10 minutes to put 1 song using BT 1.0.
apple would never release this using BT 1.0 because it is deathly slow. When I first got my treo 650 I used to BT sync it all the time until I started putting apps on it. It would probably take 10 minutes
to put 1 song using BT 1.0.
This rumor makes sense - Apple has been incorporating more and more Bluetooth into their gear, so the iPod would definitely be a logical candidate.
They need Bluetooth 2.0 or it will be to slow to even make it worth while.mobilebandit said:apple would never release this using BT 1.0 because it is deathly slow. When I first got my treo 650 I used to BT sync it all the time until I started putting apps on it. It would probably take 10 minutes
I use Bluetooth to transfer small files between my PB and G5 tower, which doesn't have airport. It's a great way to connect and sync two computers, if you cant run ethernet or firewire between the two, although firewire is the preferred method, next to ethernet.
excellent!
cool. so, there's no compression involved...? therefore you couldn't tell the difference between BT streamed Aiff's or actual CD...?
i'm not arguing, i'm genuinley asking as this is a big deal to me. i don't understand why hi-fi hasn't chosen to adopt this method. instead of making consumers fork out for expensive interconnects.
Hector said:
cool. so, there's no compression involved...? therefore you couldn't tell the difference between BT streamed Aiff's or actual CD...?
i'm not arguing, i'm genuinley asking as this is a big deal to me. i don't understand why hi-fi hasn't chosen to adopt this method. instead of making consumers fork out for expensive interconnects.
redeye_be said:
That's a good point - Apple had supposedly been working on a WiFi iPod dock for a year now but it has never seen the light of day, so perhaps an iPod with bluetooth and an Airport Express with bluetooth is more likely, especially with the new BT 2.0 being released on new PowerBooks.
What devices can be attached to this USB port?Lacero said:
I know it works for a printer, and apparently an IR remote works too, would adding BT to the list just mean a firmware update - or is it supported allready?
- I have promo code from a recently ordered mini, and i might just get me the AE, just for the promo's sake. Easy commerce-target here
AidenShaw said:
You're right, of course, but you'll find in general discourse that much of the shorthand used in technical fields makes assumptions. For example, 273K independent of context means 273 degrees Kelvin. But in a computer-related technical field, at least as far as everyone I've dealt with, it is an understanding that using the capital K refers to kB, and that a lowercase k refers to kb. It's not correct usage according to standards institutions, and you are absolutely correct in pointing that out here.
However, in a field that is pretty unwilling to accept the fairly recently-created binary prefixes for SI approximations, you'll find a lot of rule-bending-- Especially when they change the rules several decades into the game. Thanks for pointing out the technical correction that I absentmindedly skipped over.