wil the next Airport be Bluetooth???

mischief

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 1, 2001
2,920
0
Santa Cruz Ca
Apple was again ahead of the game when releasing Airport, but the real question seems to be: will it go anywhere? Steve Jobs is an infamous schemer and other versions of the 809.11b standard have shown up with MUCH greater ranges. There are some SICK features to Airport .
Very cool but it's all for naught if it doesn't do blue. For those who aren't total troglodite, dyed-in-the-wool mac geeks like some of the rest of us:Bluetooth is a wireless standard that allows for data exchange not only between systems but also devices, peripherals, WAN's etc. Very cool stuff.
 

ThlayliTheFierce

macrumors regular
Jul 31, 2001
248
0
San Luis Obispo, CA
I'd be willing to wager that it will. It fits in with their whole Digital Hub thing. But you know Jobs, it'll probably be better than just regular Bluetooth. Airport seems due for an upgrade, no?
 

mischief

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 1, 2001
2,920
0
Santa Cruz Ca
Bingo

I figured the two standards have enough in common that it wouldn't be hard. Plus there's a rumor of inter-box parallel processing that adds a bit to the potential cool factor. Add the router-like features of Airport to Bluetooth and you may get intelligent packet parsing around bottlenecks for more even bandwidth distribution and resulting user-end speed increase even if the rated bandwidth of a single unit would be less than now. Neat stuff.
 

elliotay

macrumors regular
Jul 9, 2001
133
0
so if the upgrade to bluetooth happens, does that mean I'd have to go out and spend $300 to upgrade to a new airport hub? Or is this an aiport card upgrade?
 

mischief

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 1, 2001
2,920
0
Santa Cruz Ca
who knows

It's all int the implementation: both standards have their own frequency sets so a new card would be needed to use Bluetooth peripherals. A new base station should only be necessary if you want greater range for both sets or "hardpoint" access.
 

carlsson

macrumors 6502
Jul 18, 2001
330
181
Well, afaik Bluetooth range is way much shorter than the Airport.
Thus; Bluetooth is for shortrange peripherals, while Airport is for longrange computer to base/computer management. That makes two standards that will live side by side.

I can be mistaken though.

/andreas
 

mischief

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 1, 2001
2,920
0
Santa Cruz Ca
no, that's it.

Exactly. Airport/Blutooth crossover would have to be adding a second set of electronics to Airport. It would be incredibly cool but not a straight mix.
 

Kela

macrumors 6502
May 12, 2001
287
0
US
Blootooth ist schlecht.

Blue tooth is bad. The technology is nothing great. The new technique being developed is radio frequencies between gadgets.
 

mischief

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 1, 2001
2,920
0
Santa Cruz Ca
not bad, subtle.

Airport is robust at higher power and range levels, for inter-machine communication but bluetooth may allow you to carry a set of basic peripherals instead of the whole machine. If the Idea is to build in as many drivers as possible with X then when blutooth gets more common, I could use the same Monitor, Keyboard, etc. with any Machine that's up to date. plus it frees you to pick a position, rather than being bound by your desk.
 

MrMacMan

macrumors 604
Jul 4, 2001
7,002
11
1 Block away from NYC.
The Super-ultra-secrewt project is coming. It is wiresless everything: Keyboard, mouse, internet and they would all have airport cards for Alot less then they sell now.
 

mnkeybsness

macrumors 68030
Jun 25, 2001
2,511
0
Moneyapolis, Minnesota
interesting............verrrrrrryyyyyy interesting


i like what you have to say mrmacman and would like to hear more of your ideas and theories. where can i purchase a copy of your book.

sorry i'm being stupid, but i'm serious i like the sound of the wireless stuff
 

MrMacMan

macrumors 604
Jul 4, 2001
7,002
11
1 Block away from NYC.
Originally posted by mnkeybsness
interesting............verrrrrrryyyyyy interesting


i like what you have to say mrmacman and would like to hear more of your ideas and theories. where can i purchase a copy of your book.

sorry i'm being stupid, but i'm serious i like the sound of the wireless stuff
The problem with a book is that by the time I publish it, it will have areadly happened or the rumors would have been dismissed as fake. And hey it could happen.
 

menoinjun

macrumors 6502a
Jul 7, 2001
567
0
a wireless keyboard/mouse would be a great thing for the new form factor iMacs. It is definitely along Apple's line of bringing the new and cool to personal computing. A cheap iMac with wireless mouse/keyboard would sell like hotcakes. Can they do it though? Infrared sucks, you need line of sight. Airport seems like the best way to do it, but can they take the existing technology and adapt with this idea? Would they need mini Airport cards (in essence) installed in the mouse and keyboard? Would it end up being too expensive?

-Pete
 

BurntCalc

macrumors member
Jan 2, 2002
57
0
Tucson
Doesn't Bluetooth interfere with Airport? it seems unlikely that Apple will adopt it when having a single bluetooth machine renders all your existing airport networks useless. Unless they fixed with with Airport 2....

wasn't there a rumor a few months back about wireless firewire?
 

GeeYouEye

macrumors 68000
Dec 9, 2001
1,652
4
State of Denial
^^Not Quite

Actually, (and this is why Apple will never use Bluetooth) it interferes with ANY and ALL wireless signals in an area larger than its actual range.
 

j763

macrumors 6502a
Nov 25, 2001
660
0
Champaign, IL, USA
Apple is still not a member of the Bluetooth consortium, which leads me to believe that Steve will not introduce Bluetooth in Airport until (or if) it becomes commonly used. At this point in time, it really wouldn't be worth it - Airport is arguably more advanced and has some *real* computing uses wheras Bluetooth still hasn't sorted itself out properly... It's a matter of waiting, I think...

Oh, and as usual, if bluetooth does become commonly used, steve's alternative will be better.