Bluetooth on Touch...

440Hz

The plot thickens....



This is part of an error report generated on a Touch .... oohhhh just look at that now....


NEXT....

http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/14/ipod-touch-ships-without-os-x/
... evidence of a Touch which shipped accidentally without any OS...

AND....
Chatting to an "Apple head" today who confirms that when the product was presented to them it did indeed included bluetooth. The words used were "software" and "hack".

I shall say no more on the last point.

Oriel

It looks like it's the same diagnostic tools that were used with it's big brother, the iPhone.
Why on earth would Apple ship an item of hardware and disable some of the hardware features?

P.S. Preview -> Apple-K.

440Hz

Oriel wrote:

It looks like it's the same diagnostic tools that were used with it's big brother, the iPhone.
Why on earth would Apple ship an item of hardware and disable some of the hardware features?

P.S. Preview -> Apple-K.

Its not my screen shot so you dont need to tell me that.

As for why... loads of possible reasons. Apple do "think differently" afterall.

Oirthir

Well they shipped the early macbooks with 802.11n disabled, then charged for the firmware update...

Perhaps they want to wait until the iPhone is bedded down or something?

440Hz

Likely that there are also DRM issues with sharing music on a 'primarily audio device', this of course would be less of an issue with an iPhone whose primary use is as a phone.

Possibly they are revising the software for the BT to allow certain functionality and disable the less 'anti-DRM' functions.

I would think, IMHO, that given the hardware is based on the phone, that it is more likely that they chip was included, and has been disabled.

ZENER

440Hz wrote:

Likely that there are also DRM issues with sharing music on a 'primarily audio device', this of course would be less of an issue with an iPhone whose primary use is as a phone.

I've heard this excuse touted elsewhere but it doesn't make any sense to me. I mean if I wanted to share my music I would use the much quicker medium of 802.11b/g instead of the - relatively - much slower BT. Or am I missing something - a limitation of the iPods wireless networking system perhaps - that already restricts this practice.

I think I'll defer my purchase until this is sorted, maybe after Christmas or there abouts.

ZEN

440Hz

Its just one of many possible reasons, but a likely 'business' one.. whether it makes sense or not. I agree with your point though.

Perhaps it relates to mass use of bluetooth 'piggy backing' in public areas... which might not have wifi. Like the ppl who leave their BT on all the time and are surprised to see 'unknown' devices connecting to their phones. A room full of BT enabled Touches would be fun!! DRM-hell Not that it is a likely scenario... but this is how these DRM-heads think!

babypink

i'm very sceptical of the Touch having bluetooth - the reason i'm sceptical is that in the FCC filing, there is no mention of bluetooth at all.

https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=Exhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=693627&fcc_id='BCGA1213'

If bluetooth were to happen they'd have to re-certify it, from what I can see.

ZENER

babypink wrote:

i'm very sceptical of the Touch having bluetooth - the reason i'm sceptical is that in the FCC filing, there is no mention of bluetooth at all.

https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=Exhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=693627&fcc_id='BCGA1213'

If bluetooth were to happen they'd have to re-certify it, from what I can see.

This is what my initial thought was. KT said that the unit her friend demo'd at Apple had BT in it. I figured they may have disabled it do get it through fcc in time for their projected launch date. Although ifixit said they couldn't find a bluetooth chip in their sample iPod which arrived with no OS . But the firmware visible on the unit they received clearly showed a Bluetooth logo with an 'X' through it suggesting it was merely disabled - sigh ! Now I'm really confused. Damn you Steve Jobs . . . damn you to Microsoft !!!

ZEN

Oriel

440Hz wrote:

Its not my screen shot so you dont need to tell me that.

You don't know how to edit other people's screen shots now?

As you mentioned ZENER - what good is bluetooth when you have Wifi?
To communicate with other companies' mobile phones? Hardly.
I'm with Babypink, no bluetooth. I think it's just excess iPhone code.

chrislad

In a nutshell, bluetooth stereo headphones. That's all I'd want it for.

Not to mention, with wifi, you could use a BT headset for VoiP calls. No use for this, but those possibilities are there. Me, I just want a decent wireless headset.

440Hz

Oriel wrote:

You don't know how to edit other people's screen shots now?

I have no interest in editing other people's screen shots.

NOTHING to do with lack of knowledge.

Stop stirring please.


Re bluetooth, I cant make my mind up.... Either way, im not bothered really, it would be handy but I can survive without it. Its just more of a curious mystery at this stage!!

ZENER

Oriel wrote:

You don't know how to edit other people's screen shots now?

As you mentioned ZENER - what good is bluetooth when you have Wifi?
To communicate with other companies' mobile phones? Hardly.
I'm with Babypink, no bluetooth. I think it's just excess iPhone code.

We each have our own requirements I guess. I'd sooner buy a Nokia or Sony Ericsson music phone with stereo BT support than a Touch without it. For me the convenience of a wireless headset while running on a treadmill or out on the road is a feature I'd pay for. It means less wires to contend with or to get caught possibly resulting in my iPod getting damaged.

But your sarcasm in noted - thanks - I'll try not express opinions you might not agree with in future !

2+2=5 BB

ZEN

Oriel

ZENER wrote:

But your sarcasm in noted - thanks - I'll try not express opinions you might not agree with in future !

What the hell are you talking about? Where was I being sarcastic to you?

ZENER

*/ edit : Biting my lip !!

Maybe you weren't being sarcastic but:

As you mentioned ZENER - what good is bluetooth when you have Wifi? To communicate with other companies' mobile phones? Hardly.

sure came close to it.

ZEN

Oriel

"As you mentioned ZENER - what good is bluetooth when you have Wifi?"
That was aimed at you. I was agreeing with you. "Hardly" is not sarcasm. There was no hostility there.
I capitalised your name, because that is how it is written.

If people (not just you) would stop wrongly accusing me of things, then we might get along a little better.
I can be a little short at times, yes.

ZENER

Oriel wrote:

"As you mentioned ZENER - what good is bluetooth when you have Wifi?"
That was aimed at you. I was agreeing with you. "Hardly" is not sarcasm. There was no hostility there.
I capitalised your name, because that is how it is written.

If people (not just you) would stop wrongly accusing me of things, then we might get along a little better.
I can be a little short at times, yes.

My bad, when I read it first my Safari window was narrowed and the way the lines were displayed made it read differently. When I read it again with your explanation it's clear I was a little rash - sorry.

*/extends hand as gesture of apology/*

I can be a little short at times, yes.

:eek:

ZEN

Oriel

No problem!

Oriel wrote:

I can be a little short at times, yes.

I state the obvious too!

440Hz

Oriel wrote:

If people (not just you) would stop wrongly accusing me of things, then we might get along a little better.

I don't see anyone making false accusations about you on here, other than the current misinterpretation which seems to be sorted. In fact, your statement is a false accusation in itself. And actually, I think we all get along very well here, with the exception of isolated incidents.

Back on topic, and perhaps if the one of posts was less 'attacking' people might not feel the need to defends themselves so much.

Oriel

440Hz wrote:

I don't see anyone making false accusations about you on here ... other than the current.

Riiiight, so that'll be the false accusation I'm talking about then?
Nevermind 440Hz, we got it all sorted thanks, no need for a third party.

440Hz

Oriel, if you are going to quote me in an attempt to make a point, at least quote the full sentence and not PART of it in an effort to apply a false interpretation. My point was that this case here was a misinterpretation, and that noone is going around accusing you of anything. However, by claiming that "people" do, that is a false accusation on your part against these "people".

As for the need for a third party... if an issue is raised with me, as a moderator of this forum, then I shall get involved, thank you.

If you have any further issues Oriel, please take them to PM as I have asked before.

Oriel

And was this issue "rasied" with you 440Hz? Are you going to claim that people reported a post?
Had you said nothing, none of this other crap would never have started as ZENER and I had resloved everything ourselves. But oh no.

I was highlighting the key part of your sentence, including the rest would have made no difference whatsoever.
You were saying that nobody was making a false accusation. ZENER openly admitted to making that very mistake.

440Hz, if I want to publically resolve a dispute on here especially, one directly involving me, I have every right to do so. Don't silence me by sushing me to PM.

Oirthir

OK folks, let's all take a deep breath..

Oriel

Oirthir wrote:

OK folks, let's all take a deep breath..

<age7> She started it </age7>

440Hz

Oriel wrote:

And was this issue "rasied" with you 440Hz?

Yes. It was raised with me. And, futhermore, even if it had not been, it is my job to moderate here and me posting about this is at my own discretion, not yours. I did not take sides here, merely pointed out that I felt your statement was unfair and requested the thread return to topic.

This thread is totally off topic now, which is why I suggested PMs, not to "shush" anyone.


<edit>
Actually, this is getting to be a bit tiring and is ruining threads needlessly, may I suggest trying to keep threads on topic and stop picking holes in things I/others post in future, we are all free to make points and disagree with someone but its like you are looking for a reaction. I'm saying it nicely this time to ease off, but intentional provocative posts in the future will result in a one week ban. I'm basing this on more than just this thread alone.