To: John Biddle who wrote (5112 ) 12/1/2000 6:37:51 PM From: Maurice Winn Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 196584 <Bluetooth has a maximum data transmission rate of 750 Kbps more or less and won't support the higher bandwidth needed for decent color depth at decent resolution. Looks like Bluetooth II is needed already > Where did I get the idea that it was several megabits per second? Checking the official Bluetooth site, you are right. It has a nominal gross speed of 1 megabits per second but only 750 kbps in what counts.bluetooth.com This then begs the question; why do we need Bluetooth other than in transition? Maybe OFDM integrated into QUALCOMM ASICs is a better way to go for local connection which will usually be static or walking speed. For mobile applications, HDR technology might be best. Hmmm, looks as though maybe there is a whole new world of wireless connectivity out there which I'd given up as going to be Bluetooth, with CDMA and QUALCOMM technology providing the mobile link back to Babe the base station. So, how about one of those Kyocera Son-of-pdQ gadgets, with a Bluetooth ASIC in it for local connection but an HDR ASIC for local connection at high speed where available? Or maybe an OFDM ASIC if those are available. Maybe QUALCOMM needs to buy WiLan or license the technology. Speed is of the essence! We are still in thrall to time and the faster the better applies to anything where people have to figure out what to do while they wait. Even for half a second or a tenth of a second in the case of voice delay in a phone or a response from a clicked mouse. At traffic lights when they turn green, the response is reaction time stuff, without a 10th of a second to spare. 750 kbps is hopelessly slow though it's pretty quick compared with what we have now [other than my hot-stuff ADSL when it's not down, which it is too often]. Why does anyone want Bluetooth when they can have 1xEV? With power control, a cellphone could send the most microscopic whisper direct to a corresponding ASIC in a nearby device. We are back to the old idea of a web of CDMA devices which can all talk directly to each other [if close enough] without going via a service provider base station and billing system. I'm not sure what terms apply to spectrum rights, but perhaps using spectrum in one's own home or business should not require the approval of the spectrum holder. If devices were limited in power, perhaps they could use the spectrum as they like. Anyway, if the power was low enough, the owner of spectrum wouldn't be able to do anything about people whispering to each other's devices below the detection threshold of the spectrum owner. They couldn't enter one's premises to see if you are using their spectrum. If a base station was broken in an area, the cellphones and other wireless devices could even pass signals along by 'word of mouth' until being dropped into the next closest base station. The wireless world is going to be an amazing place. Mqurice