←back to thread

219 points zdw | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.223s | source
Show context
maxlin ◴[] No.45897208[source]
If this doesn't fix the damn "audio quality goes to 10kbps if you also want a mic" I'm going to electrocute the devs responsible with the voltage common BT devices running this stack require.
replies(2): >>45897351 #>>45897364 #
mort96 ◴[] No.45897364[source]
Why would they fix that in the standard when Qualcomm has a proprietary solution which generates royalties revenue for them? Qualcomm would probably vote against that when it comes up in Bluetooth SIG discussions

Same goes for A2DP with a remotely decent compression algorithm which doesn't sound like crap

I'm cynical enough to believe that these obvious huge missing parts of standard Bluetooth aren't accidental. They've surely noticed.

replies(1): >>45898102 #
rickdeckard ◴[] No.45898102[source]
Yeah, it's a dilemma. Modern times are no longer suitable for industry-wide standards.

Up until the 2000s, industry standardization groups were formed by companies which acknowledged that they need to team up and cooperate with each other to establish a mutual standard across several market-segments.

Nowadays we have companies who participate in those standards but don't contribute their work back to it, in hopes to secure a competitive advantage with a closed ecosystem.

What happens instead, is that they force other equally-large players to develop another proprietary standard to match them, and now the standards body is unable to find common ground between all members anymore.

Apple is the most egregious example of this, extending the Bluetooth spec in proprietary ways and not contributing any substantial implementation of it back to the standard (proprietary fast-pairing, linking BT-pairing to the Apple-ID instead of the device,...)

In today's times, Bluetooth wouldn't even be a standard. There would likely be equivalent wireless specs from Apple, Google/Qualcomm and Microsoft/Intel, none of them would work properly with each other because each team has its own set of accessories to sell...

replies(2): >>45898516 #>>45900573 #
1. bluGill ◴[] No.45900573[source]
Industry standards were done back then because customers demanded it. When a large customer (big company or government) says that you have to support a standard you support it, and if you don't like it you make the standard better. Even then everyone wanted their own version that wasn't standard because nobody wants you to be able to buy from competition. In turn, sometimes competition reversed engineered you - suddenly you realized you couldn't upgrade anymore unless you were compatible with the competition because customers were expecting compatibility with someone who only partially understands what you did: a few standards were written just so they could explain why this field that was always zero was going to change to a 1 with the next upgrade.