Apple Adopts Bluetooth 4.0. Could It Reject NFC? 250
siliconbits writes "Two months after Apple joined the Bluetooth special interest group board, the company launched the world's first truly mainstream Bluetooth 4.0 devices, namely the new Macbook Air & Mac Mini 2011 editions. The products came only one year after the official core specifications of Bluetooth 4.0 were adopted and it looks likely that Apple fast-tracked Bluetooth 4.0's adoption so that the forthcoming iPhone 5 can use this technology with at least one Apple product. This could mean that the manufacturer is considering giving up on NFC altogether, a technology embraced by all of its rivals."
False logic (Score:3)
It's the first device that supports BT4. That does by no means mean that it will be a success, neither does it mean that manufacturers will instantly jump the bandwagon.
Despite all Apple success and the increase in market share, they're still a far cry from the "other" desktop computers. We should probably start talking when the iPhone supports it.
Re: (Score:3)
Despite all Apple success...
Haters gonna hate. :\ The only false logic I see here is saying "they've been successful in the past. It doesn't mean they'll be successful this time." While that's true, the fact is that Apple has a track record of strong consumer support. The standards their devices use have a strong bearing on what other manufacturers integrate into their own devices. No, I think talking now is exactly what's needed; NFC has yet to see a deployment by any major consumer hardware manufacturer. BT4 just signed its first c
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have any opinion about Apple either way, I just say that we should maybe not take the "Apple does it, it's gotta be successful!" too literal. While everything they do in the handheld market is an instant success, from iPod to iPhone to iPad, the same does not automatically apply to desktop computers. And while I'd applaud the development of ONE standard and being able to rely on it being future-proof (I sure as hell don't need another BluRay vs. HDDVD battle that kept people who wanted to adopt from
Re: (Score:3)
I don't have any opinion about Apple either way, I just say that we should maybe not take the "Apple does it, it's gotta be successful!" too literal.
Exactly. Why should we take something too literal that you imagine was said or written somewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
Firewire was a huge success (and still is), just not in the consumer space. Even FW400 (the slowest speed in a non-prototype product) is still faster and more robust than USB2.
If you needed fast, reliable, low resource using external bus, then Firewire was excellent and is the de-facto standard for consumer DV cameras, pro-sumer stuff (before you start looking at things like SDI and so on), and used for things like external sound cards, hard drives, high-bandwidth scanners and cameras and so on.
It only lost
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, they're the third biggest computer manufacturer in terms of shipments (behind Dell and HP) and the biggest in terms of revenue and profits.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I never understood why Apple fans brag that "their" company makes the highest profit off of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you think he's bragging? He's directly answering a post from the GP that Apple is "still a far cry from the "other" desktop computers" (direct quote). He's pointing out that, in fact, they are the third biggest.
I'm not sure what "a far cry" means in your world, but generally not "third biggest", unless there are only three participants I suppose.
Re: (Score:3)
Thats a strange way of looking at things.
What if there's 5 companies. Company A sells 100 computers a year, Company B sells 70. Company C sells 2. Companies D and E both sell 1.
Would you say Company C is a "far cry" from A and B?
Re: (Score:3)
iPads are not included in those figures. Macs (as in, specifically *not* iOS devices) make up 10% of new PC sales in the US, and Apple is one of the few individual vendors who are actually growing their business (in an overall decline in market growth compared to previous years).
Re: (Score:3)
Apple's influence is huge across IT and the industry. It's market share is now just under 11% of PCs
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
That does by no means mean that it will be a success, neither does it mean that manufacturers will instantly jump the bandwagon.
Well, Apple does have some leverage over device makers--namely the vaunted "Made for iPhone" program.
If you want that logo, you have to follow Apple's rules. If Apple says, "You want the logo, you have to support Bluetooth 4.0," you'll need to support Apple's rules. If you don't have the logo, your iPhone gives you snarky messages when you attach the device.
Re: (Score:2)
It's the first device that supports BT4. That does by no means mean that it will be a success, neither does it mean that manufacturers will instantly jump the bandwagon.
Funny how vendors seem to adopt rather quickly to new standards, especially when it results in putting their product in Apple stores for a slice of that lucrative revenue stream.
Despite all Apple success and the increase in market share, they're still a far cry from the "other" desktop computers. We should probably start talking when the iPhone supports it.
Uh, "other" computers? You call that "Windows" abomination that has justified a million+ support jobs some kind of success? The only "far cry" here was the expectation that Microsoft will make anything stable or secure out of the box, or easy to use.(and yeah, that's coming from a Windows SysAdmin)
And chances are the iPhone 5 will
This is a bad thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
When the Jobs Reality Distortion Field is turned off, usually Apple is found to be selling overpriced, underspec'd hardware. But the one time they get it right, we jump on them?
Bluetooth supports cryptography. NFC does not. ... in fact, the only thing NFC seems to do better is that it takes less time to setup because (ta-da!) it has no security built into it.
Bluetooth has a higher bitrate.
Bluetooth has longer range.
The power consumption is similar
So tell me guys, given how much data is sitting on your iphone, android, blackberry, blueberry, and walla-walla-ding-dong phones, do you really want a transciever built into it that has no security capability at all... and one of its main functions is point-of-sale integration?
Sorry guys, but this time at least, Apple did good.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
When the Jobs Reality Distortion Field is turned off, usually Apple is found to be selling overpriced, underspec'd hardware.
Not really. In the computer market Apple mostly sells a slick proprietary Unix operating system, bundled with large, computer-shaped anti-copying dongles.
Re: (Score:2)
So tell me guys, given how much data is sitting on your iphone, android, blackberry, blueberry, and walla-walla-ding-dong phones, do you really want a transciever built into it that has no security capability at all...
The problem isn't that bluetooth has security capability. It's that it forces security.
With bluetooth, there is no way to just connect without figuring out the target device's preprogrammed pairing code (usually 0000 or 1111), or typing the same code into both devices. This acts as another step that gets in the way of Joe Schmoe doing what he wants. In the case of some phones, they ask for confirmation every time for every file/contact that's going to be transferred -- with no way to permanently authorize a
Re:This is a bad thing? (Score:4, Informative)
First, BlueTooth 2.1 and up supports Secure Simple Pairing, which has several security modes from "no-config encryption only" to "hardware authentication dongles":
1. Just works. A fully automatic encryption-only system that sacrifices protection against MitM attacks for the convenience of not requiring any user input. Think self-signed SSL certificates -- it's easy to use and secure against eavesdropping but vulnerable to active attacks.
2. Numeric comparison. Adds authentication to the "Just Works" method by displaying a passkey on both devices and asking the user to ensure they match. The only input required from the user is their acknowledgement that the displayed codes match.
3. Passkey entry. Like legacy pairing, but the passkey is 6 digits and is generated by one of the hosts and typed into the other (as opposed to the old 4-digit passkeys that may be user-selected and entered on both hosts).
4. Out-of-band. Bluetooth allows the exchange of authentication data entirely outside the BT data stream, allowing integration with other authentication and communications mechanisms. This allows for integration with hardware dongles or SSL certificates or whatever other sort trust system you'd like to establish for authentication.
Second, even for legacy pairing, isn't it easy enough to just try "0000" and "1234" when attempting to connect to a new device, and only prompt for user input of neither of those codes work?
Re: (Score:2)
But nonetheless all of those methods require point to point pairing. NFC has no concept of pairing, you wave it past a sensor and something happens.
Having to stop and pair your device with a coke machine is a large amount of effort for such a tiny transaction.
Re: (Score:2)
You are delusional. I think you should think about what you said. Its one thing to allow users to fuck up their PC at home (average MS users) its another to allow idiots to walk around spewing personal data all over the meatspace. There are ways to enforce security with minimal invasion. Your OLD *Samsung* case is nothing like how Bluetooth is implemented in premium devices today. I have never entered my pair code more than once and I LIKE that a 2 year old can't hijack my Bluetooth devices with zero effort. I understand it can be hacked, but at least it can't be done by every walmart checker.
I'm sorry, I must have crossed an Apple fanboi. But okay, I'll bite. Obviously, *Samsung* doesn't have any "premium devices", and only "MS users" ever leave their wireless router unprotected.
As far as spewing personal data all over, Facebook should be a good enough example that people don't care about their personal data... They walk around posting location updates [facebook.com] now too.
Funny thing is that I actually think it's good for Apple to support this standard that forces the standard user to think about security.
Re: (Score:2)
I was going to mod you up but I think a reply is probably better. I absolutely love that Apple is pushing Bluetooth 4, and think it has so many advantages*, (many of which you state) over NFC for local communications. However, NFC is not without merit. While it's being sold on the merits of being contactless payment system, the really cool part of NFC is the auto-configuration and app launching abilities it will open up. The possibilities for how to use that are quite vast and cool. In fact, it could (i
Re: (Score:2)
Bluetooth supports cryptography. NFC does not.
The Internet (v4) does not support cryptography either... However, if two machines both equipped with support for either unencrypted protocol (Internet or NFC) wish to exchange encrypted data, what's stopping them from doing so?
Hint: TLS exists as a layer atop an unencrypted channel; Thus, HTTPS (part of the "World Wide Web") supports crypto...
(Also: I'd take upgradeable / patch-able software encryption protocols over hardware crypto implementations any day.)
Re: (Score:2)
This article is just more worthless speculation. Bluetooth and NFC serve totally different purposes. The primary purpose of Bluetooth is tethering of devices wirelessly. The primary purpose of NFC is a "wireless key".
Probably some of the best implementations of NFC are already available. One example is hotel room card keys. Instead of a physical key, you get a card. The card conveniently unlocks your hotel room door.
Another good use for NFC is public transit ticket readers. Instead of purchasing a ticke
Re: (Score:2)
When the Jobs Reality Distortion Field is turned off, usually Apple is found to be selling overpriced, underspec'd hardware. But the one time they get it right, we jump on them?
Bluetooth supports cryptography. NFC does not. ... in fact, the only thing NFC seems to do better is that it takes less time to setup because (ta-da!) it has no security built into it.
Bluetooth has a higher bitrate.
Bluetooth has longer range.
The power consumption is similar
So tell me guys, given how much data is sitting on your iphone, android, blackberry, blueberry, and walla-walla-ding-dong phones, do you really want a transciever built into it that has no security capability at all... and one of its main functions is point-of-sale integration?
Sorry guys, but this time at least, Apple did good.
I don't know, firewire was pretty much superior in every way to bluetooth, but the market went bluetooth anyway. BT4 may be superior to NFC, but from a consumer perspective it will come down to price and convenience. People on slashdot might worry about the things you mention, but the majority of phone buyers don't.
Re: (Score:2)
FireWire and Bluetooth address two completely different use cases. I don't think anyone's clamouring for a Bluetooth hard drive.
Never said they were. The point was that not every superior technology adopted by Apple has been an industry success.
Re: (Score:2)
Hence NFC's "security" is range (i.e. tapping).
We have terms like security by obscurity, which does work in situations, though not in many others.
NFC brings to the table security by proximity--the island method (you're technically secure if you're on a stranded island miles away from the next person... and they can't hear you).
Increase NFC's range (which application engineers will *want*) and BT4.0 will be the superior tech. NFC should be a replacement for RFID, not BT...
Re: (Score:2)
the other aspect of NFC that no-one seems to notice is that it'll be off all the time until you want to use it. You can't just click your phone against the reader to transfer money, you have to unlock the phone (at least) first. They say the only way to get security is to unplug from the network - this does that.
Incidentally I've heard of using NFC for pairing, followed by Bluetooth for data transfer. No more typing in codes to your bluetooth device, connect via NFC to enter the codes automatically.
Re: (Score:2)
When the Jobs Reality Distortion Field is turned off, usually Apple is found to be selling overpriced, underspec'd hardware. But the one time they get it right, we jump on them?
Bluetooth supports cryptography. NFC does not.
Bluetooth has a higher bitrate.
Bluetooth has longer range.
The power consumption is similar
I can't believe that you want to muddy the issue with facts.
This is SUPPOSED to be about APPLE!
Re: (Score:2)
Bluetooth supports cryptography. NFC does not.
This is false. NFC's ISO 14443 mode is a smart card protocol which supported cryptography before Bluetooth existed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because most slashdot users still have their first computer in a corner or in the attic
hey! ... someday I'm going to resurrect that thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Because most slashdot users still have their first computer in a corner or in the attic.
QFT. It takes an unbelievable amount of begging, pleading, and cajoling to get me to dump old computer components, especially when said computer components still function. My garage looks like a late 90's-era Fry's exploded all over it, but dammit, at least the crap isn't rotting in a landfill, and there's still uses for it.
Hell, Just recently I donated a bunch of stuff to a friend doing an art project in her summer daycare class. The kids had a blast making little transformer-esque crap out of it...
Re: (Score:2)
You might get more support if you don't start off your post with douchey lies having nothing to do with topic at hand.
Um. There is plenty that relates a very real perception of Apple products to a news article about Apple products. It has very much to do with the topic at hand, and is not a douchey lie.
*It's interesting how so many on /. only talked about iphone costs in terms of the cost of the phone + plans, but no one on slashdot ever mentions Apple's high resale value when doing comparing prices of other brands vs. Apple
Any positive for resale value is completely nullified by the fact that standard accessories are outrageously priced... Want a wall-charger? $30. Charge/sync cord wear out? $30. Earphones fell apart? $30. Hell, let's assume you get an iPad and want a keyboard: $70. Bluetooth keyboards for a real computer don't even cost that
Re: (Score:2)
My wired, USB keyboard cost $70. Plus shipping from the US to Europe, plus customs and tax, which pretty much doubled the price.
Indeed, it is a Model M-lookalike, with the same key mechanism, and I love it and hug it and call it George. And it wasn’t even made by Apple.
Good peripherals cost good money. They are very often worth it, too.
Re: (Score:3)
This holds true while you only consider the internals: the CPU, graphics chipset, RAM, etc.
As soon as you consider other factors, Apple turns out to be fairly priced.
For instance, four years ago, when I suddenly got enough money to buy a good laptop, I was considering a ThinkPad. T40p, if my memory serves me right. An excellent laptop at the time, with an excellent screen, a ThinkPad keyboard and all the other nifty details that made it worth the price difference over similarly specced, yet cheaper laptops
Re: (Score:3)
And the extra you're paying is exactly for the shiny:
-- Generally better battery life than its contemporaries - sometimes significantly longer;
-- Generally lighter/thinner than its contemporaries - sometimes significantly smaller/lighter;
-- A whole bunch of fairly good consumer software to power your shiny new toy;
None of this comes without additional cost. Apple offers less choice in terms of customizability & models - but if you limit your search to similar sizes, weights, battery life, screen qualit
Re: (Score:2)
Apple vs similar laptop spec-wise
These comparisons are difficult. For example, how much is something like the illuminated keyboard worth? Are you comparing machines with the same battery life and size / weight? What about things like FireWire 800? I actually use that quite often for a couple of daisy-chained external disks. How about screen quality? I wouldn't buy an Apple laptop without the antiglare screen option - are the other laptops you're looking at including displays of a similar quality? Do they have switchable GPUs and au
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
You sure? I see the $599 iPhone selling for $50 [ebay.com]. I guess it depends on how long you hold onto your gear.
That's a first generation iPhone you've linked to. I'd bet money that other hardware companies can't even give away, brand new, the phones they made that were contemporaneous with the iPhone 1st Gen.
The surprise with Apple gear isn't that it has a higher resale value than the competition; it's that unlike the competition, Apple products have a resale value at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Bluetooth sucks (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I've tried bluetooth keyboards and mice and I agree they don't work well. Moderate priced keyboards and mice from companies like logitech which include both a proprietary receiver and transmitter (they call it unifying receiver) just seem to work. Plug them in and they pair without any difficulty. Bluetooth is just a PIA...
About the only bluetooth items that have been easy to use are the silly-looking BT headsets.
The technology never met its hype.
Re: (Score:2)
I had a lot of trouble with BT keyboard pairing, and I had pretty much given up trying until I borrowed a Apple BT keyboard. That thing worked perfectly! First time, and has worked since! Only quips with it is that there is no "off" switch, so when I put it into my bag I have to pull out the batteries lest it drain them constantly as I carry it around. All the other BT keyboards just didn't work! Additionally the Apple keyboard feel really nice to the touch! If you're having trouble with BT keyboards, try t
Apple to Apple Bluetooth works just as easily (Score:2)
And sometimes works easily with non-Apple Bluetooth devices.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't know about your incident, but pairing an Apple BT keyboard with an iMac is brain-dead. It's the same process as pairing a BT PS3 remote or headset with a PS3. However, I do have a problem with my headset losing its pairing.
Pairing PS3 controllers uses a bit of a cheat since plugging it in USB circumvents all the normal BT pairing procedures.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There is a reason why HID Bluetooth devices are blocked. Apple sells an overpriced "iPad Keyboard Dock". Mr. Jobs says buy that and make him more money.
Nice theory - except my clunky old Belkin Bluetooth keyboard pairs with my iPad in a jiffy, and my cheap'n'nasty Packard Bell USB mini-keyboard works via the USB adaptor that comes with the $30 iPad camera connection kit (you get a "USB device not supported" message, but it still works).
Back under the bridge and wait for the next billygoat, mate.
The GP's problem is probably that he forgot to hold his nose and hum the star spangled banner while standing on one leg and holding the power button on the keyboa
Re: (Score:2)
Where's the "-1 totally, utterly spouting bullshit" moderation option.
Any old bluetooth keyboard works with the iPad. You can also hook up usb keyboards via the USB adapter and they work too. No need to buy the iPad accessory one.
Re:Bluetooth sucks (Score:4, Informative)
Luckily, apple's bluetooth stack is one of the absolute best out there – I've never actually had a device fail to work with my macs.
Re: (Score:3)
Because Sony performs some not-quite-standard tricks with the Bluetooth implementation of its controllers/the PS3. They also do extensive testing to make absolutely sure those two units interop.
Which is why things work. Have you noticed that there are NO other Bluetooth wireless controllers for the PS3? All other wireless controllers plug into a USB port because there's some Sony "special sauce". Also, to my knowledge, few if any people have ever gotten a PS3 controller to pair with a non-PS3 host. (US
Re: (Score:3)
http://www.gamestop.com/ps3/accessories/gioteck-ps3-hf-2-bluetooth-wireless-controller/90929?affid=9797&cid=ppc_60000001 [gamestop.com]
PS3 controler on PC via bluetooth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJnuekAp7Fk [youtube.com]
PS keypad on PC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQoqreZ8cw [youtube.com]
Just sayin...
Re: (Score:2)
SOny keeps the password secret. it's why there is no iOS or android app to act as a remote for a PS3 since it should be trivial to do
Bluetooth Works Fine - If you buy GOOD products (Score:2)
I had no problem pairing Microsoft Bluetooth Mobile Keyboard 6000 ($42 USD) and their [amazon.com] Microsoft Bluetooth Mobile Mouse 5000 [amazon.com] ($39 USD) with an HP Laptop with Bluetooth built in and a desktop both running Windows 7 and also with Ubuntu 10.04 and 11.04 using the default Bluetooth stacks in both OSes using a Bluetooth Class 1 (1 mW = 100-meter distance) dongle ($15 - 30 USD) [amazon.com].
I use the keyboard which is always on sitting under my coffee table to occasionally type into XBMC Media Center running on Ubuntu 11.04 an
Re: (Score:2)
Does anyone know why Bluetooth sucks so bad
Because it is overkill for keyboards and mice, more expensive and power hungry than proprietary radios, so people don't buy bluetooth keyboards and mice so the drivers don't get debugged etc... The only real attraction for mice/keyboards is if you have a laptop with built in BT, but now that the proprietary wireless dongles tend to be those low profile jobs that you can leave in a laptop USB port without getting snapped off, that's less of a consideration.
Re: (Score:2)
I tend to get my users keyboards & mice with proprietary radios because the Bluetooth equivalents are so goddamn expensive. Many tens of dollars more expensive, and I don't know why.
What, no more iDweeb wires-into-ears look? (Score:3, Insightful)
This from a company that's been pushing wired headphones for years? Maybe Apple will finally get stereo Bluetooth support to work right.
Re: (Score:2)
Want to hang AAA batteries from each ear, do you?
Re: (Score:2)
Why not? They're stylish and functional.
Level Up! (Score:2)
What, no more iDweeb wires-into-ears look?
Actually, no, I upgraded from those a long time ago. [vuzix.com]
You people can call me a tool all you want -- I can explode your heads revealing the underlying talking anuses with my altered reality... [vuzix.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Stereo Bluetooth has worked on iPhones for a couple of years now, and on Macs forever. I've never had a problem with it.
You did get a couple of Apple anti-fanboy mods though. Congrats.
NFC is unrelated (Score:5, Insightful)
NFC is an almost entirely unrelated technology. Granted BlueTooth and NFC share some common features, but NFC is for other things. We use it for digital payment here in Japan for example - that's something you don't want going over BlueTooth. NFC is also good for various physical hot-spot applications. NFC also allows for physical queuing - something some fast food restaurants use for example. BlueTooth on the other-hand handles headsets and other peripherals, as well as a variety of inter-device communications. My phone has both BlueTooth and NFC, as do most phones here in Japan. To have both makes perfect sense.
Re: (Score:2)
We use it for digital payment here in Japan for example - that's something you don't want going over BlueTooth.
You don't want it going over the encrypted-by-default standard, but you do want it going over the 100% unencrypted no matter what standard?
Re: (Score:2)
I expect the information being sent over NFC to be encrypted. There's nothing that requires data transmitted via NFC be unencrypted.
Unless you want to try and pair with every wireless payment device you come across?
Re: (Score:2)
You don't want it going over the encrypted-by-default standard
You can't realistically do a bluetooth pairing every time you need to pay for something. Encryption is nothing without authentication, and the authentication problem cannot be solved.
For payments you need end-to-end encryption, and then it doesn't matter whether the wireless link itself is encrypted.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I would prefer my payments not happen without some input from me. Thanks anyway though.
Re: (Score:2)
Surely NFC systems will be available that can be set to prompt for transactions over a given amount.
Of course, current transaction systems could lie to you just as well today.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
"that's something you don't want going over BlueTooth."
If you read the article (or the summary even), that's precisely what it's though Apple may be planning. Why wouldn't you want digital payment information going over Bluetooth? Unlike NFC, it can actually be encrypted.
Re: (Score:2)
So NFC will somehow break if I encrypt data and transmit THAT?
How does AES-128 break NFC?
they do this all the time, and it works for them (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple isn't known for giving a crap what their competition is embracing. (that's MS's gig) I think the basic ideas is "why have a feature that everyone else has, giving the consumer a choice between our product and a dozen competitors, when we can offer an appealing feature that we have a large portion of the market on"?
Makes perfect sense really. Hype something that you, and everyone else, is offering, or hype something that they can only buy from you? That's just smart business.
Now of course this relies on the market adopting it if it's a compatibility thing, but then if you've already established yourself as the representative for the feature, you've accomplished your goal and it's ok for the competition to run up into the back of the pack with support too and their support for "your feature" just works to your advantage then.
Apple did it with USB (Score:3)
The iMac was the first computer to ship with USB standard. It's dropping of legacy ports wasn't copied in the PC world for years.
Re: (Score:2)
Only when PC laptops got small enough did they start dropping legacy ports, and that's just due to lack of space.
Some new PCs still ship with PS/2 keyboards, for crying out loud.
Re: (Score:2)
also look at how quickly apple dropped serial ports. small appliances (high end routers etc) still come with serial ports instead of usb, they need to get with the picture.
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, and that's why business don't buy Macs for the most part. Suppose you had a fancy $50k lathe that interfaced with its controller via an RS232 port? Sure, today USB->RS232 dongles cost $1.99 and the drivers are ubiquitous, but if the controller ran DOS v4 chances are that wouldn't have been a viable option. At work we still have odd machines running NT4 for this sort of reason, and I'm sure somebody has something running software written in COBOL on CSIS. Legacy support gives you a more gradual u
Legacy will always exist (Score:2)
We were running a RIP (raster image processor for a printer) off of Windows 95 and SCSI. Windows 98 wouldn't work, nor any flavor of NT.
But for most people, the loss of the older connectors was a good thing.
Re: (Score:2)
That is correct. Many PCs shipped with USB before the iMac, including large manufacturers. It was Intel and the PC companies, after all, and not Apple that developed USB.
The reason the PC world was delayed in officially rolling out USB was Microsoft's delays in shipping Win98. That opened the door for Apple to lie about it being first to market, and like all Apple's lies, it was bought into by many. Apple contributed next to nothing to USB.
'Nothing beside remains. Round the decay...' (Score:4, Funny)
"My name is Apple (tm)(c)Inc., king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"'
Do they even fill the same role? (Score:4, Insightful)
After a quick glance at NFC, it seems like Bluetooth and NFC don't even fulfill the same roles. NFC only has a working range of 20cm or less, while Bluetooth can reach for something like 20-30 meters (in extreme cases). That seems like it would make NFC useless for headsets, as a phone in the pocket is going to be more than 20cm away from your ear. Same thing for laptops. Also, NFC has an extremely low data rate compared to Bluetooth, so your not going to use it for file transfers. Seems like NFC is mostly useful for things like credit cards/ID badges/ etc. which Bluetooth would be useless for, since it needs pairing, while Bluetooth is used for voice/video communication, file transfers, and the like.
Am I wrong about this? Anyone know more about NFC compared to Bluetooth? I do see that Bluetooth 4.0 is low energy, so it could fill some of the roles of NFC, but it can't do passive RFID like NFC can, so again, different technologies for different uses. Seems like the story (at least the summary) is just sensationalist speculation. Seems like not using NFC would be quite stupid on Apple's part in any case, since nearly everyone else is. Having the iPhone/ MacBook not work with actually deployed technology seems like it would be a huge mistake for Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
Yup - BT4.0 and NFC address completely different problem spaces.
And not including NFC will potentially cripple Apple, since in this particular case it's not just about what their competitors support - it's what retailers/other point-of-sale venues support. "I support NFC already - you want me to add something else that only works with YOUR devices?"
Re: (Score:2)
I imagine that Apple is relying on their pull to cripple NFC, rather than lack of NFC crippling Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
NFC works with passive devices too, one active device generates a signal to power the other one. I do not see Bluetooth replacing that
Re: (Score:2)
oops wrong reply to Baloroth that already told this. FAIL
Re: (Score:2)
Bluetooth 4.0 competes with ANT [thisisant.com]. One reason Apple wants this is the Nike+ device communicates with the iPhone/iPod via ANT. That means, in the iPhone and iPod touch at least, yet another radio stuck in the device. If Apple can run it through Bluetooth 4.0 and get the same battery life, they can drop the ANT stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Read the article. Apple doesn't want to replace what Bluetooth does with NFC, they (might) want to do what NFC does with Bluetooth. Less chips, cheaper design, cheaper device. About the only thing NFC offers over BT is passive communication, which I think most of us would prefer our phones don't do anyway.
If you were a merchant and you could buy an NFC payment system and get the Android people, or you could buy a BT one and get the Android people (Android phones have BT already) AND the iPhone people, wh
Doesn't matter (Score:3)
If bluetooth transfer is available only between two Apple devices, it won't mean much.
I actually hate this attitude.
Why can't I take a photo with my Blackberry and transfer it to my iPad? Why can't I download a pdf on the iPad and transfer it to my Playbook via bluetooth?
There's no technical reason why I could not transfer files and settings (such as calendar and address book entries between an Apple device and any other phone). This is old tech.
I managed to find a way to transfer files via ftp, making the iPad an ftp server and connecting with the playbook/torch as a client but this obviously requires a wifi connection and of course I can't transfer photos or music from the ipad this way.
It could jsut mean... (Score:3)
It could just mean that we have an opportunity to speculate wildly on basis of limited information.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah... "Two new computers were released without NFC support, and support for the newest version of Bluetooth, older versions of which Apple's computers have supported for years now. We can then conclude from this that the iPhone 5 will definitely not support NFC, and instead will simply support BT4."
FTA:
So they don't know, they're pulling a wild guess out of their collective asses. Using that same logic, I suspect that my urine
heh mainstream (Score:2)
there was a story not long ago talking about apple getting back up to 10% of the pc market, course that number was bullshitted up by the sales of Ipads
I saw a clincher for me (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Remember when Apple made high-end tools for artists instead of crippled plastic toys to lock in sheep consumers? Oh, Wozniak, how we miss you...
By high end tools for artists you mean the Apple II? Woz had little to do with the Mac.
Re: (Score:2)
Remember when Apple made high-end tools for artists instead of crippled plastic toys to lock in sheep consumers?
That era ended along with the GPU. Apple has never delivered a comparable 3D acceleration offering to PC/Linux/Solaris.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, dang that Apple invented proprietary thunderbolt. You'd NEVER see a company like Intel trying to create something like that just to lock in the users.
Same with Display port. Apple should stick to plugs designed by a standards organization instead of inventing their own stuff.
And don't even get me started on that proprietary USB only iMac.
Re: (Score:3)
You're right, they're pushing thunderbolt because of lock in, not because it's an intel defined spec that intel have already said they'll be building into all their next generation of chipsets. And not because it's a fast bus that integrates PCIe and allows them to do things like ship monitors that act like docking stations (see the new cinema display that has gigabit ethernet, firewire, usb, audio and video all running off the same standard intel connector).
Of course, it's apple, and therefore it's all ab
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I could maybe see it in the MacBook Air, but you're right about the Mac mini...