Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by foobarian 1404 days ago
I worked a bunch with BT closer to the physical layer, and I have to say I was always impressed by how well specified and implemented things were up to the link layer. I think it works fantastically well. But unfortunately it's an invisible achievement, kind of how IT folks don't get recognized when things work; instead when people say "Bluetooth sucks" it's usually due to poor app profile implementations/specs.

As a result, saying "let's invent a better Bluetooth" contains a hidden trap: it requires reinventing that really good core, which is probably really expensive, which then would not leave much to build better app profiles and we would end up with a similar problem.

We should not be inventing a better Bluetooth but fixing the app profile certification. I'm not sure what the right solution there is.

2 comments

Granted, I know very little about this, but I wonder if you could wipe the slate above the link layer for a "new protocol".

Devices all have bluetooth chips already, which is probably the hardest part of adoption.

Then you can define a new system on top, and even swap out the bottom if this new "red tooth" catches on.

Ofc you still have a massive uphill battle, particularly getting manufacturers to agree to a more sane spec than what we have currently (which I wouldn't hold my breath on, that's for sure)

Also the android bluetooth stack has always been trash, with it varying per vendor on how bad it got. It's getting better, but still.