IP: Re: Wireless rivals recast as bosom buddies

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne () warpspeed com>
>
> [Note:  This comment comes from reader David Reed.  Thanks for your 
> comment.  This puts Bucktooth in a whole new perspective for me. DLH]
>
> At 3:43 -0800 12/14/01, David P. Reed wrote:
> > From: "David P. Reed" <dpreed () reed com>
> > To: dewayne () warpspeed com,   "Dewayne-Net Technology List" 
> > <dewayne-net () warpspeed com>
> > Subject: Re: Wireless rivals recast as bosom buddies
> > Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 03:43:12 -0800
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> >
> > The biggest distinction between the two is that unlike the 802.11 family 
> > of technologies, the Bluetooth technologies define application level 
> > "profiles" that go all the way up the ISO layers to the very top, and 
> > which relegate the Internet (TCP/IP, UDP/IP, RTP/IP, VoIP, ...) to a 
> > tiny, non-standard, second-class citizen status.
> >
> > Yeah, it was a consumer-electronics-style power grab to create another 
> > walled-garden.  The original folks who quite intelligently limited the 
> > original 802 family of Ethernet standards to layers 2 and below can see 
> > this clearly.
> >
> > Putting a perfectly reasonable radio system in such a prison got the 
> > expected result.
> >
> > If the Bluetooth guys just would lose their delusions of competing 
> > against the Internet and keeping the Internet out of the cellular 
> > industry, they could recover the industry-wide investment in radio technology.

For archives see:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/