Talk:Bluetooth stack

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bluetooth stack article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Software: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

WP:SELFPROMOTE[edit]

The list of embedded stacks reads like a who's who of the Bluetooth stack peddler market. Should this simply be removed an a pointer to an external website listing one or more of the implementations put in its place? "There are many embedded implementations of the Bluetooth protocol stack, generally focusing on memory and CPU constraints of those platforms.[xx]" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.74.172.39 (talk) 17:45, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV violations[edit]

User 194.116.180.250, I have removed some of your text that may have leaned too much into the opinion region. These include "probably the simplest and most powerful API to use", "this has the most pleasant and intuitive user interface", and "the API is the most clumsy of all those available". From my own experience as a programmer, these can be subjective things and what one person calls "clumsy" can be another person's "elegant". Lathe26 19:41, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Windows specific cruft?[edit]

"Generally, only a single stack can be used at any time: switching usually requires uninstalling the current stack, although a trace of previous stacks remains in the registry" -- why is this uncited, Windows-specific information in the definition of Bluetooth stack? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shinyplasticbag (talk • contribs) 00:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As of Windows 8, Windows is no longer limited to USB-only radios. i.e. http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/windowshardware/Bluetooth-Serial-HCI-6d95ac60 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.254.6.200 (talk) 04:54, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion[edit]

I cannot contribute about this, but I would like to see a separation of client and sever capabilites of those bluetooth stacks. The article sais that "The Toshiba stack supports one of the more comprehensive list of Bluetooth profiles" and lists 15 profiles. While in reality this stack offers only 4 services.

I'm looking for a stack that has an implemented HFP server rather than client. And this article doesn't help me. Maybe a comparisson page ould be better suited for this task.

Unfortunately this has to be tested in order to publish it. I've only found such information in the table on this page [[1]]

Links to technical terminology lacking[edit]

The word "stack" has (within the computing category) multiple meanings. Should there exist a category page or other type of referral wherein the variety of "stack" this article attempts to explain is defined, then such a link aught be the first available link in the first sentence of the first paragraph of the either the first section or (should one exist) topic summary (ie. whatever the analogue of an article's "Abstract" heading is on wiki).

Without a definition or other kind of "contextual referral" the article is totally meaningless (to me anyway). As well I should add that, being an IT professional, I'm not exactly "computer illiterate". I may be illiterate on this particular topic, but not in general. So terms like "stack" could be explained to (and understood by) me were there a place to find out what it is.

The upshot is that authors of articles like this one (and many others) are essentially "speaking in tongues" when the language in use hasn't been indicated. Alancarre (talk) 16:53, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

General-purpose implementations[edit]

My BenQ Joybook also came with the Toshiba stack first in 2006, running under XP at that time (now it's Windows 7 for both).

Inaccuracies Regarding Mac OS X profile support[edit]

Looking at http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/DeviceDrivers/Conceptual/Bluetooth/BT_Bluetooth_On_MOSX/BT_Bluetooth_On_MOSX.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP30000997-CH215-TPXREF108 , it is clear that OS X support the serial port profile, and many which aren't listed. 93.97.77.139 (talk) 15:18, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comparability issue of Bluetooth devices[edit]

Please note that I had to spend more than one month to try to fix the issued Bluetooth headphone to Microsoft Windows 7 and 10 PCs. However, it might be basically impossible to fix it. Several people spent more than three - five months to find the solution, but no luck as there is no way without specific firmware developed by Microsoft or the issued Bluetooth vendor. If you find the firmware of plantronics or Altec headsets to Microsoft Windows 7 and 10 PCs, Please update the subject above Goodtiming8871 (talk) 01:19, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]