Return-Path: <bmidgley@xmission.com>
Message-ID: <416EE163.1050605@xmission.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 14:28:19 -0600
From: Brad Midgley <bmidgley@xmission.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>, bluez-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bluez-users] News: Stereo BT Headset from BlueTake
References: <416D8520.5060102@thomae-privat.de>	 <416DA635.2070105@xmission.com> <1097741691.4640.19.camel@notepaq>	 <416E8560.3070801@xmission.com> <1097762684.4640.49.camel@notepaq>
In-Reply-To: <1097762684.4640.49.camel@notepaq>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
List-ID: <bluez-users.lists.sourceforge.net>

Marcel,

I must not have understood the distinction. I've seen stuff 
(http://www.ericsson.com/bluetooth/files/newsletter5_0403_lores.pdf) 
that suggests 1.2 brings with it higher-quality audio through new 
profiles (A2DP, AVRCP, GAVDP) and stuff 
(http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Bluetooth#Bluetooth_1.2) that says it 
gives us better transfer heuristics (eSCO).

Are the profiles purely a function of the software stack? What about eSCO?

I'd love to hear that the 1.1 adapter hardware is not being obsoleted by 
1.2. I don't mind having to get a new headset like the bluetake.

Brad

Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi Brad,
> 
> 
>>I'm not saying bt1.2 is required to use the new headsets, but I'd want 
>>to experiment with the a2dp profile for higher-fidelity audio.
> 
> 
> you don't need Bluetooth 1.2 for A2DP either.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Marcel
> 
>