Portablewolf wrote:
You know, you don't need to berate people for saying it's something they would like to have.
Also, I honestly don't understand how 1 0r 3 Mb a sec isn't enough for music streaming, if I can stream music over a relatively slow internet connection at say 512Kb a second, why wouldn't bluetooth be fast enough? Not to mention bluetooth 3.0 just came out a little bit ago which supposed to be able to handle even more data.
I didn't berate anyone...but you'll have to agree it is strange to see folks post in a forum without reading the prior posts. Wireless headphones would certainly be a nice option... but bluetooth is not the solution.
And to answer your question...bluetooth transmits at 1mW to 100mW, for very short ranges only, by design. It's intended only for low bandwidth applications...and you can't assume it can hit or maintain 1Mb/sec...that is the maximum capability under ideal conditions (the 3Mb spec was only just ratified in April by the way.) It typically can only
maintain much less. Then you have to consider overhead (framing, etc., and error correction) which reduces the effective bandwidth substantially. And finally, remember that digital music (raw not compressed) is encoded into 16 bit words, at a 44.1KHz rate, or approx. 700Kbps... it just doesn't fit into a bluetooth application very well. Your 512Kb internet connection works because it buffers the (compressed) stream...something that headphones cannot do.
