this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
49 points (74.7% liked)

Technology

59087 readers
3244 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Compared to bluetooth :

  • 60% lower power consumption
  • Six times higher data transmission speed
  • 1/30th the latency
  • 7 dB improvement anti-interference for a more stable connection
  • Twice the coverage distance, and
  • 10 times more network connections

Notice it's not talking of compression yet, but raw connection performance.

Due to the US Huawei ban, the tech won't arrive to the US yet. Nor maybe ever until something is done.

https://consumer.huawei.com/za/community/details/Huawei-Nearlink-launched-new-wireless-technology-far-ahead-of-Bluetooth/topicId_276306/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pastermil@sh.itjust.works 35 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

So basically like a compromise between wifi & bluetooth?

The thing is, people using bluetooth is not looking for raw performance. When they more performance, they'd go with wifi. Wifi data transfer is a thing.

Last but not least, it's Huawei...

Edit: Regardless of the privacy & security stuff, Huawei is known for coming up with a bunch of empty gimmicks (see: Harmony OS).

[–] cyd@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Bluetooth's poor latency performance is quite a big problem. It makes Bluetooth audio peripherals finicky for watching videos, and unsuitable for gaming. Audio headsets for gaming use their own protocols, which annoyingly makes them incompatible with everything else.

[–] afunkysongaday@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is not an issue of Bluetooth itself. Some audio devices include too large caches (because in the early days not having interrupted audio was a bigger deal than having video and audio synchronized), but you get Bluetooth audio devices just using the default SBC codec that don't have any noticeable delay. Using codecs like aptx adaptive fully solves the problem.

The reason you don't see BT gaming headsets is not latency, it's Bluetooth missing a proper mode to submit audio in high quality bidirectionally. Long story short: when you got high quality sound on your headphones, the mic of your headset is not in use. When the mic is in use, the quality of the headphones is reduced to basically telephone call quality.

There have been technologies trying to work around that, most important would probably be faststream, but it never really caught on. It's pretty
obscure still, you have to take care that all the devices and software you want to use support it, so I guess it's just easier and cheaper to get a dedicated wireless gaming headset with dedicated USB dongle.

At least since BT 5.0 I read stories that BT will be able to support gaming headsets aaaaany day now but well, nothing for now.

[–] Tibert@compuverse.uk 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The new creative zen hybrid pro hybrid and pro sxfi seem to be advertised to use bluetooth 5.3 with LC3 and LC3+.

Tho not if they are on the market yet or if there are reviews.

[–] Tibert@compuverse.uk 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not really like that.

Right now it's not possible to connect a headset/headphone via wifi to a device other than some proprietary things.

So a general competitor usable on all devices allowing more data transfer for more audio with less compression. I think it could be interesting.

Not just because it would maybe be better. But because competition on a market is a good thing for the consumer. And push bluetooth maybe further than what it is.

Tho if by some misunderstanding, the chip used isn't compatible with bluetooth I'm not very sure... As brands would need to include 2 chips, which increases the cost.

[–] Vilian@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

and it's proprietary, so less adoption

[–] vividspecter@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

Very low latency would be a big deal for audio. It currently ranges from incredibly high to passable, depending on implementation.

[–] sndrtj@feddit.nl 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would certainly love Bluetooth to be higher bandwidth, for things like high-fidelity audio.

Currently Bluetooth pairing usually works quite well on almost all devices. Conversely, wifi-based pairing is mostly a disaster. So much that even respected brands can't get it right.

[–] Obi@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 year ago

I sometimes control a high end camera through my phone. For basic controls it connects via Bluetooth but if you want live-shooting (you see what's being captured on the phone) it switches to WiFi. It's ALWAYS a massive pain in the ass, takes forever to connect, disconnects if the phone screen is off even just a few seconds, etc etc.

[–] PlexSheep@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Exactly. The important stuff is the stability of connection, even in a train where everyone uses it.

[–] Tibert@compuverse.uk 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm not sure it's always the only thing people want. Yes stability is needed, even more when a lot of people are using it.

But currently headsets are heavily missing (very) high quality wireless audio and mic at the same time. Maybe this tech could push towards that.