When an emerging standard, such as Bluetooth, aims to network everything - from mobile phones to cars - there are bound to be 'teething problems.' As different industries hope to utilize and maximize on Bluetooth, the various usage profiles need to be constantly refined to promote interworking among the various manufacturers.
A recent end user survey by Frost & Sullivan points to a 'tantalizing' growth potential for Bluetooth. Defying bearish pundits baulking at its prospects, Frost believes that, despite the delayed debut of products, Bluetooth-enabled devices will be a runaway success, set to slowly revolutionize communications.
Shamir Amanullah, program leader at Frost & Sullivan, notes that interoperability across various products and applications is one of the biggest hurdles to be faced. According to a Panasonic spokesman, the price of the Bluetooth radio module and the delay regarding its implementation on mobile phones are the primary obstacles. But Johan Akesson, manager, strategic marketing for Bluetooth at Ericsson, says, "Everything is in place for Bluetooth to start a rampup - building blocks, software, hardware, etc. The radio module's price still needs to come down before we can see it being implemented in home appliances, toys, etc."
An industry observer in Japan points out that Bluetooth is not progressing as quickly as it should. He believes that: "After prices drop, Bluetooth will become a standard technology embedded in mobile phones - spreading to PDAs, DSCs and mobile PCs, and then on to personal and public networks."
Nicolas Gontard, managing director of Hong Kong-based Innovi Technologies Pvt Ltd, which produces mobile accessories including Bluetooth headsets, adds, "We need a good chip working under a point-to-multipoint environment - something smaller with lower power consumption."
Neil Werdmuller, head of wireless networking at TTPCom, notes that interoperability is being addressed by the Qualification system and Unplug-fests. "Products based on v1.1 are now coming onto the market, which should start to take off in the second half of 2002 when prices for single-/two-chip solutions get close to $5. System-on-chip (SoC) implementations will see the cost of adding Bluetooth to high volume products drop below $3."
Tan Weng Kuan, vice president, wireless solutions, Infineon Technolo-gies Asia Pacific Pte Ltd, points out, "Until recently, Bluetooth has been touted as a WLAN carrier. Its actual strength lies in PAN applications." He cautions that Unplug fests and large scale field trials will have to be taken more seriously.
A spokesman at Siemens ICM says the vendor is convinced of Bluetooth's capabilities and the quality of the products and solutions. As the market has grown at a slower pace and on a smaller scale than expected, a decision has been made not to market Siemens' Bluetooth USB adapter developed by the ICM Group - first announced in February 2001. Siemens ICM plans to integrate Bluetooth into its products as soon as there is sufficient demand.
Some concerns have been raised that Bluetooth could fragment into incompatible flavors, rendering it less of a standard than a guideline. Akesson says, "The Bluetooth SIG is very active in the promotion and protection of Bluetooth. A product not qualified by the Bluetooth qualification process is not a Bluetooth product, and hence, cannot use the Bluetooth logo or claim to be a Bluetooth product." Tan adds that given the rate at which the SIG is going, it is unlikely that Bluetooth will be fragmented into incompatible implementations.
Baumgartner: Attractive applications
Peter Baumgartner, senior vice president and general manager, global market segment communications at Philips Semiconductors, notes that a well-defined profile system as well as a qualification procedure has been established to avoid deviations. Desmond T. O'Donnell, marketing manager for Bluetooth products, wireless communications at Conexant Systems, feels that v1.1 is complete and interoperable.
Vendors are currently coordinating to create the necessary infrastructure to support Bluetooth. Bruno Defretin, director, Bluetooth core team, telecom peripheral and automotive group at STMicroelectronics says, "Bluetooth is a mature standard and there is a profile for each application. It will be a must in many market segments starting with nomadic and handheld applications." O'Donnell adds that the specification provides the necessary guidance while Panasonic's spokesman feels that vendors have to prepare complete Bluetooth test procedures.
There has been some talk that Bluetooth and 802.11b may either move off in different directions or align to a single standard. Amanullah says, "The two standards are meant to take on different directions. 802.11b promises up to 11Mbps while Bluetooth's speed is significantly slower. Wi-Fi products are dominating the enterprise circles. The lack of Bluetooth products in the market has meant fewer of these in enterprises. I believe that the issues related to interference have been hyped out of proportion. The imminent move away for WLANs to 5.7GHz is likely to end this talk of interference."
O'Donnell feels 802.11 is already moving to a higher bandwidth with 802.11a. "This is a case of competing standards within a single specification. 802.11 is basically a high-end solution. Bluetooth, from the very beginning, targeted the moderate performance, low-cost segment with the objective of becoming ubiquitous. The two standards are complementary, not competitive, although there is clearly confusion on this point."
Tan is of the opinion that there is a fairly clear border between the application segments of Bluetooth and 802.1, while Baumgartner believes that 802.11b is currently targeting high data rate applications more in the WLAN area, and Bluetooth is targeting more WPAN applications. Werdmuller at TTPCom concurs that the market for Bluetooth is much larger as it is applicable across many devices and not just laptops.
Bluetooth reportedly has several competing alternatives such as DECT, HomeRF's SWAP, Spike, IR and 802.11 WLAN. Tan stresses that Bluetooth is at this point the only strongly backed PAN standard. "Most other standards can be companions, but not competitors," he notes. O'Donnell feels all of the technologies have benefits and limitations. According to Amanullah, most of these standards work in the 2.4GHz band. Only 802.11b has attained a fair measure of glamour, having succeeded on a comparatively large scale. Bluetooth requires the interoperability of more products and applications.
Akesson: Wireless handsfree kits for sure
Guillaume Ponticelli, Innovi's business development manager, points out that the segments aren't similar. "For example, DECT is only compatible with a manufacturer who has made the same devices. A DECT headset from supplier A cannot work with a base manufactured by supplier B. With Bluetooth you can. Infrared is directional, very sensitive to interference and very short range (below 5 meters), but not so for Bluetooth." Baumgartner agrees, "DECT is a standard for cordless telephony and very voice-centric. You can use DECT for a wireless data link, but the frequency band is not available worldwide, as is the case with Bluetooth. HomeRF/SWAP is being transferred into the ZigBee standard IEEE 802.15.4. The standard is now aiming for low data rates (maximum 250 kbps) and lowest power consumption."
Defretin argues: "Let's reduce the list to the solid candidates - 802.11b and Bluetooth. One is a power hungry WLAN-only technology capable of several Mbps, and the second is a ubiquitous, low power, low-cost wireless technology limited to 1Mbps." Werdmuller points out that it provides many applications across the same air-interface - which is Bluetooth's key strength. "A single Bluetooth-enabled device can perform all of the functions of the above technologies. But as it has just one radio running multiple applications simultaneously, this does not cause interference problems. Currently, Bluetooth and 802.11b are the key technologies. Both will continue to flourish."
Do Bluetooth developers need to think through specific applications practical in PAN, and also see how the environment differs from those better served by 802.11, 2.5/3G, etc and work around those differences? Tan says: "Past experience has shown that despite visions being generated by technologists, the markets will regulate the applications being mapped onto various standards. Developers must realize the feasibility of their applications under the umbrella of a certain standard in order to remain competitive."
O'Donnell adds that Bluetooth developers need clarity and focus in selecting applications. "The other technologies cited will work with Bluetooth. The vendor which best integrates Bluetooth into the solution will be the commercial winner," he predicts. Bluetooth will only be successful if it is applied first in places where there are differentiating factors, stresses Defretin. Areas such as low power and synchronous link capability are key points. According to Werdmuller, developers must develop applications that conform to its profiles in Bluetooth's early phase.
Wi-Fi is said to be taking on a stronger role in the enterprise and Bluetooth in the SOHO and personal electronics spaces, despite their well-publicized inability to co-exist in the same physical space. Defretin points out that Wi-Fi is slow for serious enterprise applications and 802.11a would be more successful. He says: "Wi-Fi and Bluetooth will certainly co-exist in SOHO and home-based applications, initially with some sacrifice on Wi-Fi throughput, when both are simultaneously in use."
Tan believes that both standards will likely co-exist in the same physical area, and that such a scenario would be feasible due to the different application areas. O'Donnell stresses that since enterprise customers are less cost sensitive, Wi-Fi will have more success there than in the SOHO and personal electronics spaces. According to Werdmuller, road warriors comprise the main market for Wi-Fi devices. Such people would also be the early adopters because of Bluetooth's flexibility and freedom. Baumgartner believes that Bluetooth will be the dominant standard for PANs.
Are proximity applications crucial as well? Not so for Bluetooth, feels Baumgartner, due to its limited range. O'Donnell suggests Bluetooth should be embedded in the application - PDA synchronization, dial-up access, and networking, among others - and made transparent to the user. But Tan believes proximity is what Bluetooth has been defined for. "There are enough attractive applications which can boost sales of Bluetooth-enabled devices, such as mobile phones with their counterpart, the headsets," he says.
Defretin: Bluetooth - a mature standard
Werdmuller notes that proximity is not crucial to Bluetooth's uptake. He says: "Proximity does have a market but the profiles still need to be developed to exploit this application." Defretin goes a step further and suggests that every car will include Bluetooth in future, and it will start with the need of a mobile phone/car interaction, which will then extend to other new applications.
Speech recognition, text-to-speech and VXML are likely to create new opportunities for voice-driven information access. Tan notes that personal devices will incorporate advanced A/V user interfaces. He says: "Multimedia, including voice/speech interfaces, will play a crucial role. Bluetooth can help a lot to make the experience more personal and enjoyable."
Akesson agrees, saying that voice-driven information and voice commands would play important roles in the near future. Gontard points out that Innovi is a strong believer in speech recognition, speech-to-text and text-to-speech, as is STMicroelectronics, according to Defretin, who cites the car as a good example. Werdmuller adds that these opportunities already exist.
Baumgartner notes that voice capabilities of Bluetooth will experience extensive improvements with the introduction of the A/V profile. He says: "Audio (stereo) in hi-fi quality and video streaming in a second phase will be possible. Some of our customers are combining speech processing with Bluetooth in order to tackle voice-driven information access."
There are debates raging over killer applications for Bluetooth. Tan says, "For the first wave, mobile phones with their headsets will certainly play a major role in terms of volume sold. Integration of PDAs and mobile phones, as well as faster data services in mobile networks, will drag PDAs into Bluetooth functionality for voice and data applications. PDAs equipped with Bluetooth will then offer a usage model for the second generation of products, such as USB dongles and PC Cards. Third-generation devices could possibly be products currently not related to IT and the communications industry. 'Personal telemetry' could play a role here."
Adrian Chu, general manager of the communications segment in Asia at Philips Semiconduc-tors, notes, "In Asia, the first application is still the headphone. Other applications include mobile phones and headphones for cars, hi-fi systems and PCs. Headphones for telephones - when prices are low enough - could be another application. PC applications could be PC cards, PC peripherals applications like mice, printers, keyboards and speakers, and PDAs."
Werdmuller adds, "Accessing the Internet pipe that 2G+ and 3G mobile phones provide from other devices is the largest market. This means mobile phones connected to laptops with PC cards, CF or USB devices; PDA devices with CF devices or dongle type devices; and headsets." Ponticelli feels there may not be several generations and hence, no major killer application.
Akesson predicts that wireless handsfree kits will be popular, and once Bluetooth makes it into cameras and camcorders in connection with 2.5G and 3G, these would become killer applications. According to Baumgartner, headsets and cable replacement are killer applications for the first generation. The USB dongle is a key application for the second generation. Defretin thinks the market is ripe for cable replacement in laptops and cell phones.
Tan: End products by 2003?
There will evidently be different classes of products. Akesson says, "Class 1 devices (approximately 100m, 100mw, 20dBm) and Class 2 devices (approximately 10m, 1mw, 0dBm) will be used by various products. Both classes are compatible. Hence, a 20dbm radio can communicate with a 0dbm radio. But the 20dbm radio is more sensitive to interference and also more power-consuming than the 0dbm radio."
Tan adds that Class 1 and Class 3 products suit different applications. "Whereas it is not acceptable to have the power consumption of a Class 1 device in a tiny headset, a set-top box offering VoIP services will require an extended range to connect to a mobile phone. It is feasible though that the vast majority of devices will incorporate a Class 3 device," he notes. O'Donnell feels that Class 2 will be most ubiquitous as this is what most suppliers offer today. He says, "The cost and power of Class 1 will limit its use in portable battery powered applications. Class 3 is really a subset of Class 2." Panasonic's spokesman believes that Class 2 will be most appropriate for Bluetooth applications.
On the subject of devices, Akesson feels that Bluetooth v2.0 will be ready by the end of 2002 and products based on this specification should be available a year later. Tan agrees that a realistic estimate would be for end products to appear by the end of 2003. Werdmuller adds that Bluetooth2 may not retain that name, as there is a debate within the SIG. High-rate Bluetooth, with data rates similar to 802.11b, is being defined at the moment by the SIG, but this is still quite some time off.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
