Talk:List of Bluetooth profiles

message: Several times the term SCO is used, but it is never defined or linked anywhere. --ScottJ 23:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definitions 

message: "useful external links" linked you to a page that required membership, possibly money.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tendo (talk • contribs) 18:48, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  removed some corporate links 

message: The very first paragraph:
"A Bluetooth profile is a profile of a Bluetooth device."!!! But what, pray tell, is a PROFILE???  The sentence does not describe what a profile is.
Todd 14:22, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I'll tag it with  for now. PS: you should add new comments to the bottom of talk pages, under their own heading. (see talk page guidelines) -- intgr 16:26, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for responding, and for pointing out the guide for the talk page. ;-) I need to learn these things. Todd 20:08, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

text: To answer the question above, from my time in the Bluetooth SIG, the short definition was "A profile is a set of specifications that define protocols as well as use cases (a.k.a. users scenarios)."  They picked the term profile so that people didn't think of Bluetooth as just a bunch of technical papers about how bits fly through the air. Lathe26 23:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Perfect! Removed the tag .. after some 4 years waiting for more complaints .. --Edoe (talk) 22:59, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction

message: I think it has to do with profiles, so I'd like to ask here how many can Bluetooth devices can I use in the same time? Does it matter which specific Bluetooth dongle I have or only which Bluetooth version is it made of? -Lwc4life 10:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In the general case, a Bluetooth master can connect with up to 7 slaves in a single piconet (the Bluetooth AM_ADDR field is only 3 bits in size and one of the value is reserved which I think is 000b).  However, a Bluetooth device can be master in 1 piconet and a slave in other piconets which is called a "scatternet" scenario.  Bandwidth and network management gets difficult in this scenario.  Complicating this is that some devices drop in and out of the piconet to save on power.  An example is when you don't type on your keyboard for a while, say 10 minutes, it will disconnect from the network and try to rejoin later on when the users starts typing again (this is why there can be a short delay when you start typing again after a long break).  This means that you can be "paired" to many more than 7 devices but that only a max of 7 can be active at a time to a single master.  <opinion> I won't even go into Park mode which is just messy and I'm not sure any devices on the market use this (maybe some do, but I don't know of any). </opinion> Lathe26 23:22, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multi-link 

message: Would it be appropriate to add short blurb on the history of BT HID?  For example, I know some of the early contributors and could add some text saying "so-and-so from CompanyX and so-and-so from CompanyY decided to start this effort in DD-MM-YYYY".  This would be similar to some of the text in USB Human interface device. Lathe26 23:28, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Human Interface Device Profile (HID) history 

message: The text of this page is in some parts very close to http://www.bluetooth.com/Bluetooth/Learn/Works/Profiles_Overview.htm
Could someone more knowledgeable in Wikipedia's standards on plagiarism take a look at it and see if this is OK?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.237.142.10 (talk) 17:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It still is ... somebody plz have a look at this. --153.96.161.212 (talk) 13:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  I get a 404 for that link. The Bluetooth site has been updated recently, and I can't find any plagerized text (but I'm looking too hard, either.) The Rev. John H Munson (talk) 18:03, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plagiarism 

message: The paper
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/connect/bth_faq.mspx 
say's Vista doesn't support A2DP, 3rd party drivers can add support.
I can't find this April Update?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.18.70.247 (talk) 00:22, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Tricky one, the operating system _platform_ supports it, but not every _product_ opted to include that support. Also S60v3.1 uses Symbian 9.2.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.6.10.217 (talk) 18:35, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advanced Audio Distribution Profile (A2DP) 

message: I feel the second sentence in the A2DP section is a little ambiguous. It states "For example, music can be streamed from a mobile phone, to a wireless headset, hearing aid & cochlear implant streamer, or car audio or from a laptop/desktop to a wireless headset."
* To me, that implies that a bluetooth-enabled laptop/desktop can ONLY stream to a wireless headset, whereas phones can stream to wireless headsets, hearing aid & cochlear implant streamers AND car audio. I'm fairly sure laptops AND phones can both stream to all of the mentioned devices.
* The term "car audio" is very ambiguous. Only head units or fully-fledged car-PCs support Bluetooth (and the latter falls under the "desktop" description anyway).
AntJ103 (talk) 14:45, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  A2DP intro 

message: Gurus, not to rain on this parade, but I'm actually getting nothing out of this article. It needs more than a better intro. The problem is there's inadequate context for END-USERS. Here's why I came to this page: I need to know if my old phone model, which says it supports Bluetooth, will run stereo BT headsets. A2DP and possibly AVRCP are involved, but there's no starting point on the web for learning what I need to know to answer this question. Should a self-proclaimed Dummy be the one who valiantly attempts to come up with accurate info to post here on said questions? Clearly not. We really need you guys, gals and gurus to communicate for a general audience. No criticism intended here -- just observing what's gone missing in the work till now. Cheers! A.k.a. (talk) 05:52, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to second this point.  I am having the same problem.  I have an HP laptop. The information provided within the machine and on the web has no mention of profiles but lists a host of things the laptop can do with Bluetooth e.g. connect to speakers and headsets.  So how can I tell if the headsets I'm looking at will work?  Broadcom, the manufacturer of the BT chipset publishes no information on profiles etc.  The headsets themselves sometimes refer to VOIP sometimes not and nothing I've been able to find refers to A2DP for instance (a profile regularly referred to in connection with music).  This article as it stands doesn't help in any way to link academic information to real world artefacts.  In my opinion it should.  This is not an isolated case.  It seems that when one is too close to information its overall form becomes invisible.  I think the article should work from the general through to the detailed in a manner that relates to application rather than to the provenance and genesis only.  Those things could be isolated in a History section on profiles and the evolution of BT into an applied technology (if it worked that way around) I'd also like to put in a plea for why BT is seemingly becoming quasi-obsolete.  Looking for BT stereo headsets I have found that there are very few models available in outlets and there seem to be almost no reviews of any devices, apart from dedicated phone headsets, post 2007.  Perhaps the problem is linked to the plethora of profiles available resulting in poor connection of devices and consequent poor publicity for manufacturers that make devices suitable to exploit the base technology.  Just some thoughts FWTW LookingGlass (talk) 00:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd agree here. I'd also agree with the comment earlier about the introduction and what is a profile question. My opinion is "Bluetooth Profile" being a bad name for this page. Being a total newbie to Bluetooth, I was looking, via googling, for an article on "Bluetooth services", because that is what my device advertises. It advertises services and not profiles.  This article lists what my cell phone calls services. I get the reasoning behind calling it Bluetooth Profile, but there needs to be a redirect to this page for the query "Bluetooth Services". Becuase everyone who is not a Bluetooth geek or member of the elite Bluetooth SIG is not going to know that "Bluetooth services" are "Bluetooth profiles". That's all I have to rant on this topic today. Half an hour later, I find the answer, to what should have been a simple question.--Celtic hackr (talk) 14:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  For End-Users and Other Dummies 

message: The section on Service Discovery Application Profile (SDAP) mentions SDP but doesn't explain what that is. Not sure if that's a typo or what. --ScottJ (talk) 18:09, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  SDP?? 

message: Isn't the HFP used by all the little Bluetooth headsets that people wear on their ears? The HFP section in this article only discusses cars with built-in Bluetooth and says nothing about headsets. --ScottJ (talk) 18:13, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: To answer this question from 15 years ago, the article now includes this passage: Most Bluetooth headsets implement both Hands-Free Profile and Headset Profile, because of the extra features in HFP for use with a mobile phone, such as last number redial, call waiting and voice dialing. ...which I guess answers that. (But all of these  easily-confused TLAs and FLAs really do the Bluetooth ecosystem no favors.) FeRDNYC (talk) 22:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hands-Free Profile (HFP) not just for cars, right? 

message: "the iPhone variant of OS X provides no A2DP support as of October 2008. (But will be supported in future versions of the iPhone OS.)" Where have you seen that Apple is planning to add A2DP support?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.198.92.66 (talk) 00:20, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  iPhone & Bluetooth 

message: Any information on this, when will this be added? 212.50.144.26 (talk) 11:16, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medical Device Protocol 

message: Would you need a HID profile implementation for something like a Powerpoint/Keynote/PDF/... presentation clicker or would it also work (maybe even better) with AVRCP, BIP or something like that? Iassume you would use HID or AVRCP (or a derivation thereof) if you wanted to control on your handset the presentation on a different computer, but use BIP if the presentation resided on the handheld device itself. — Christoph Päper 14:26, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screen presentation 

message: The Message Access Profile has been ratified and is now an approved profile.  Car manufacturers (e.g., BMW) and mobile device manufacturers (e.g., RIM BlackBerry) are already releasing products which support this feature.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.113.163.141 (talk) 00:50, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments section is outdated re: Message Access Profile 

message: Can anyone provide an English translation of this section????
Thanks,
209.34.211.191 (talk) 21:27, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  1.23 Profil de port série ( SPP ) 

message: Until 2G, we used to be able to access the internet from our car-borne notebook (carried in the trunk on a dockstation, steered from the drivers' seat via periphery) via the GPRS modem in our cellphone. Obviously, the condition was a correctly mounted handheld phone (corresponding carkit, preferably external antenna), but that was not a problem, as all the components were available. 
GPRS was incredibily slow, so we looked forward to 3G. Now that 3G has been here for a while, we had to find out that internet access is no longer possible this way, because the necessary components aren't there. Unless I've missunderstood something, bluetooth instead of cabling isn't the problem. The real problem seems to be that SAPs don't interwork with the cellphone's HSPA modem, respectively that the SAPs don't have an HSPA modem of their own. The Huawei modem is a makeshift solution only, because you have to change SIM cards, and it doesn't work via the external antenna.
Contacting sellers and makers leads nowhere, for reasons unclear. Sometimes one even gets the impression that the whole thing might be owed to some kind of government interference. I do not want to accept this state of affairs but seem to have reached the end of my possibilities. Are there people here with more qualifications and an interest in this issue?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.32.33.163 (talk) 12:13, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  SIM access profiles (SAP): Why no *HSPA modem* access ?! 

message: Under Operating Systems the first entry is a simple claim that Android supports Bluetooth. There is no information concerning the supported profiles. I believe simply listing Android as having "Bluetooth support" is not in keeping with a technical article specifically directed at Bluetooth profiles. All other entries in the list specify the profiles supported. It appears obvious the Android entry requires expansion or deletion. DavesPlanet (talk) 14:17, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Android 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of Bluetooth profiles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://archive.is/20120715182335/http://forum.samsungmobile.de/samsung-s5230-star/13022-probleme-mit-fse-remote-sim-access/ to http://forum.samsungmobile.de/samsung-s5230-star/13022-probleme-mit-fse-remote-sim-access/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:05, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:22, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: Bluetooth Classic radio (BR Basic Rate or EDR Extended Data Rate) came first, and some protocols require older radio (for example HSP). LE Low Energy came later, and only recently LE Audio which will replace some earlier profiles. Dave Nadler (talk) 19:59, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Types of Radio need clarification, and Profiles tied to specific radios should say so... 

message: In the SIM Access Profile section, the last item listed there (before the "Discontinued..." section starts is:
Apple iOS
Manufacturer	Models based on Apple iOS
Apple       	Officially lack of support
With that citation leading to a page which lists supported Bluetooth protocols for iOS and iPadOS.
The problem is, that page never mentions the SAP protocol anywhere. Never even alludes to it. The citation appears to be relying on the fact that the protocol is not listed on that page. But that's reeks of synthesis, and it's not how citations work.
We can't claim that something's absence from a document constitutes "officially [sic] lack of  support". Official lack of support would be a positive statement that does appear in the document, saying something like "The SIM Access Protocol is not supported." No such statement is present in that citation, nor am I aware of any other document where the protocol is explicitly documented as "not unsupported".
Besides, the body text earlier in the section already claims,  That's sufficient commentary on the Apple situation, there's no need to also call it out in a table just to make claims unsupported by the sources provided.
I'm going to remove the box shown above from the article, in its entirety. 
FeRDNYC (talk) 22:41, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I just removed a table I hadn't noticed before in the discontinued-devices section, making the same claim (clearly added by the same editor — "Officially lack of support" again — about three Windows Phone manufacturers. Because this time it was completely un-cited. And therefore even more unnecessary. FeRDNYC (talk) 16:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of statement does not constitute official statement