My girlfriend has been using a work-supplied Bluetooth email gadget. It has had a few glitches, but generally she (and the others there) like it. So I wouldn't bet on Bluetooth simply dying, unless something comes along that is substantially better and/or cheaper, and at least as well implemented.

From what I hear Bluetooth I is stillborn mostly due to licensing, power, and worst of all, stability issues. It doesn't really work.

 UWB will probably get the monker BTII.

In Canada, you can get TWO Bluetooth handsets, the Sony T68i, and the Treo. Here, these handsets cost as much as lots of people pay PER YEAR for cellular service. Even the
T68i typically runs C$500.

You can't get access points, just laptop adapters. (I suppose I can order them from the U.S., but that would likely mean the access point costs more than a computer.)

You can get Bluetooth in some handheld devices - iPaqs, as an example. But without something to talk to, what's the point? And if I have a Treo, will I get an iPaq to go with it?

The whole profile thing is confusing. I will readily confess that I don't get it (lack of devices, what's the point), but it looks a lot like "Bluetooth" is not enough of a statement to ensure compatibility.

Bluetooth adapters for laptops are typically more expensive than WiFi, for less range and lower speed - 750kbps was the highest I found quoted. For a home DSL or cable user, that would mean a local limit that is lower than their net connection. And, of course, WiFi access points are both available and growing cheaper.

Sandisk should be shipping the SDIO WiFi adapter this month. That will WiFi enable many devices that up to now only had BT as an option.

Basically, Bluetooth seems to have aimed too narrowly. They tried to build a solution to a particular problem - cable clutter - while the industry was off reinventing devices so that everything was just wireless. BT was outflanked, and has tried to recover, but it seems poorly suited as a general wireless network solution, and the time it to took to stabilize BT for that function has left them way behind. Bluetooth still seems to do ok for single cable replacement, but the downward trend on device prices in general has left BT high and dry. It might have been ok a couple of years ago, but now it seems like a BT option is a lot of money for what you get.

That said - things seem a lot different in Europe, where BT handsets seem relatively cheap, and WiFi doesn't have the same buzz.

It looks like IEEE 802.15 is planning to run the Bluetooth MAC protocol on top of UWB, so it will still look and act like Bluetooth (and it might even be called Bluetooth), only faster.

Bluetooth is ready to die? It seems like it's finally starting to show up in devices and looks to become as big as all the hype said it would.

This article would have made more sense six months ago, when I would have agreed that bluetooth seemed like a promise that would never deliver.

It's basically wireless slow-ass USB.

Wake me when there's a shipping product.
Why does everybody hate BT so much?---Apple likes it, isn't that cool enough for you? (1/2 :) )

Should be fixed now -- thanks!

Whoops, looks like some wacky characters hitched a ride on the quoted text...