Cingular Treo 650 also has crippled Bluetooth
By Peter Rojas 
posted January 26th 2005 12:59PM
posted January 26th 2005 12:59PM
Cingular might have bumped back the release date of their version Treo 650, but we just got a tip from a reliable source that when it does come out, it'll have the Bluetooth Dial-Up Networking profile disabled on it just like it is on the Sprint version of the Treo 650. That means you won't be able to use it as a wireless modem with your laptop, and unlike the Sprint version of the Treo 650, you won't be able to enable the DUN profile with that hack that's been making the rounds. At least, not until someone hacks the hack.
Stupid. WHEN will US providers realize that crippling bluetooth and other things just piss off their customers? The first company that has ALL phones that use SyncML and Fully Functional Bluetooth, fully functional 1XRTT, EVDO or GPRS (allowing both the device and anything that connects to it connections to the internet), and no damn BS trying to upload wallpapers or ringtones over the data cable. GEESH! Don't they know that if we really want to get around the crap, we can? Why fight it? Quite nickel and diming us.
Why do people consistantly state the Bluetooth is 'crippled' when it doesn't include ALL of the profiles. Bluetooth is a transport protocol, not an application, similar to USB.
It would be the same as saying if a device has a USB port that it should be an MP3 player, storage device, camera, printer, keyboard, mouse and everything else that can connect via USB.
Bluetooth just covers the transport, and there are a set of 'profiles' that are unique applications of the transport. You still need to develop all the software device side and other side to accomplish such applications.
It's very simple. For Cingular, Verizon, Sprint, et. al. it isn't about pleasing the customer, it's about increasing revenue. That's why they disable features they think might cost them money. That's why they "offer" us a limited selection of phones, are slow as Christmas bringing out new ones, and lock you out of using any other ones. That's why they lock you into long-term contracts with high penalties for withdrawal. That's why their customer service blows.
They can get away with it because in many markets they still have effective monopolies. Even if you do have options, they're all equally bad. Number transportability is a good first step, but we're still a long way from being able to buy whatever phone we want with whatever features we want and easily activating it on whatever network we want. Someday a wireless carrier is going to step up and give customers what they really want and blow the market wide open.
Because if the default configuration of the device is having xyz, and it lacks z, it is crippled. Nobody refers to whales as being crippled because they lack legs, but if they lack fins they sure are. Maybe it's not the Bluetooth per se that's crippled but the feature set of phone. Is that what you are trying to convey with your thoughtful, well-spelled semantic critique?
@ joey
So your saying if you bought a computer with USB ports and then found out they had disabled the ability to connect a printer to the USB port you wouldn't think it was crippled?
I think the bluetooth is limited because the carrier (be it whomever) doesn't want all the cheap-@ss fanboys demanding low cost unlimited packet data for tethered connections to their laptops.
That said, US carriers aren't the only ones. Japanese carrier phones are highly limited. So are most Vodafone handsets.
Unless everyone is willing to pay a truly unsubsidized price for handsets and pay for the true cost of high-usage unlimited data (around 40-60 bucks/month when you factor in bandwidth, spectrum, etc limitations), then I think carriers will continue to limit how their limited resources are used.
OK Joey, so the *phone* is crippled... The factory model can function as a gprs modem, but it couldn't anymore after some excutive duhcision-making.
For the end user it doesn't make a difference if a protocol is missing or if a chip has been ripped out by a pack of baboons. Although getting the chip back from the baboon, might be harder than applying a hack.
@ Victor
Couldn't they just limit the bandwidth available to each customer and offer a scaled cost structure like most ISPs do now. You want more bandwidth you pay more per month.
My point is that they didn't flip the bit to OFF on the ProfileRegister that corresponds to Dial-Up-Network Profile. It is a fairly large feat to develop and certify a Bluetooth profile, it just doesn't have to do with simply enabling it.
Guess I'm in less of a hurry to get the GSM Treo 650 now. Sounds like it will be worth it to wait for an uncrippled, unlocked version from PalmOne directly or via a third-party. One wonders if T-Mobile will sieze their chance to be the non-sucky provider or not.
@Mark.
That is possible. But there are two factors:
It's indistinguishable between handset data for port usage (WAP browsing and laptop usages, for example).
Secondly, it has been found that data services uptake is miserable if you limit the data usage, even if the limits are high. People like the all-you-can-eat mentality in this societ. Buffets are popular.
In CDMA 1x, packet data shares the same bandwidth with voice. In GPRS/EDGE, there are limited time slots for data. These are both very finite resources for carriers.
I really don't understand why Cingular or any other carrier would cripple their phones to prevent their paying customers from spending more money by using more data services. It boggles my mind.
I'm an AT&T (Cingular now, I suppose) customer and use my Sony T616 as a Bluetooth modem when I'm on the road. I wanted to get the Treo 650 when it came out and I probably would have entended my contract another couple of years to get a discount. But if I can't use it as a Bluetooth modem with my PowerBook, then Cingular has just lost revenue from me (and countless others in my situtation).
I agree with Mark: the carriers escape a lot of accountability with customers by locking them into long term contracts...now the standard is 2 years.
So if you know a customer is locked in for 2 years you can pretty much abuse them.
I know the rationale has always been that the carriers subsidize prices on equipment in exchange for contracts, and I still might buy that for low cost phones, like the ones that are given away for free or $25 or such. But now there are so many higher end phones that even with a contract cost at least a few hundred bucks. Look at the Treo 650 cost...it's outrageous even with a 2 year contract.
If they were selling these things for under $100 with a contract, that would be one thing. But at the prices they charge to lock a customer in is outrageous.
Also, being locked in means, no matter how nice and new your phone is when you buy it, you better accept the fact that it will get old and obsolete before you can renew your contract. The only other option is eating another big cost for a new phone at full price before your contract is up.
Like Mark mentions, number portability was the first step in the emancipation of the consumer. Another good step would be the elimination of these contracts, along with device portability. As long as carriers control both hardware and service, and lock customers into contracts, consumer choice will be limited.
I was actually going to buy this when it was available. I've been watching for it for months. Screw you cingular no way you are getting my $550 now.
@ Victor and Joey
First off, carriers can and do block tethering without a data plan. I have a Nokia 3650 and cannot tether without paying for the $20 data plan.
"I think the Bluetooth is limited because the carrier (be it whomever) doesn't want all the cheap-@ss fanboys demanding low cost unlimited packet data for tethered connections to their laptops."
So I am to understand that demanding a fair price for a service that I want makes me a cheap ass and a fanboy?
I don't know. Maybe both of you are right. Maybe we shouldn't be able to purchase products without service providers telling us what features we're allowed to have and what products we're allowed to use on their networks. Maybe my ISP should only allow me to use computers purchased from them. Maybe they should also make changes to its OS so that I can't download files that are over 10 megs.
Considering the new phone (when it finally does come to market) will have ONLY 32mb of on-board memory that will be partially taken up by the OS leaving you will some 22mb left over.....Bluetooth is the least of this phones problems. Read the tech reviews on many site (cdnet.com etc...) it is very dissapointing to say the least. I was going to convert until I found this out. Seems like a serious step backward.
One more reason that the cell phone industry should be split into two parts. 1-Handset sales and 2-Wireless carriers. The number one reason in my oppinion is locking handsets and long term contracts. Yea, you will pay more for your phone, but you will not have to deal with this crap.
I've had my Sprint 650 for a month now. During this period, my treo pulled in 120 Megs of data. My voice usage went down by 1000 minutes over that same time period.
120 Megs * 1024 = 122880KB. At an avg speed of say 6KB/sec that is 341 minutes.
I think that if sprint added software that makes tethering setup easy, and can monitor billing, a lot of people would pay say another $30 (on top of vision) for unlimited tethered access. I wouldn't, but I'm sure many others would find it useful.
@ joey
That's exactly what Cingular and Sprint did.
The 650's original OS includes the DUN BT profile. Sprint and Cingular "asked" that their versions not have this profile, so PalmOne effictively "flipped the bit to OFF on the ProfileRegister".
This has been proven by the person(people) that hacked the Sprint 650.
Buy the unlocked version and stop complaining. That's what I did with my P800.
I'm hoping Verizon will understand how to make money - charge me for usage!
I'm not going to cancel my cable modem and use a paltry 144k connection full-time - I'm going to use it on the road when I can't get anything else but need a connection and I'm going to pay per packet whatever they're charging.
Verizon, don't you want my money?
Why would you want to use the Internet when you have all those wonderful proprietary information services, many of them individual billable events? They're clearly looking out for your interests when they do this.
I don't get it. Many other Cingular phones already support BT DUN, and people are tethering their phones with laptop or PDA. What's the point of disabling DUN for the most expensive phone in their lineup?
In any case, I have to thank to Cingular for saving me $550.
go T-MOBILE, awesome phones, 1 year contracts and FANTASTIC customer service, great signal (TX & DC). Get bent Cingular, Sprint, & Verizon.
PDANet will undoubtedly soon be working on the Cingular 650, so frankdly I don't think it's really not all that big a deal. I actually chose to use PDANet on my Sprint Treo 650 rather than the hack because it has such a nice interface and works so well. I regularly use it with my Sony Vaio U750P as a wireless modem.
Considering the new phone (when it finally does come to market) will have ONLY 32mb of on-board memory that will be partially taken up by the OS leaving you will some 22mb left over.....Bluetooth is the least of this phones problems. Read the tech reviews on many site (cdnet.com etc...) it is very dissapointing to say the least. I was going to convert until I found this out. Seems like a serious step backward.
I guess I got to get a unlocked version if I want to use it with a bluetooth GPS for my car. Second, that example with the whales was a very lame analogy and perspective.
@ all: Why are you complaining that a company wants to charge for something? Last time I checked, Cingular was NOT a non-profit organization. Their goal is not to provide you every little whim at cost to them, their objective is to provide you with a phone that works, and a service to use that phone on for a fair price, one that enables them to make a profit.
And let's not have any more *****ing about contracts and whatnot. If you don't want a contract, then go to www.myworldphone.com or someplace else and purchase an unlocked, unbranded phone at FULL RETAIL and then walk into your favorite GSM carrier and get a plan. The reason they do subsidies is cause our society is bent on free stuff. So for a commitment of 2 years, they take on $150 of the price. If your desired phone costs $700 retail, then why should they take on more than $150, just so your phone is cheaper? Your comments don't make sense.
I mean, it's not like this is the only phone that Cingular carries with Bluetooth. As was pointed out earlier, all of their other bluetooth phones have full bluetooth. If you really need to use the DUN profile, get one of those phones. There's no law that says you HAVE to have a Treo. And it's not like they advertized it to have DUN. It's not like the v710 fiasco, I have yet to see a commercial for the Treo 650 that promotes or advertizes DUN. Sounds to me like they're being pretty upfront about it, really. It's a well-known fact that Cingular doesn't encourage tethering on their $20 MEdiaWorks plan, you're supposed to get the PDAConnect plan. So by using the MEdiaWorks to tether, you're already cheating them, who's to say they can't cheat you back?
Shame, that's a deal-breaker in my book; damn thing costs enough without being emasculated as well. I'll stick with my old, DUN-enabled phone and wait for the Tungsten E2 to show up.
Hope Cingular reads Engadget as often as Oakley does.
Why speculate? Just ask the guy who got one early to send a screenshot proving or disproving this news item.
Just a note to those users with phones who CAN use WAP, but not standard data with a computer... it's because GPRS has what are called APN's , which are effectively usage profiles. An APN configured for WAP will only allow data to and from the WAP gateway. An APN configured for access to the internet will not restrict your traffic... that's how the billing works with GSM/GPRS services.
Cheers.
-Sutha
P.s. I'm also a little upset to hear the DUN is crippled on the 650's. I'm among the many PowerBook users w/ a Treo 600... and I occasionally take the SIM out and throw it into another bluetooth handset when I need the mac to get connected... I was looking forward to a less painful experience w/ the 650.
The way my at&t account works with my SE T616 and audiovox 5400 is that data used from the handset is included (I have the $25/month unlimited data plan), and data from the tethered connection is billed out at a buck a MB, I think. I do get IE mobile access, and streaming on WMP 10 all included. Now if only I could find a VoIP client that works on the smartphone I'd be in business...
O
thank you engadget, I had an chance to get this phone tommorow and thanks to you you just saved me 550.00 If got this phone and found out the bluetooth was crippled I would have been really pissed off
It is absurd to deactivate the DUN feature on Treo, when it is available on other bluetooth phones. WHat on earth do they want their customers to do: buy two bluetooth phones, one for their PC, one as a Treo? I also own a Mac Powerbook, and the ONLY way to use a phone as a modem is through bluetooth, there are no connectivity kits for Mac. Thus, one of the features I was reallly looking forward to on Treo650 now is gone. I suppose I should wait for a unit from PalmOne directly after all. Thus, Cingular is losing my money, but is going to end up what an unlocked phone on their network, with functional DUN. How is this misguided decision helping Cingular. Plus, I pay like $45 a month for their data service as is, how much more do they want??? I'm pretty disappointed in the entire thing, both with PalmOne for letting Sprint talk them into a three month "exclusive", and for Cingular in screwing up the functionality of the Treo.
Well according to the original thread on treocentral, using bluetooth for DUN is still a bit buggy. It's probably disabled to avoid an avalance of support calls. Sprint already claims they will be releasing an official patch later to re-enable bt DUN. Now doesn't that make more sense since other (cheaper) phones already have bluetooth?
Blame p1 for releasing the treo too soon, not money hungry wireless carriers.