Apple's iPhone Bluetooth Headset unboxed
By Nilay Patel 
posted Jul 23rd 2007 8:08PM
posted Jul 23rd 2007 8:08PM
[Via TUAW]
Please note: If you're a current Engadget commenter, you do not need to re-register. Simply login and you will be prompted to select a username.
It looks very un-Apple to me. My Jabra has a better design, and it's half the price.
Apparently apple thought that the dual dock would be of some use after all did they? At one point or another they were shooting for seperate chargers/charging docks weren't they? Now if only they would listen to what else the "consumer" has to say about the iphone and make a few changes, 3G Anyone??
dude, if 3G was in iPhone it would kill battery life.
And Second I would have to pay $40/mo for 3G NO THANX!
If you want 3G then just be patient. For me Edge is MORE than enough to check emails, use google maps and some Safari Use. Have you even used EDGE? It's fast enough for a PHONE. It has wifi so i can wait till im at a hotspot to do some surfing. Otherwise i can read Engadget and all on EDGE which loads of super fast.
STOP WITH THE FRACKNIG 3G ARGUMENT. ITS LAMEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
Are you kidding? First off, Cingular (woops, AT&T) charges the same for unlimited data regardless of 3G vs. EDGE. Second, do you think people who've spent $600 on a phone would mind another $20 for 3G data, if that were the case? My experience with EDGE in the NY metro area ranges from unacceptably slow to just not working. It is by far the biggest flaw in the iPhone.
If the battery life were lessened due to 3G that would be a shame, but reports have indicated that the lack of 3G in the phone is due to the current chipset not being small enough to fit.
Anyway, I'll just buy a new one once they add 3G. Anyone who wants to can buy my existing phone on eBay. Now... where is my A2DP software upgrade???
Fatima, what's lame is claiming that 3G ruins battery life when smaller phones offer it and WiFi is much more battery hungry. What's lame is claiming that EDGE is fast enough and that web pages load "super fast". What's lame is claiming that 3G is more expensive than EDGE when there's utterly no evidence to support that claim.
If 3G is so undesirable and unnecessary, then why be patient for it? Why would Apple eventually introduce such a crappy technology? Why has anyone else bothered?
What's a joke is believing that WiFi power management can be handled effectively and 3G cannot. WiFi is not a substitute for 3G and neither is EDGE.
1) 3G does drain battery life way more than EDGE. As does Wifi of course, but the 3G battery drain over EDGE is certain. As is a slight increase in size that would be necessitated by the 3G chipset. I think Apple felt that battery life + form factor were more important to including 3G for the (relatively) few customers who would be able to utilize it.
2) As the owner of a 3G phone and an iPhone I have to point out that 3G is not exactly magical data nirvana. Coverage is spottier than EDGE, and a pokey 3G connection is not that drastically different than a strong EDGE connection. Holding coverage constant, 3G obviously takes the gold, but things aren't quite that simple. And Wifi, when available, blows the doors off of 3G and EDGE.
3) Moral: 3G is great and an obvious upgrade both AT&T and Apple can look to offer in the near future, but given current 3G coverage a non-3G phone is still plenty good. I'd say the lack of 3G hasn't been quite the disaster everybody was predicting/hoping, but I think EDGE ranges from "horrible" to "acceptable", which can obviously be improved.
4) (on topic): basically it's Apple's BT vs. the Jawbone. Apple's already wins in looks (doesn't look like it fell off Optimus Prime) and integration (dual-dock with the battery indicator is muy convenient) but the jury's still out on sound quality and does-it-fit-in-my-ear factor.
@ Craig & James,
Are you two paid shills by MS or Nokia or Verizon to spread FUD? Or are did you, in all your wisdom, just assume that because it is faster it must use more power?
WiFi not only uses a great deal less power it also takes up a lot less space of the circuit board. EDGE does use less power than 3G and takes up a great deal less space and the chips cost less and these chips can be imported into the states right now (though I doubt Apple say that one coming).
For proof, check out this lnk:
http://www.anandtech.com/gadgets/showdoc.aspx?i=3036
Leonard,
I don't know what your problem causes your reading comprehension problem but I have specifically argued that battery life is not the reason for going away from 3G. While the article you quoted concludes that WiFi battery life is better than EDGE, it tests the two modes under different conditions so the tests are flawed. Regardless, the article's conclusion supports my own, that the iPhone could easily support 3G without any adverse battery life consequences.
Now, since you feel entitled to accuse me of being a paid shill, perhaps you should provide references to back up your claim that WiFi "uses a great deal less power". How much is a great deal?
That is a heck a lot of money to pay for a bluetooth headset but since it comes with a awesome dock I could see myself buying it if had an iPhone. After all you don't get one, but two products.
A person who is strictly in the market for a bluetooth headset can off course pick up a nicely designed one for $30-50 in most stores(can't understand why apple is only selling overpriced BT headsets on their website).
One question though, what happen you lose your headset or you dog breaks it, will you have to fork over another 129 dollar for a new one, ending up with two docks?
`Yes it is a TWO product VALUE.`
You have been taken in again, feel like a chump?
There's actually THREE products in the box:
1) Bluetooth headset ear-thingy
2) "Travel Cable" iPhone dock cable with bluetooth charger port.
3) Dual iPhone/headset dock.
So you have the dock for your desk, the travel cable for your suitcase, and of course, the BT earset for your ear. Assuming you can use the dual dock with your iphone's original USB cable (I don't know if this is true), it's not as bad a value as I thought it'd be.
I'll admit it. The dual dock does look sexy.
Are you starved of human contact. If it had a sanyo logo on it would the white plastic be sexy?
It's the Sanyo logo just the said company's name? Doesn't seem to sexy to me, so my answer is no, it would not be sexy. Also, you should have put a question mark after the first sentence.
*Isn't the Sanyo logo...
Damn... I like Apple stuff, but they really, really need to get out of the business of designing anything that goes into your ear. Looks like they glued a crappy bluetooth stick to one of their canal-wrecking ear buds.
I don't think it would stay in my ear, be it that the ipod ear buds won't last more than 10 seconds in my ears.
Is that a beach towel behind him? Haha, I'll have to go down to Marlton tomorrow and check it out. I haven't had the chance to even see the iPhone yet. I don't have AT&T (thank god), but I do wishI could get my paws on one.
It's so revolutionary! If any other company EVER makes another BT headset, it's obviously a copy of this one. Especially if it's black.
i would buy one if it played music trough it, not only pnone calls, that would be nice,i am thinking of buying the v moda vibe duo headphones, the white ones that cum with the iphone totally suckk...
The headset should fit "in" the iphone, like how a stylus would fit "in" a pda
^^^^ additionally there should be an option to charge the headset from the phone, but should not do it automatically
I don't understand why a device that has the function of storing & playing STEREO music would not have a stereo headset?... Can one use two of these and achieve a stereo effect?
Apple has chosen not to enable A2DP (Stereo Bluetooth) on the iPhone. The hardware is there - do you think we might see an Apple (or partner's) A2DP headset launch in mysterious conjunction with this feature being enabled by software update?
OS X actually doesn't support it (no conspiracy... Apple just hasn't included it yet) and therefore the iPhone doesn't support it. It's coming in Leopard, so predictably/hopefully it will trickle down to other OS X based products
James,
Making Apple apologies again? Do you have any references where Apple has made statements to back up your own or are you just pretending it isn't a weakness in the product? The iPhone's bluetooth support is a well-known embarassment.
Engadget, can you find out if this headset works with the RAZR? Thanks!
Pairs fine with the RAZR.
I picked up a pair of those V-Moda Vibe Duo headphones
Sound quality is awesome, up there next to Shure and Etymotic Research, but the lack of a click to answer and end calls is disapointing.
I think I will pass on this, I guess because I listen to music on it more than I talk on it.
did you know that Apple gets $355 profit on the 8Gb iphone?
That's to cover R&D costs, development & support, and marketing.
Did you know that video game companies like EA make around $59 profit on each game they sell? CD's and cases are dirt cheap. thats around a 98% profit margin.
Alex,
Games are software, the iPhone is hardware. The pricing structures are entirely different and not comparable.
Profit margins for literally ALL products are to "cover R&D costs, development & support, and marketing." The iPhone is in no way distinguished from any other product in that respect. The margins are remarkably high on the device and there's nothing wrong in pointing out that fact. Apple sells these devices direct whereas their competitors, who sell at lower prices, have middlemen. The iPhone is immensely and abnormally profitable for a cellphone.
Alex,
You're a little off with your 98% figure for software development. With that number you quoted, a company that spends $10m on development would make $500m profit. I'll agree that software can be extremely profitable, but there are few players short of Microsoft making that kind of money.
Perhaps you were talking about raw material costs.
James,
1) Yes, 3G does use more power than EDGE, but WiFi uses much more than either, and all 3G radios will also do GPRS if not EDGE. WiFi is power-managed and disabled at the user's option, and there's no reason that 3G can't be the same. Furthermore, anytime WiFi is available there's no reason for 3G to also be enabled. The fact is that any device that can offer reasonable battery life with WiFi can also do so with 3G and there are plenty of 3G devices with less size and battery than the iPhone. The battery requirements argument is way overblown. It was not the reason Apple chose not to include 3G.
2) Yes, 3G is less available than EDGE but WiFi is vastly more spotty and more chaotic than 3G. If you're going to use that argument for 3G then don't ignore it for WiFi. WiFi is not a roaming, mobile solution at all and it doesn't matter that WiFi is faster than 3G when it isn't available under most circumstances. WiFi was never intended for such usage.
3) I don't see how you conclude this as a "moral" nor do I see how you conclude that the lack of 3G isn't a disaster. It simply depends on your perspective. Furthermore, suggesting that people were "hoping" it would be a disaster marks you as a fanboy. Reasonable people with reasonable perspectives can have reasonable expectations that include 3G (especially those converting over to AT&T and not getting to use the one service they offer that's compelling). That doesn't mean their complaints constitute hope for a disasterous market failure and it's an insult for you to suggest otherwise.
4) You've already proven yourself a fanboy and these comments don't help. Looks are subjective, the dock integration is next to useless especially considering some (including me) have no interest in using the dock at all, and the Apple device is entirely unproven. It would be nice if the Jawbone could be used with the iPhone without re-pairing each time you power it on.
And you've already proven that you don't have a clue what you are talking about. WiFi uses a great deal less power than 3G or even EDGE, despite having a significant speed advantage.
If you still otherwise then please post some testing results (as I did above in response of your last FUD filled post).
All right, jackass, prove that WiFi uses a great deal less power. Your article proved nothing of the sort. Your article showed that the iPhone, and only the iPhone, offered better battery life when used with WiFi under very different testing conditions than EDGE. It is not evidence that WiFi itself is lower power than EDGE and, to borrow your own insulting tone of voice, "you don't have a clue what you are talking about".
Tell me how WiFi offers a significant speed advantage for the overwhelming amount of time where its use is entirely unavailable to me? I get to use WiFi with my iPhone only when I don't need to use my iPhone for data at all. Otherwise, EDGE is all I get. Some great benefit.
Criag said, "Yes, 3G does use more power than EDGE, but WiFi uses much more than either"
Then he tried to backpeddle by saying, "Tell me how WiFi offers a significant speed advantage for the overwhelming amount of time where its use is entirely unavailable to me?'
The issue is your FUDerific comments about WiFi using more power than both EDGE and 3G technologies. I proved you wrong by pointing out tested results from an independent, well known and trusted site.
Where is your proof to the contrary?
Easy, Leonard, because the link you provided did nothing of the sort. That article offered no analysis of WiFi versus EDGE whatsoever.
Furthermore, I did no such backpeddling. My comment refuted your claim that WiFi offered much better performance than 3G or EDGE. It does not except in the narrow range in which it works at all. WiFi is not a substitute for EDGE or 3G. My so called "backpeddling" comment had nothing to do with power consumption and anyone without reading comprehension difficulties understands that.
Regarding my "proof to the contrary", any cellphone which integrates WiFi cannot disable its cell radio when WiFi is active. Therefore, WiFi cannot be lower power than "no WiFi". The fact is that WiFi radio have only typical transmit powers and they vary through a range. Cell technologies are similar, so no hard-and-fast comparison can be made. The testing that you quote that resulted in better battery life numbers for WiFi was the result of specifically eliminating access point switching with WiFi while encouraging it with EDGE. It says so in the article and it means the testing was stacking in WiFi's favor.
There is no way that EDGE+WiFi is lower power than EDGE alone. Anyone who fails to see that is a fool. That would include you, Leonard.
Craig, the link posted by Leonard seems perfectly clear to me. Where are your test results that deny his viewpoints? How about you define "super fast" before you ask him to define "uses a great deal less power" despite the site mentioned having clear cut percentages and times listed.
If it's perfectly clear to you, then you didn't read it. I don't need to provide test results to refute an article that doesn't say what Leonard says it does. Furthermore, "super fast" was not my term, it was a term I was ridiculing.
The site Leonard linked to made absolutely no claims regarding WiFi power consumption versus EDGE or 3G. It compared the iPhone versus the Blackjack using very specific tests. Perhaps you should actually read it.
I'm looking to the testing of this product. There are plethora of BT headsets but few offer any decent quality. It will be good to see how this medium priced product stacks up.
I'm also looking forward to 3rd-party offerings that work with the iPhone as I am not a fan of Apple's earpiece design. I much prefer the earbuds and would like an option for stereo BT earbuds that are connected via a small black wire.
Wow. I paid $14 for my Logitech bt headset and can't really imagine this one being any better.
It's better than your POS handset in everyway, because it's an Apple.
Most of us have cases for our iPhones... so we don't scratch up the phone itself... but you can't dock the phone without taking it out of the case... so this dual dock is dumb.
Actually that case your using to prevent your iPhone from getting scratched is probably scratching it.... There's always a little slack between the plastic/Phone and dust particles are more than likely collecting up in there, and scratching the chrome bezel. The case itself is dumb.
"Craig, that Anandtech article did the best it could to compare EDGE, 3G and WiFi power consumption."
No, it did not. It compared two phones using WiFi, EDGE, and 3G under specific circumstances. It did NOT compare specific power consumption of those 3 technologies. Anyone who stupidly asserts that their test proves that WiFi itself is lower power than EDGE or 3G totally misses the point.
3G is known to be higher power than EDGE but those tests show better battery life with 3G. How do you explain that? How can EDGE+WiFi use less power than EDGE alone? The answers lie in how the tests are structured. The article in no way offers proof that WiFi is lower power than 3G or EDGE.
With WiFi, a cell phone also has to have EDGE enabled at all times so there is no cellphone in the world that gets better battery life with WiFi enabled than with it disabled. It may be that, under specific circumstances, a device could get better battery life such as when usage is optimized for EDGE using minimal power then testing by measuring power consumed per byte transferred. It is clear that faster technologies using similar power will offer better throughput per watt. That's what is being shown in the article.
Funny that, in a post where the point I make is that power consumption is NOT the reason Apple didn't include 3G, I get criticized and even called an industry shill for the misguided belief that I've argued the opposite. The iPhone in its current form could have offered 3G without battery life problems. The Anandtech article supports that argument and I have no beef with it. It does not, however, offer any proof that WiFi consumes less power that EDGE or 3G during operation. What it does show that the power consumed for the duration needed to transfer a certain amount of data is less.
A QUICK REVIEW
blog.dekace.com