Debunk: the iPod touch Bluetooth chip is really the Nike+ receiver

Usually product teardowns are only interesting for the raw, visceral thrill of seeing chipsets and circuit boards splayed wide open, but iFixit's disassembly of the new iPod touch revealed something rather more interesting: a Broadcom BCM4325 Bluetooth 2.1+EDR chip. (That's the silver rectangle in the middle of the top circuit board there.) That's got a lot of people all atwitter, but there's an obvious explanation for it: Nike+, built into the new touch, is based on a proprietary low-power 2.4GHz communications protocol called ANT -- not quite the standard Bluetooth frequency, but awful close. Yep, sorry, it's for technojogging, not secret A2DP -- although we'd welcome actual Bluetooth support in the touch with open arms. Hit the read link for the complete breakdown.

Update: Just to be totally accurate, the BCM4325 also does WiFi -- and Nike+iPod has been called a "proprietary 802.11 protocol" in the past, so it's even less likely that it's there for actual Bluetooth usage.

[Ryan @ Sep 10th 2008 10:06PM]

thats so interesting......

[Ryan @ Sep 11th 2008 3:54AM]

Stop making the Ryans look bad.

[stealth658 @ Sep 10th 2008 10:06PM]

why couldn't they have just fucking used bluetooth?

[Ruben @ Sep 10th 2008 10:08PM]

They really should have. Both from a usability standpoint and a financial standpoint.

"$9.99 for bluetooth? How can i go wrong?"

[bondsbw @ Sep 10th 2008 10:19PM]

Bluetooth means little to me, without a decent stack. I have a 1st-gen iPhone, and I'd like to have GPS integration. But I can't, because there's no support for a Bluetooth serial port which could hook up to my nice Bluetooth GPS receiver.

I'd also like to be able to transfer files wirelessly to other devices, but that isn't happening either. Screw copy-and-paste, a good Bluetooth stack is what I really want.

[SimonRichards @ Sep 10th 2008 10:07PM]

So is it a proper bluetooth chip or not? If the software just doesn't use it for bluetooth it doesn't mean it can't be done, right?

[Ruben @ Sep 10th 2008 10:07PM]

That's a shame.

[hungry @ Sep 10th 2008 10:14PM]

I would have rather taken Bluetooth instead of Nike+iPod

[Jacob @ Sep 10th 2008 10:18PM]

if it had Bluetooth it'd be useless like the Iphone's Bluetooth. I'm still pissed at how useless the Iphone's Bluetooth is.

[Justin F @ Sep 10th 2008 10:16PM]

"an Broadcom"

[JonM @ Sep 11th 2008 11:10AM]

? "A broadcom" is already correct by American standards...

[hungry @ Sep 10th 2008 10:17PM]

r u a woman

[Das Gluten @ Sep 10th 2008 10:21PM]

Why would they shoot themselves in the foot like this? Now that everyone knows they could have put fully functioning bluetooth in it, everyone's going to be pissed. I know I would have loved bluetooth for VoIP, file transfer, hell you could even make it a touch screen computer remote if you knew what you were doing. WHY APPLE WHY! Why cripple yourself when you could've been so COOL!????

[Wolfticket @ Sep 10th 2008 10:25PM]

Because bluetooth would make it compatible with loads of non-ipod accessories. Which, in turn, would mean Steve Jobs could not afford that solid gold toilet seat he's had his eye on.

[Kizorblade @ Sep 10th 2008 10:35PM]

"had his eye on."

"Had his ass on."

Corrected.

[wickedpheonix @ Sep 10th 2008 10:53PM]

"has his ass on."

Second correction.

[ak.anthony @ Sep 10th 2008 11:24PM]

Yeah, Everyone will be pissed, and they will only sell 130 million of them

[pito189 @ Sep 10th 2008 11:24PM]

Yeah your right because the first one didn't have bluetooth and nobody bought it, so this one not having bluetooth is really going to hold it back.

Just because we want it doesn't mean all those people out there that don't give a crap aren't still going to buy it. Educate all your non-tech friends to the benefits of it and then people will start clamoring for it.

[Mrmeku @ Sep 11th 2008 8:46AM]

"Had his eye on."

"had his ass on."

"Had his brown eye on."

Corrected.

[absurdio @ Sep 11th 2008 1:49AM]

"hell you could even make it a touch screen computer remote if you knew what you were doing."

Can't you already do that? With an app? A free one? ...and if you want a touchscreen remote that controls more than just itunes, is it really the absence of bluetooth that's prohibiting that from happening?

Maybe you were kidding?

[Benson @ Sep 11th 2008 2:31AM]

Probably the same reason the crippled the iPhone. It too could have had fully functionong Bluetooth for (everything), but got left with just a bluetooth chip. Oh, and it has HSP, where this has Nike. It's not like it surprises anyone.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Sep 10th 2008 10:22PM]

The 4325 also does WiFi (so sez the internets).

It can do WiFi and Bluetooth simultaneously, so that means probably if Apple wanted to they could do Bluetooth on the Touch if they wanted, even if it is right now doing WiFi and Nike.

[Ryan Trevisol @ Sep 11th 2008 7:53AM]

Which means they could turn it on later and call it a "feature update", and get $5-10 more out of everyone who wants it bad enough.

[Shinigami @ Sep 10th 2008 10:29PM]

Congrats. You failed in both (so far has no low rank, and so far is second comment :) )

[sam @ Sep 10th 2008 10:35PM]

The bluetooth part is probably a $9.99 upgrade...

[B.Cherry @ Sep 10th 2008 10:37PM]

WOW...Apple sure know how to work their customers! How many times must I say this? Rather then just makin' one GREAT PMP (Portable Media Player), they rather make baby steps with minimum upgrades to make millions along the way! We all know this, we just don't want to admit that Apple has us trained. Go ahead and low rank me you haters! I'll be dang if I spend another penny on an Apple product when I have a perfectly workin' 'ol model iPod/iPhone. I'm through with Apple and their greedy ways...

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Sep 10th 2008 10:43PM]

If you don't like it with the specs it is offered with, don't buy it.

If you paid for it with the specs offered, don't bitch it doesn't have something you weren't told it had anyway.

[Bdad @ Sep 10th 2008 10:59PM]

I agree 100%

[B.Cherry @ Sep 10th 2008 11:00PM]

Your right bro, that's why I'm not trippin'. All I'm askin' for is that Apple stop cheatin' people when they buy a product one week then the week there's an even better version of the same product for less or with better features. When I hear rumors over the internet I try and ask an Apple employee but they play dumb. That and they wanna put out newer models and stop supportin' older generations. Anyways, have fun wastin' your hard earned cash tryin' to keep up with the latest (GREATEST) Apple product...

[zenbrane @ Sep 10th 2008 10:39PM]

Apple probably isn't keen on adding bluetooth to the touch. Paired with a cell phone there's no reason why it couldn't handle text and voice. Not good for the iPhone.

[Dillon @ Sep 10th 2008 10:49PM]

Lets not give him what he wants. Everybody rank him up.

[kenna @ Sep 10th 2008 11:07PM]

Bluetooth on my touch, that will FTW

[Benson @ Sep 11th 2008 2:33AM]

s/will/would/

Since it's not gonna happen.

[Benson @ Sep 11th 2008 2:35AM]

Oh, and will for the win?
That doesn't make sense either way, so I suppose will is just as good as would.

[Nicholas @ Sep 10th 2008 11:15PM]

Apparently it can do FM receiver wifi and bt.
H@ck h@ck!!

[PM @ Sep 10th 2008 11:19PM]

Not only did they screw up with the bluetooth, but the now "included in 2.1" Nike+ is not even included with 2.1, just with iPod touch version 2. Apple always finds a way to screw things up. Again, a perfect opportunity to improve not only a future product, but the use of an older product by including Nike+ support since that is what Jobs said, but greedy apple leaves the people who have already supported the touch in the dust by not including Nike+ support. Thanks for nothing apple.

[roz @ Sep 11th 2008 1:45AM]

Then again, first gen Touch might not support Nike+

[RWB @ Sep 10th 2008 11:47PM]

All you guys would pop you zippers if you just read the stinkin datasheet for the 4325! It does all that 802.11 stuff and more... From what I can tell, it is not ANT unless Broadcom licensed it from Dynastream Innovations and is a software implimentation. Ant is not on the datasheet.

So, I think if the OS allows (in the future), it will be able to do WiFi, Bluetooth - simultaniously, ZigBee, SDIO, SPI, UART, eSCO (for voice), dual A2DP stereo sound.

[Tom F @ Sep 11th 2008 9:54AM]

RWB is correct. This NOT ANT. This a The standard they are using is very close to ANT(the radio transmission protocols are similar) but the message protocols are different. ANT has over 50 partners but Nike and Apple have of course decided to use a different protocol. Is anyone surprised?
http://www.thisisant.com/?section=94

[Todd Long @ Sep 10th 2008 11:54PM]

that sucks...

[Todd Long @ Sep 10th 2008 11:57PM]

that sucks...

[Sublimewulf @ Sep 10th 2008 11:54PM]

Bluetooth chip - Nike + JailBreak = WIN

[Brian @ Sep 10th 2008 11:58PM]

Cool... it works with ANT?

So does Garmin's Forerunner, Edge, Oregon, and Colorado! (Including heart rate monitors, power meters, accelerometers, and bike speed/cadence sensors.

I wonder if they'll all work together, considering they work with the same wireless standard.

[FRiC @ Sep 11th 2008 12:15AM]

Is it compatible with other ANT products like Suunto and Garmin?

[RyanS @ Sep 11th 2008 12:36AM]

Or is that what he really wants? Damn you reverse physcology

[Squid7085 @ Sep 11th 2008 12:49AM]

I think the question now is can the iPhone be updated so that the Nike+ thing can work with it and not have the little white dongle on it? Since they have the same hardware (from what I have heard) it would seem like it would be possible.

[Kevin Kowalewski @ Sep 11th 2008 1:01AM]

FCC Documents reveal this is infact a bluetooth radio... Along with the chipset spec, its reasonable to assume with a simple software mod could enable full out bluetooth.

*cough* Its already running linux *cough*

[Benson @ Sep 11th 2008 2:42AM]

*cough* No, it's not! *cough*

Linux != BSD ~= OSX

If it was Linux, it'd be open source, and you'd have a chance. (Well, probably not you, but hackers.) Coming from BSD source, OSX can be as open or as closed as Apple likes, and that's rather closed for the versions on the iJunk.

[blizz419 @ Sep 11th 2008 8:15AM]

its not running linux, mac OS is based on UNIX at its core as is linux but they are as i would say 2 completely different evolutionary branches, definitely nowhere even close to being considered the Same OS.

[Andrew @ Sep 11th 2008 1:07AM]

So if a bluetooth reciever can handle ANT will the iPhone work as a nike+ reciever? I sure hope so..