Broadcom's first Bluetooth 3.0 chip gets certified
By Nilay Patel 
posted Apr 23rd 2009 6:48AM
posted Apr 23rd 2009 6:48AM
Well, that fast -- just a day after the Bluetooth SIG officially announced the new Bluetooth 3.0 specification, Broadcom's announced that its BCM4325 chip has been certified and is ready to go. As you'd expect from a chip that uses the new high-speed multi-protocol standard, the 4325 does WiFi as well as Bluetooth, with a dash of FM thrown in for good measure. Handshakes all around -- now let's get this thing in some devices, shall we?
I've got to get a phone with that. Sounds pretty sweet.
I've got an iPod touch with that.
No you haven't you moron.
According to the guy below, seems the iPod touch 2Gs DO have that chip. Guess we know who the moron is here.
Either way, it's nice to put hardware in a device, purposefully cripple it, then charge people to enable it later on. Least it'll give some jailbreaker something else to work on in the meantime if they so desire, or they'll just distribute the firmware.
@SS_Raizer: What do you mean "purposefully cripple it". The Bluetooth 3.0 specification became official just a few days ago. And *if* Apple release a firmware update enabling it (even a payed one for iPod Touch owners, we've been over the reason behind this so many times already) it's just a bonus - when you bought the device you had no expectation that it'll be able to do Bluetooth 3.0 ever. You've got what you payed for and now neither Apple, nor Broadcom owe you anything.
No, I'm not referring to the 3.0 specification. Im referring to the actual chip in the touch that users cant use (for wireless headphones etc) that dailytech and other sites have written articles about stating that the chip is inside, but cant be used, and Apple's idea was to charge touch users for the 3.0 firmware upgrade to enable the Broadcom chip's use. That's all I meant. It was the way it was reported as 'being purposefully crippled' since it's just to give users a reason to pay the $10 for the upgrade when it comes out later this year (for something other than the Nike stuff).
Why not call it BlueFi
Or WiTooth.
People would mistake it for another Wii controller.
Aren't iPhone and iPod Touch using this BCM4325 chip? Should we expect software upgrade to support Bluetooth 3.0 on them anytime soon?
It does, well spotted. It would need a new firmware but I imagine that's within Apple's ability to do so. Perhaps it will have BT 3.0 by the time iPhone 3.0 OS is released? Makes sense for tethering.
Meant to post this link too - http://www.ifixit.com/Guide/First-Look/iPod-Touch-2nd-Generation/586/2
I thought the whole advantage bluetooth has over Wifi is power savings. How is this new protocol on power saving?
-sun
From my basic understanding it can seamlessly switch to an implementation of 802.11n WiFi for fast data transfers and switch back to regular Bluetooth for power savings. There's a lot of info on this topic if you want to Google it.
Oh, Sony Ericsson, buy these chips for the Idou! Please!
OMG, judging by the comments above me, should we expect Bluetooth 3.0 in the next iPhone?
we should expect (and I do) Bluetooth 3.0 in the CURRENT iPhone and iPod Touch models.
HTC engineers determined to figure a way to make it as ineffective as BT 1.0.
I thought their (old?) CEO had sent the entire company up his nose...
Re-read my comment..it does seem a bit too aggressive, so I'll clarify and say that it doesn't really matter to me and yes, it wasn't advertised with that feature..perfectly fair, and I agree with you lurch. I did get what I paid for. But (I know this has been rehashed multiple times) it's just a bit weird that Apple would word it in that way themselves. In reality, I'm glad if my device has more capability than what I originally knew about. It's kind of nice that way.
I think this is great but I have been wondering about this..
Can a device with this chip simultaneously join a WiFi network AND transfer files using Bluetooth 3.0 high speed?
Apple just snuck that old chip into the old iPhone and Touch so they could greedily enable a standard they knew was coming out soon. Greedy bastards, getting me to upgrade my current device for next-to-nothing instead of having me buy a whole new one to get access to awesome new technology.
What would have been the point of Apple allowing bluetooth access for the Touch until 3.0? So you could listen to your music on your bluetooth headset? They haven't enabled the chip because the OS wasn't ready for it, but it sure was nice of them to make sure that your old Touch was going to have the hardware available for future OS features.
Apple has gone above and beyond their commitment to their customers with this forward thinking.
How do you know that Apple used any forward thinking? How about this possibility, they used the same hardware design as the iPHONE and the same chips (except for the cellular baseband and RF) to gain economies of scale and make the design easier. Than they charged just a little extra to cover the cost of a chip that is partially disabled.
And why do this, because they knew people would pay the extra amount and their development cost are lower.
How do you feel about Apple's forward thinking now?
First - I'm just going by Apple's history. Like putting 802.11n laptops before the n draft was ready, and enabling it later.
If you read over their OS 3.0 announcement, describing what OS 3.0 can do with bluetooth, you realize they are actually just describing Bluetooth 3.0 features - high-speed, automatically negotiating network connections, easy pairing.
Apple doesn't do last-minute knee-jerk reactions. They've been working on OS 3.0 for a long time (copy and paste not a priority? give me a break, they were just stalling).
If OS 3.0 uses bluetooth 3.0, and all of Apple's current hardware happens to support bluetooth 3.0, then its fairly obvious they have been planning all along on utilizing these chips for bluetooth 3.0 in the new OS.
My understanding is BT 3 requires a new antennae so you should not see it in current gen Apple products.
It would have been interesting to hear the price (per/1000) of that chip, just to get a ballpark expectation of what we are looking at in acceptance, if it's $100+ per chip then we know it's not going to go quick for instance.
I think it's the software that's important, the chips are not different in a big way.
OF COURSE I think that I could be wrong.
Not sure though..
BT 3.0 is already moving quickly in case you have not noticed, It spent quite some time in the R&D stage but it's finally ready.
Sure enough you need software too, but there is significant difference between 2.0 and 3.0 actually, and you will need the chip since much of the handshaking and signalling is done in hardware, and the cost of the chip still can be a dealbreaker, and if one company has the first and only for a while they can ask too much and slow things down because of that.
But yeah a good software stack is needed too.
Where are all the hardware guys cuz ya'll have it wrong. The iPhone and touch use a Marvell XXX868 combo bluetooth and wifi chip. The upcoming firmware oh sorry software update will enable A2DP and AVRCP profiles for the existing Bluetooth 2.0 certified chipset. If you want Bluetooth 3.0 then wait for something to come on the market using that crappy Broadcomm chip the author mentioned.