← Back to context Comment by amelius 2 months ago Honestly, can't we just ditch BT and send audio over WiFi?One thing less to worry about. 9 comments amelius Reply cloudfudge 2 months ago "Just use wifi for headphones"and"One less thing to worry about"These are not compatible statements. :) wolvoleo 2 months ago WiFi is nowhere near as low energy as Bluetooth is. michaelt 2 months ago If you think wireless headphones are insecure today, I very much doubt connecting them directly to the internet would improve the situation. theteapot 2 months ago AFAIK Wifi Direct has quite wide hardware support -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-Fi_Direct. But few people know about it? amelius 2 months ago WiFi does not necessarily mean it's connected to the internet. mrheosuper 2 months ago and enjoy your precious 1 hour of listening time.The whole tcp/ip, wifi stack is at least a magnitude more complex than bluetooth one, and the wifi radio generally consumes more power. Namidairo 2 months ago Qualcomm kind of does this with their XPAN extension, sends the audio over local network. I believe it's mostly a proprietary solution though, so I haven't seen any serious attempts to re-implement it yet. girvo 2 months ago That exists, using proprietary 2.4ghz dongles usually, but they’re much higher power draw. a96 2 months ago And roughly zero security.
cloudfudge 2 months ago "Just use wifi for headphones"and"One less thing to worry about"These are not compatible statements. :)
michaelt 2 months ago If you think wireless headphones are insecure today, I very much doubt connecting them directly to the internet would improve the situation. theteapot 2 months ago AFAIK Wifi Direct has quite wide hardware support -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-Fi_Direct. But few people know about it? amelius 2 months ago WiFi does not necessarily mean it's connected to the internet.
theteapot 2 months ago AFAIK Wifi Direct has quite wide hardware support -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-Fi_Direct. But few people know about it?
mrheosuper 2 months ago and enjoy your precious 1 hour of listening time.The whole tcp/ip, wifi stack is at least a magnitude more complex than bluetooth one, and the wifi radio generally consumes more power.
Namidairo 2 months ago Qualcomm kind of does this with their XPAN extension, sends the audio over local network. I believe it's mostly a proprietary solution though, so I haven't seen any serious attempts to re-implement it yet.
girvo 2 months ago That exists, using proprietary 2.4ghz dongles usually, but they’re much higher power draw. a96 2 months ago And roughly zero security.
"Just use wifi for headphones"
and
"One less thing to worry about"
These are not compatible statements. :)
WiFi is nowhere near as low energy as Bluetooth is.
If you think wireless headphones are insecure today, I very much doubt connecting them directly to the internet would improve the situation.
AFAIK Wifi Direct has quite wide hardware support -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-Fi_Direct. But few people know about it?
WiFi does not necessarily mean it's connected to the internet.
and enjoy your precious 1 hour of listening time.
The whole tcp/ip, wifi stack is at least a magnitude more complex than bluetooth one, and the wifi radio generally consumes more power.
Qualcomm kind of does this with their XPAN extension, sends the audio over local network. I believe it's mostly a proprietary solution though, so I haven't seen any serious attempts to re-implement it yet.
That exists, using proprietary 2.4ghz dongles usually, but they’re much higher power draw.
And roughly zero security.