Even when I’ve seen offers made that a future release of firmware for a piece of it kit would be cut when the spec and the industry straitened out, to bring it up to whatever came out, I’ve seen ppl burned when the update didn’t provide the same level of spec as was expected. To get the full, real deal, you had to buy a new one. This is general IT, not hearing, but in a sense hearing stuff has taken on a flavor of IT.
WH
What is general iT? As a R&D professional, I have no idea what that mean.
HA company do not promise anything unless it is confirmed by an official statement by the entire company. I sure don’t promise anything to our customers because there is a risk of promises are broken due to unforeseen problems.
Hardware bugs exist and causes features to not work properly. they have to redesign the entire system to fix the bug once they learn the issue, validate the fix and fix the bug, like 1.5 year later. by then a new HA chip platform is launched.
Features are taken away from that firmware/HW release and nobody is happy, even the R&D engineers involved in the project.
I can’t answer for WhiteHat, but I felt like I knew what he meant. Although in certain ways computers and integrated circuits are extremely reliable as compared to the old transistor and tube days, but there remains a fair amount of glitchiness. There’s also a tendency to over promise. I’ve seen one hearing aid company promise an ancillary device “soon” that took over a year. They also backed away from an initial claim of future Bluetooth compatibility. I think what WhiteHat is saying is to approach any claim by any hearing aid company with a fair amount of skepticism. One is generally not rewarded by trying to “future proof” one’s purchases.
Completely agree with this. Problem is the novel HW/protocol/SW used in the hearing aid and their engineers are learning they go.
IT is information technology or what most commonly all the field of computing.
It seems like we are in violent agreement.
WH
Yes, I know that, i think you meant is genera productl development/. What confused me IT is never used in engineering department unless there are computer / network / security issues…
I have been in the business of program management, development, deployment and operations of IT for a specific customer for nearly 40 years. We sometimes have a company go from spec to production design, test, develop technologies, etc, for something special we need, but prefer to buy (or lately rent!) commercially available stuff. But over the years I’ve seen a thing or two.
Usually the RDT&E shop is isolated from us even though we’re paying the bills.
Happy thanksgiving, if you’re celebrating today!
WH
That’s the norm in any tech industry… Happy thanksgiving!
Here’s a LE Audio product that’s available now. I don’t think it’s been mentioned before.
https://www.amazon.com/Bluetooth-Transceiver-Transmitter-Monitoring-Smartphone/dp/B09Y8YFFGR?th=1
This Sennheiser dongle also says Bluetooth 5.2 codecs:
Bluetooth® 5.2, aptX HD, and aptX Adaptive codecs let your headphones show their full potential
But not LE Audio. I hate how various manufacturers use 5.2 and 5.3 as selling points, but without LE Audio those dot versions add pretty much nothing. My understanding anyway. And if I know the difference between a codec (LC3) and Bluetooth specification (BT 5.2), surely these guys should be able to. Sorry for the mini rant.
Agreed. Analogy (mediocre at best) I just came up with. Having BT 5.2 or 5.3 offers the potential for LE Audio, just as a healthy human being has the potential of being able to run a marathon. However, most healthy humans can’t run a marathon, just as most BT 5.2/5.3 devices can’t do LE audio.
correct, LC3 is not a protocol, You need BAP/CAP/HAP to get it working properly…
See this for more info:
Did a product search on Bluetooth.com for Samsung devices with CAP. Their Flip 4 and Fold 4 phones (BT 5.2) are listed, as well as a TV and earbuds (BT 5.3) Sounds promising!
Anyone tried the RS120W sennheiser
Headphones?
Le audio Bluetooth 5.2
I have no experience with them. They do claim LE Audio. However they do not show up on the Bluetooth.com website so I wonder if they are certified. I’ve seen very few reviews from buyers on Amazon and other sites. They all seem positive, but none mention anything about LE Audio. I doubt there’s anything available that could transmit LE Audio to test it.
WOW!!! That is so incredible!!! I ended up buying a 2nd pair of Phonak Lumity Life rechargeable aids cuz they only give me about 12-13 hours of use. Now I swap in the other pair halfway through my day … EVERY SINGLE DAY.
I thought rechargeable battery life was like a Holy Grail, not even developed yet. I almost wish I could try out a pair of the Starkey aids to see if their rechargeable battery life would last 20 hours on ME.
Starkeys were my first pair of aids back in the '80s. To think that their technology is better than Phonak in a very critical area like rechargeable battery life is kind of humbling.
Well Phonak is using Bluetooth Classic which is a heavy hitter on the batteries, where LE is low energy. My More1 aids claim to be LE but I have the 100db receivers that must be a heavy hitter because I sure don’t stream much.
Heaven help me when LE is working on the N8. I still haven’t mastered pairing the version I have on my bimodal devices. The more complicated it gets the less likely I am to be able to manage it… It frustrates me when iPhone updates muck around with the settings and aren’t compatible with my devices. I can see a lot of headaches when LE is introduced!