why does it suck so much?

werkz for me

>>58671759
Shitty protocol. Buggy implementations

>>58671766
even when it works, the range is shit, and the speed is even shittier.

werks on my machine :^)

>>58671773
werks just fine for me

>>58671759
For what application does it suck?

>>58671759

Are you sure you're pairing correctly?

Pretty good for what it's meant for. 5.0 will be even better.

it just werks for me :^)

>>58671791
yeah, it works, but it sucks.

>>58671790
file transfer from phone to pc for example. audio streaming is also shit tier if you have decent ears and equipment so I never use it for that.

>>58671817
>file transfer through bt
just use wifi, you dumbass

audio quality is just fine with the latest version of Bluetooth also

>>58671817
With audio streaming Bluetooth always compresses the audio stream unless you have like $500 headphones that use a protocol that doesnt.

I never bothered doing file transfer with BT, didnt even know that you could. But it sounds fine if its between mobiles phones, and light files like a picture or two, or address book, etc

>>58671837
>just use wifi
no easy feature for that,

>click share
>only apps and BT
welp.

>>58671853
>. But it sounds fine if its between mobiles phones, and light files like a picture or two, or address book, etc
takes forever for 1 fucking camera jpeg. it's not as fast as you'd think it should be.

>>58671837
>audio quality is just fine
it isn't and the implementation is shit.

>>58671759

>get in prius
>automatically starts playing spotify from my phone app

dont see the issue

>>58672149
>>get in prius
make it automatically drive you off a cliff

>>58671837
>the latest version of Bluetooth
the SD835, qualcomms latest SoC for 2017 and likely to be in most flagship phones over the next year only supports 2mbps over bluetooth, and that's assuming the device you're connecting to ALSO supports BT5.0 which is unlikely.

>>58672193
4.2 supports uo to over 800kbps
that's as much as a flac file

>>58672588
I have lots of FLAC that is upwards of 2000kbps

>>58672666
stop listening to placebo, satan

>>58672673
No, it's just classical music that can't be compressed that much without losing out on a lot of the detail.

When you have a 50+ piece orchestra playing in all ranges, there isn't much you can do to compress it without losing the detail and range, some of the songs are over 3,000kbps even.

There is a reason classical music downloads are frequently offered even up to DSD quality.

>>58672709
use a modern format like aac or opus

>>58672781
I have and you lose a large portion of the detail in larger orchestral pieces.

Trust me if I could get away with more compression i'd gladly do so.

File: 1485234348938.png (85KB, 259x194px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 259x194px

>>58671759
>not posting from DYI BTKeyboard (Named: BTK Sword)

IDGI OP, what do you want BT to do that it doesn't already?