At 09:57 AM 4/30/99 -0600, Adrian wrote:
>2. Palm devices don't talk IrOBEX by "default". The built-in apps
>happen to support IrOBEX. Both the Exchange Manager (IrOBEX) and
>the TTP/IrLMP API's are accessible to developers.
Yes, I wanted to simplify the issue and not get too technical. Always
a mistake. =-)
>3. It has been my experience that using IR with non-Palm devices is
>not easily done. Connecting (at the IrLMP layer) to various laptops
>via IR has been unreliable at best [...]
I think you might find connecting at IrLMP to/from any device could be
tricky. In any case, why connect at this level ? Generally applications
should connect at the TinyTP level (or even higher levels of abstractions)
unless a very compelling reason otherwise.
>4. Installing IrOBEX on other devices does not solve the interoperability
>problem. It merely moves the problem further up the protocol stack to the
>application layer. With IrOBEX I can still receive data I can't do anything
>with (similar to getting an AmiPro document via email and not being able
>to read it). This is not my idea of a seamless use model.
Well, this is a problem with no solution. Regardless of the communica-
tions method there will always be data types which cannot be handled.
This problem isn't limited to IrDA or IrOBEX. The IrDA protocols simply
provide common ways to exchange data.
>5. For years IrDA has been trying to steer people away from IrCOMM. [...]
Unfortunately, millions of legacy and new devices out there, including
digital cameras (most IrTRAN-P devices), cellular phones, IrDA modems,
IrLPT printers, etc., depend on (at least subsets of) IrCOMM. Not to
mention all of the applications out there which do not support any
IrDA protocol directly but only know about serial ports. One cannot
achieve wide connectivity today by ignoring IrCOMM. (Yes, it's sad,
considering all the limitations and complexity of IrCOMM.)
Regards,
-Ade
