Team: Two hypothetical WT4090 questions I need your help with (thanks!): 1.) If a future generation of wearable computers had only the Microsoft BT stack instead of the Stonestreet BT stack, are your customers/partners using Stonestreet features that they would be greatly inconvenienced by not having (i.e. features/API's that you know SS1 has and MS doesn't)? If so, can you tell me the customer name & the SS1 stack features?? What would be the customer's response? 2.) If they didn't have a BT Explorer optimized for touchless screens what would be the fall-out of that? Would it be missed, and why? Thanks!
BT Stacks & BT Explorer for touch-less screens |
1 Replies
Juliet,
This is a difficult question to answer without knowing the feature set of the Microsoft stack which would be implemented in a future WT. Up to now the Microsoft BT implementation on CE has been pretty basic compared to the version in Windows Mobile (which itself is quite limited). Having the Stonestreet stack on our CE units has therefore been an advantage since it has a richer user interface and feature set in comparison to the Microsoft CE BT stack. However, I think most WT users are not really concerned about which BT stack is implemented as long as it provides full support for connectivity to printers,R507 scanner and audio headsets with a Wizard interface to help with the initial config and pairing. If the MS stack can provide similar functionality & API's in these areas to Stonestreet then I don't see any issue with switching to it but I am not confident that it can unless we are moving to Windows Mobile for a future product.
Assuming we kept the Stonestreet stack on a future product (or preferably allowed the developer to choose between MS and SS as we do on the WM units), I think we need BT Explorer to be usable with non-touch displays since it is required for demo and test purposes. Best Regards, Ian Hatton EMS EMEA