Unfortunately this has to be tested in order to publish it. Maybe a comparisson page ould be better suited for this task. I'm looking for a stack that has an implemented HFP server rather than client. While in reality this stack offers only 4 services. The article sais that "The Toshiba stack supports one of the more comprehensive list of Bluetooth profiles" and lists 15 profiles. I cannot contribute about this, but I would like to see a separation of client and sever capabilites of those bluetooth stacks. Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.254.6.200 ( talk) 04:54, 6 June 2013 (UTC) Suggestion "Generally, only a single stack can be used at any time: switching usually requires uninstalling the current stack, although a trace of previous stacks remains in the registry" - why is this uncited, Windows-specific information in the definition of Bluetooth stack? -Preceding unsigned comment added by Shinyplasticbag ( talk Īs of Windows 8, Windows is no longer limited to USB-only radios. Lathe26 19:41, (UTC) Windows specific cruft? From my own experience as a programmer, these can be subjective things and what one person calls "clumsy" can be another person's "elegant". These include "probably the simplest and most powerful API to use", "this has the most pleasant and intuitive user interface", and "the API is the most clumsy of all those available". User 194.116.180.250, I have removed some of your text that may have leaned too much into the opinion region. Should this simply be removed an a pointer to an external website listing one or more of the implementations put in its place? "There are many embedded implementations of the Bluetooth protocol stack, generally focusing on memory and CPU constraints of those platforms." - Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.74.172.39 ( talk) 17:45, 15 August 2013 (UTC) NPOV violations The list of embedded stacks reads like a who's who of the Bluetooth stack peddler market.
#How to completely remove toshiba bluetooth stack mac os x
7 Inaccuracies Regarding Mac OS X profile support.
5 Links to technical terminology lacking.
0 kommentar(er)
