>> Another Cons: Bluetooth fries the brain, its very very harmful for the >> health... And needs more energy than wi-fi that means less stand-by time.. > > Conjecture on the frying of brains. Largely as reliable as the word organic > on the side of something I buy in the store. (Define Organic. Carbon based. > All food consumable by humans is carbon based.) I thought Bluetooth was significantly lower power than Wifi...? > On the second. Yes when I'm using the n800 it does last less time than when > I'm not using it. (bluetooth VS standby.) However WiFi phones don't exist. When using Bluetooth one would expect the battery life to be reduced to some extent, add to this the fact that the CPU load is reasonably high as it is re-encoding PCM data (decoded from MP3 on the DSP) to SBC so it can be transmitted to and understood by the Bluetooth headset. The question is whether it's the Bluetooth transmitter or the CPU load which is causing the majority of the power drain? I don't think a Wifi phone would be much better - I'd guess that the power consumption of the Bluetooth transmitter is lower than the Wifi transmitter. Simon
