backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 16 comment(s) - last by TomZ.. on Aug 24 at 11:52 PM

Princeton PTM-UBT3S Bluetooth 2.0+EDR USB adapter  (Source: PC Watch)
Princeton thinks small with its new Bluetooth adapter

When it comes to mobile devices, smaller is often time better. We witnessed this last month with the release of the Logitech VX Nano wireless notebook mouse.

The VX Nano did away with the traditional, bulky RF receiver for a much smaller unit that barely juts out from the USB port. Logitech's assertion with the new design was that customers wouldn't need to remove the receiver due to its small size and thus eliminated the fear of breaking or losing the receiver.

Princeton is taking that same concept to heart with its new PTM-UBT3S Bluetooth 2.0+EDR USB adapter. The adapter measures just 14mm x 19mm x 4.5mm, weighs just 5.5 grams and will happily sync with any of your Bluetooth-enabled peripherals.

Princeton notes that the PTM-UBT3S is compatible with Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista and Mac OS X.

The tiny device will be available in Japan this September for 2,480 yen ($22 USD). There is no word on U.S. availability although it probably won't be long before the devices show up on eBay.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
USB
By Moishe on 8/24/2007 10:20:10 AM , Rating: 2
At this point we almost need to have a smaller standard set of USB ports on laptops so that you could have a bunch of tiny devices plugged in most of the time.
I actually had a dlink wifi USB nic for awhile that eventually broke because it stuck out too far (over 2 inches). Tiny is good.




RE: USB
By mdogs444 on 8/24/2007 10:22:19 AM , Rating: 2
It would be nice if they used those Mini-USB ports like they have on cell phones. It would make room for additional ports.


RE: USB
By omnicronx on 8/24/2007 11:00:23 AM , Rating: 3
The whole point of the USB standard in my mind is to keep everything universal (thus the name). It just wouldnt make sense if there were different cable sizes for different devices. I know cables like that of cell phones already convert to miniusb, but thats only device side. It would just cause more confusion, in the already confusing world of computers ;). Although it could be a good idea to include USB and miniUSB jacks on laptops though, giving you the best of both worlds.(still confusing though) My family already has it hard enough differentiating between usb and firewire ;)


RE: USB
By Suomynona on 8/24/2007 11:13:44 AM , Rating: 3
I don't think the problem is usually number of ports, but how close they are too each other and how unnecessarily chunky some peripherals are. Most laptops have 3+ USB ports, which should be plenty for almost everyone. The problem is idiotic companies that make cases for flash drives and other peripherals that are twice as thick as they need to be and prevent you from using two adjacent USB ports.


RE: USB
By omnicronx on 8/24/2007 11:25:48 AM , Rating: 2
But who is to blame for that? the usb spec or the company putting out flashdrives that don't fit ;). changing the pinout size should have no effect on the size of the flash unit. If the unit is bulky, it doesn't matter what connection you use. in fact if the connector was smaller, you would have less space if they were put close together, and if they are spaced out, it defies the whole purpose of having a smaller connection in the first place.


RE: USB
By GoodBytes on 8/24/2007 2:01:24 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, I take a knife or some sort and cut the excess plastic on the sides.


RE: USB
By TomZ on 8/24/2007 4:43:23 PM , Rating: 2
Obviously the size of the enclosure is the minimum required to fit all the stuff in it. There's no real reason for someone to design a product like that which is "too big."


RE: USB
By ZmaxDP on 8/24/2007 6:43:11 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe no "good" reason. However, since "style" is still a pretty big seller of computer peripherals, I can think of several USB keys that are significantly larger in the packaging department than what is on the inside. I've got one at my desk. Particularly those that come in cylinders, or the "ruggedized" ones... Look at NAS enclosures. There are a lot of those that could be a lot smaller. Then again, I'm sure in some cases the manufactures could produce something a lot smaller, but don't for somewhat legitimate business reasons. One being that older, larger, cheaper components that are still in stock are getting used up instead of newer, smaller components. Also, even if you upgrade to smaller components but you still have all your mold forms at the older larger size, why have to create new enclosures and pay that cost, however small, for designing and manufacturing newer enclosures? I think the latter is why my little USB key is half empty. Looks like the flash memory modules are a newer process technology than the old one of the same brand. So, smaller circuit board, smaller chips, but same casing!


RE: USB
By TomZ on 8/24/2007 11:26:09 PM , Rating: 2
You could be right about that. All the USB flash drives I have you can see they are minimally sized. Maybe there are other devices out there that are not.


RE: USB
By TomZ on 8/24/2007 11:03:14 AM , Rating: 2
I disagree - what we need is a standard module form factor for integrating small devices like this inside of the laptop's enclosure. USB is designed to be a connector, and so it doesn't accomodate the mechanical design requirements for a module.

There are some module form factors that are pseudo-standard already, e.g., "mini-PCI," but I don't know how broad those standards are.

Regarding smaller connectors, I don't like that idea either, because the smaller connectors are not as robust as full-size USB connectors. My new laptop has 5 USB connections anyway, and I don't see the point of more.


RE: USB
By Moishe on 8/24/2007 11:27:33 AM , Rating: 2
A nice upgrade system for these things would be nice... even if it were a few ports like this that could be accessed via a screw down panel (like laptop ram upgrade).

My point is, stop using the primary USB ports for things like this and relocate ports like this to somewhere out of the way so you can plug a tiny device in and leave it. Make each laptop have 4 of those and we'd be set.


RE: USB
By omnicronx on 8/24/2007 11:33:38 AM , Rating: 2
Ya thats a good idea, maybe a front CD drive panel that has space to fully put a device like this in your computer leaving it flush with the outside.


RE: USB
By TomZ on 8/24/2007 1:59:37 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, that's what I'm talking about. Laptops have these sorts of expansion areas already, however, I don't think there's any kind of industry-wide standard for them. I would guess the form factors and electrical interfaces are largely manufacturer-specific.

One other benefit to this approach is that wireless devices could take advantage of larger antennas. For example, most wireless network adapters in laptops have the electrical module that ties into a much larger antenna that is built into the either the body or the display portion of the laptop. My Inspiron has, as I understand it, either a three-element antenna, or three separate antennas (not sure which) built-in. The point being that small wireless devices could have performance-optimized antennas, instead of size-optimized antennas like you have now in USB-format devices.


RE: USB
By bfonnes on 8/24/2007 5:32:57 PM , Rating: 2
How about we just don't buy the laptop if the laptop doesn't have enough USB ports... That seems like the simple solution.


Not Bluetooth 2.1?
By iwod on 8/24/2007 10:21:43 PM , Rating: 2
I was hopping 2.1 will come out sooner.




RE: Not Bluetooth 2.1?
By TomZ on 8/24/2007 11:52:16 PM , Rating: 2
1. Bluetooth 2.1 was just accepted by the SIG on August 1, 2007, so it's too soon for products that use it

2. What is so great about 2.1 anyway - I don't see any changes there to get excited about. The next exciting release seems to be 3.0, which is still a ways in the future.


"This is from the DailyTech.com. It's a science website." -- Rush Limbaugh











botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki