Go for the 6000L or hold out for the 6000W?

[Ethereal]

Using Bluetooth with a 1xRTT Bluetooth phone is a much more flexible solution.

Yeah, and I have a T608, but that adds up to 2 devices on the belt instead of just one--not at all prohibitive, but not ideal...

[jerrybme]

I have yet to find a Japanese retailer that will sell/ship overseas.)

I bought my C750 from a Japanese retailer on ebay. He says he can ship the 6000W for around $910, but he claims there\'s not much demand for them. (at $910, I\'m not surprized). But if you\'re interested I can send you his email address.

Cheers,
Jerry

[chyang]

I have yet to find a Japanese retailer that will sell/ship overseas.)

I bought my C750 from a Japanese retailer on ebay. He says he can ship the 6000W for around $910, but he claims there\'s not much demand for them. (at $910, I\'m not surprized). But if you\'re interested I can send you his email address.

Cheers,
Jerry

Why is it so expensive? Incredible!  :shock:

[treke]

I have yet to find a Japanese retailer that will sell/ship overseas.)

I bought my C750 from a Japanese retailer on ebay. He says he can ship the 6000W for around $910, but he claims there\'s not much demand for them. (at $910, I\'m not surprized). But if you\'re interested I can send you his email address.

Cheers,
Jerry

The pricing is really a bummer. I\'d considred getting a 6000w for the bluetooth and the transreflective screen, but a 900 bucks it\'s definitly a no go.

[rjamestaylor]

Maybe this not making the SL-6000W available is a gimmick to get people to buy the 1xRTT card.    Maybe someone like Sprint even paid Sharp off to go that route.

Maybe Bluetooth isn\'t a compelling feature in the US marketplace...

I\'m quite interested in the 6000L. I thought I might like clamshell that one Sharp engineer carried around with him but the vertical/flat orientation is familiar to me (and the bulk of the marketplace).

Honestly I am more interested in the built-in 802.11b than the presence/absence of BT.  But then I\'m a thin client application developer who needs network connectivity like fish need water. I also work out of T-Mobile hotspots more often than not (Proof of my affliction) and buying another add-in card is not a pleasant thought. Which makes me sympathize with you BT lovers/needers.

The other thing that interests me is now that the WiFi is built-in does the unit (hardware/software) work more efficiently with finer control to preserve battery life longer?  The same question would hold true for BT built-in vs add-on.

I see myself making a purchase in the near future. Probably after I get the wife a new dining table to ease her pain a bit...

[DrWowe]

Maybe Bluetooth isn\'t a compelling feature in the US marketplace...  

It seems as thought all the Japanese manufacturers think so.  When I was shopping for a subnotebook recently, I noticed that none of the japanese offerings had built-in bluetooth, but in many cases, the same notebook imported from Japan did have it.  Some of last years US models did have it.  So my guess is, that they included bluetooth in one product cycle, it didn\'t sell that well, so they gave up.

(Does Sony still sell any Clie\'s with BT?  That\'s about the only exception I can think of)

[ganoe]

Maybe Bluetooth isn\'t a compelling feature in the US marketplace...  

(Does Sony still sell any Clie\'s with BT?  That\'s about the only exception I can think of)

My understanding is that Sony is specifically not including Bluetooth in some of their Clie US models (TH55 for example).

The simple fact of the matter is that the average US consumer has no idea that Bluetooth even exists, let alone what it can be used for.  You can\'t be compelled by something which you don\'t know exists.

[Ethereal]

The simple fact of the matter is that the average US consumer has no idea that Bluetooth even exists, let alone what it can be used for.  You can\'t be compelled by something which you don\'t know exists.

They may not know what \"Bluetooth\" is, but whatever it\'s called, they would understand \"check email or surf the web from anywhere that you have cell service,\" if only Sharp (or another manufacturer) would articulate the advantages of BT technology.

Consumers (OK, some of them) \"get\" the usefulness of WiFi for their mobile devices, even though it accelerates battery drain and requires someone else (your workplace, your favorite Starbucks, etc) to supply the infrastructure to use it.  Bluetooth is the mobile data connectivity standard for the \"rugged individualist\" who wants internet access wherever he is, not just while drinking a $6 latte.

[rjamestaylor]

The simple fact of the matter is that the average US consumer has no idea that Bluetooth even exists, let alone what it can be used for.  You can\'t be compelled by something which you don\'t know exists.

They may not know what \"Bluetooth\" is, but whatever it\'s called, they would understand \"check email or surf the web from anywhere that you have cell service,\" if only Sharp (or another manufacturer) would articulate the advantages of BT technology.

Oops. That\'s not what BlueTooth is nor what it does. BlueTooth is a peripheral connection technology that replaces short cables that tangle, clutter and become sentient (under my desk, anyway). You can use BT connections to do the things you suggest but you by no means need BT to do them; in fact, having BT alone won\'t allow you to check email wherever you have cell service -- you still need a phone and a service plan that allows you to check email. The same can be done with a cable.

Consumers (OK, some of them) \"get\" the usefulness of WiFi for their mobile devices, even though it accelerates battery drain and requires someone else (your workplace, your favorite Starbucks, etc) to supply the infrastructure to use it.  Bluetooth is the mobile data connectivity standard for the \"rugged individualist\" who wants internet access wherever he is, not just while drinking a $6 latte.

I really don\'t know what you are referring to here. Without some kind of access provider you\'re dead in the water with either 802.11b or BT or CAT5, or Coax, or... you get the idea, I hope.

So perhaps its not quite true that the average US consumer has no idea what BT is or what it allows one to do. Maybe some of the above average consummers have trouble, too.   :wink:

[elvis]

BT is so overpriced it is ridiculous. I\'ve been eye it to rid myself of a large tangle of cables but the sticker shock makes me retreat away and stick with the cables.

[DrWowe]

Oops. That\'s not what BlueTooth is nor what it does.

You obviously don\'t work in marketing.  

The way to get customers to want to buy some technological mumbo-jumbo is to give examples of useful scenerios where the technology plays a part.

Not to tell the guy \"what it is and does.\"

[DrWowe]

BT is so overpriced it is ridiculous. I\'ve been eye it to rid myself of a large tangle of cables but the sticker shock makes me retreat away and stick with the cables.

Chicken and egg.  Supply and demand.  Price comes down when its mass produced and everything has a cheap bluetooth chip in it.

[yodabob]

I\'ve got a 6000L and wanted bluetooth as well, and also didn\'t want to give up the CF or SD slots while I was using bluetooth.  So I just plugged in my trusty AirCable bluetooth (which uses the connector on the bottom), set it up and am able to connect fine to my bluetooth phone.  Just like on my 5600.

[metal9966]

I think the W version will come out soon in the US, All three versions has diffrent release dates in Japan as well, so i just assume the US will be similar.

[Ethereal]

BlueTooth is a peripheral connection technology that replaces short cables that tangle

OK, fine.  Actually, Bluetooth was a Viking, or is a 2.4 Ghz spread-spectrum radio communication technology based upon a set of standardised profiles...etc, but no consumer is any more interested in that than in seeing schematics of a clock radio before buying one.

While there are countless \"end user\" things that Bluetooth does, including command dialing, virtual LAN, file transfer, and wireless audio, the \"killer app\" (based both on what I read in tech publications and my own personal experience with friends and colleagues marveling \"and you can use it to connect...anywhere?...anywhere?) for BT connectivity seems to be mobile internet via cell phone.

True, one must have a BT-enabled cell phone from a provider that offers data services, but that\'s not an incredibly difficult thing, unless (like me) one demands CDMA coverage as well.  Word on the street (I don\'t use GSM, so I can\'t speak from experience) is that T-Mo permits HTTP access without even paying for a data plan, and a large number of GSM phones are BT-enabled, even if those buying and using them don\'t know it.  CDMA is catching up, slowly: Verizon will soon be offering a Motorola CDMA phone with BT that was recently approved by the FCC.
 

Without some kind of access provider you\'re dead in the water with either 802.11b or BT or CAT5, or Coax,

True, but BT is the most convenient way (who wants to carry a cable to connect their PDA and cell phone?) to get access from a \"provider\" that can provide access that reaches farther than the exit door at Starbucks.