Logitech MX Products are incompatible with AirPods
support.logi.com
support.logi.com
If you switch the Logitech device to use their "unifying" adapter, which doesn't use bluetooth but a different proprietary wireless protocol, the problem goes away.
Logitech acknowledged the problem about six months ago but thus far have deflected any further questions about a fix.
Could you elaborate?
"endangers the use or functioning of a safety-related radiocommunications system, or significantly degrades or obstructs, or repeatedly interrupts, the use or functioning of radio apparatus or radio-sensitive equipment."
So if one Bluetooth device interferes with another, but not other bands, then it won’t be breaking any laws. But it might be breaking a contract about the use of the Bluetooth or Wi-Fi logos.
And what evidence is there that Logitech MX products don't?
Previously I used a wired mouse, plugged into the dock, which worked great. However, I needed a new mouse as that one started to fail and the only options available through my company were wireless.
The reason I ask is I have noticed this issue too when too many things are placed between the receiver and the device.
I didn't have anything other than the laptop between the receiver and the mouse. I was going to try and move it closer to see if it helped, but with some of the other cables plugged into it, I can't really move it much.
[1] https://www.caldigit.com/wireless-keyboard-mouse-not-working...
But that’s a wild ass guess.
Not exactly the same, but makes me reminisce the days of the iPod nano. It offered FM radio using the headphone cables as an antenna. I haven’t seen that supported anywhere since, which is a shame because I’d really like to get local stations on my phone.
https://www.amazon.com/Ulefone-Power-Armor-13-Smartphone/dp/...
https://crgsoft.com/the-list-of-2019-smartphones-that-have-f...
https://www.reddit.com/r/MotoG/comments/u2dvvp/any_current_m...
It was very common in previous decades because it was cheaper and allowed more room in the device (the alternative was the metal “pull to extend” antennas).
I had that come with a cheap motorola phone (3 years ago or so)
https://www.motorola-support.com/uk-en/?page=topic/applicati...
So not ubiquitous but not that rare either.
I blame the French. They introduced a law that forbids radio receivers that don't support DAB radio, as a way to make the newer DAB format take off. But globally, DAB never did so phone hardware don't have it. In the EU, distribution chains often cross borders and it would be too bothersome to have models with special firmware just for France — so instead, nobody gets FM-radio.
I bought last year a DAB compatible radio for my car, only to realise that it is worse than FM :)
That was common on phones in general. Headphones acted as antenna.
If you open the FM radio app without connecting wired headphones, it'll ask you to connect it.
This was common in Android phones as well.
My current Android phone does not have headphone jack. And I can't use FM radio (although there are services that play radio over the internet, but that isn't really the same...).
------
About phones which have the capability but which are disabled, I wonder if it's because of security implications.
Where I live, the allowed frequencies were from 87 MHz to 108 MHz or something. Consumer FM radios could only be tuned in this range.
That's because on frequencies outside this range, other transmissions — for example, police transmissions — might be taking place.
The aforementioned allowed range is different in different countries.
Also, in my country long long ago (like, ≈50 years ago) you needed to get the permission of the government (via a license or something) to get a radio. You couldn't just go to a store and buy one. That changed later, however.
Now that I think about it, it might have something to do with semi-secret transmissions happening on frequencies outside the allowed range.
A friend told me it's possible to take apart the radio and tune to non-standard frequencies because in most radios the "dial" to select the allowed range really works by physically jamming the dial with another block. If you remove that block, you could keep turning that dial. Haven't tried this myself, so take that with a pinch of salt.
Second, hams are not vindictive people, and most interference issues are sorted out locally, possibly with support from the ARRL. Some sources of interference can be very hard to find.
The FCC only levies massive fines when their instructions are being ignored. They don’t play games, that’s true.
Or a clip on, something like this : https://www.cablechick.com.au/cables/ferrite-core-rfi-and-em...
https://resources.altium.com/p/how-do-ferrite-beads-work-and...
Likely cost savings combined with design considerations ("these knobs look ugly").
That was a bad time.
So odd.
Don't have the equipment to test or diagnose, but empirically, having moved to using balanced cabling from point of analog conversion all the way to amp input, there's no sounds coming out of my headphones that shouldn't be.
Until you have to do the dusting, and you’ve got a tangle of cables in your way.
I have a pair of desktop speakers that have both a USB input (to an onboard DAC) and an analog input; originally, I had the USB input connected to an iMac and used the analog input to plug into my work laptop. Recently, I swapped the iMac for a Mac Studio and a Studio Display, and figured that I could just unplug the Thunderbolt cable to the display from the computer and plug it into the laptop. I kept using the analog cable, though, because I wanted to keep the speakers directly plugged into the computer rather than the hub on the display, probably due to irrational audiophile-esque superstition that this would make the sound laggy or the highs less chocolaty or whatever. (More seriously, I've heard of DACs having stuttering issues when they're run through hubs, and hey, I had the cable, right.)
And the first time I plugged the analog cable into the same laptop that I'd been using, the only difference being that the Thunderbolt cable was also plugged into it, it was terrible.
Despite the audiophile joke above, I don't mean terrible in some kind of "this cable is making the sound subjectively worse" fashion, I mean terrible in a "when no sound is playing, I can hear grinding electrical noise going BZZZZZbzzzzGRRRFTTTTgrrnkFFFFNK constantly" fashion. The problem was clearly the Thunderbolt cable, even though it wasn't involved in the audio circuit at all. It's like it had turned into its own little RF interference generator. While I only had the one Thunderbolt cable so I couldn't swap it, the interference went through two different analog cables.
(This is not as weird as hearing RF interference over one specific pair of headphones from a headphone amp when nothing was playing but only when I was using a specific USB cable running to the same outboard DAC, which also happened to me years ago.)
https://www.corning.com/optical-cables-by-corning/worldwide/...
As soon as I stand up my headphones become violently disconnected from my computer. Cables also interfere with each other and all the other items on my desk.
It's just different sets of compromises.
Of course, it has the dongle issue which limits the usage to certain devices (Xbox and Windows in my case, I haven't tested the dongle on my Mac or Linux).
"flow of electrons in a copper wire" has little to do with the speed of a signal transmitted via electrons in a copper wire - what we care about here is propogation delay[1]. Assuming that the speed is about c in air (a bit less but whatever) and at least 0.6c in copper, and assuming a minimum threshold of say 1ms of delay being noticeable to an audiophile, then you would need a headphone cable about 450km in length to noticed the difference.
> Wired sound infinitely nicer sounding
There are good sounding wireless headphones and terrible sounding wired headphones. The drawbacks is that with wireless headphones you can't control the sound stack and are dependent on the manufacturer to provide high quality drivers, amplification, and digital to analog conversion all built into the device.
> much lower latency
...is an engineering problem.
> Will we ever have a day when wireless will be sufficiently low latency?
A company already markets their wireless headphones directly to musicians, which is basically the threshold of low latency you need to meet; realtime monitoring [1]. Does it accomplish what it set out to do? Not sure, but seems like it's good enough for some people.
Ultimately it comes down to exactly what I said, which is that there are tradeoffs to using wired vs. wireless headphones and one is not intrinsically better than the other. You thinking that something sounds "infinitely better" doesn't make the rest of those tradeoffs not meaningful to other people.
[1] https://aiaiai.audio/headphones/tma-2-studio-wireless-plus
On the other hand, instead of doing loads of research and buying new equipment, I can just connect my headphones or speakers by Bluetooth and the noise is gone.
Now I have to deal with the annoyances of Bluetooth which are not zero either. But it's a great tradeoff for me.
Backpacks are also a recurring offender.
Many pieces of clothing... or objects you regularly traverse, can become a wire trap.
Those objects are the bait & fishing rod, and your wires are the fish :)
A high bandwidth data cables (aka wires) does introduce RF noise / EMIs. That's why ferrite bead were invented to reduce the noise.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_bead
The reason some ethernet cable and audio cables don't have ferrite beads is because they have internal metal mesh EMI shielding. But not all cables have that.
That's not to say it's not using some archaic weak encryption scheme left in for backwards compatability though.
GSM uses time division multiplex, which means it shares the 8-timeslot channel with 6 more devices (7 devices + 1 signalling), meaning your phone transmits for 577us, then waits quietly for all the 7 timeslots that other devices use (so, for 4.039 milliseconds - 7x577us), and again transmits for 577us, and again waits. Bursts of power every ~4.6milliseconds make a noise that we can actually hear at a bit over 200Hz.
To simplify, up to 7 users (+1 timeslot for signalling) share the same channel/frequency, but each of them is allowed to transmit only 1/8 of the time (even less, due to guard intervals). This basically means, that your phone transmitted for a bit over 0.5 milliseconds (577us), then waited quietly for 7 more intervals like that for other devices to transmit, then your phone transmitted again, and the affected speakers "buzzed" because of these 577ms bursts of power every 4.616 milliseconds (this causes a buzz in the frequency range we can actually hear).
Good ol moto razr
Compressed air will never get it out. It gets really compacted in there. Don't be afraid of using a needle, the port is quite rugged. Just avoid the contacts in the middle.
What a happy world. There's enough interference in cabling, but most time it's not enough to cause any issues. Had a case once where an AP with PoE did not work properly (started, then died, repeat) and the issue was that we had to much cable somewhere and rolled it. Interference caused issues, despite using STP and Cat. 6...
16” MBP Intel on Monterey 1. Connect headphones, assuming mouse is already connected. 2. Turn off mouse. 3. Join call. 4. Turn mouse back on.
You might ask, "how do you know that the Logitech devices were to blame and not one of those other devices?"
Because I tested one-by-one removing each of the culprits and observing the results: - Just removing the game controllers from the room made no change - Just switching to a wired headset made no change - Switching the Logitech devices to bluetooth changed how _often_ the problems surfaced, but didn't remove the problems - Swapping the Logitech devices out for wired replacements solved the problem -- no more interference issues.
I've gone all wired and dumped my Logitech wireless peripherals and not looked back. It was actually what got me into mechanical keyboards anyways, and that's a fun rabbit-hole I've been enjoying.
Everyone I know, from casual users to gamers, has had problems with logitech mouse button failures. Sometimes within months of purchase, even on their high end gaming mice that cost well north of $100, the buttons will stop working or start double-clicking.
Their Unify dongle usually has to be at the end of a USB extension cable for it to work at all, for me. I don't even try it without, anymore.
Asus are now selling mice with hot swappable switches. I made the (sorry) switch myself after my G903 died, ie I couldn't hold the buttons steady.
I see now that I should be able to source Japanese Omron switches that might be a bit better; the replacement in the G903 requires some patience and (to be developed in my case) skill, but it's not like I can break it any further. Will grab extra spares for my Chakram X at the same time.
0. https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/o1jvsy/logitech_a...
I wonder if they've changed something about the buttons.
The unifying receiver is unusable through a hub or connected monitor, and I don't have enough USB-A ports on the dongle to keep the unifying receiver connected all the time.
Switched to an apple keyboard, and never experienced the problem with the MX mouse connected.
https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/requests/new
(Interference; Unlicensed.)
I’m all for using the federal agency complaint process but this is dumb.
I'm not confident in making any accurate predictions beyond that, but it's not my job to predict what they'll do — it's my job as a consumer to report problems to them, and let them act or not as they see fit. Refusing to report a problem just because (made up example) I think they don't care about Bluetooth has a non-zero probability of being a variant of the Bystander Problem. And however likely or unlikely that may be to any of us, it's got better odds than if we don't report it at all. So I say:
Report the issue as perceived, and give them a chance to surprise you with a useful outcome from that.
Trust me - they are very well aware of this - and Part 15 is already written with this in mind. No one is surprised that all the junk in the ISM band interferes - as I said elsewhere I think many of us are constantly amazed it works as well as it does.
This is also not enforceable interference - it does not meet the definition of “harmful interference”
> Report the issue as perceived, and give them a chance to surprise you with a useful outcome from that.
My question still remains - what do you think or hope this will accomplish?
Are you hoping they will carve out a slice of new spectrum for AirPods and give it to Apple for free?
> Refusing to report a problem just because (made up example) I think they don't care about Bluetooth
It’s not that they don’t care - it’s that this is getting really outside the scope of their regulations.
You do you, but the point of the federal complaint process is, well …“By filing a consumer complaint and telling your story, you contribute to federal enforcement and consumer protection efforts”
Consumer protection meaning scams and fraud over telecommunication or provision of services - its not a place to vent because your shitty electronics don’t work all the time - which is not fraud even though you may feel cheated. And there are no rules broken to enforce. Having read complaints I know that yours won’t nearly be the dumbest by far but it’s still dumb.
No.
> Consumer protection meaning scams and fraud over telecommunication or provision of services
It was their choice to invite consumer complaints about radio interference in unlicensed bands using a crafted UI.
> Having read complaints I know that yours won’t nearly be the dumbest by far but it’s still dumb.
Please don’t be unproductively insulting and vicious at HN.
When I go to the FCC link you posted, I don't even see what you're talking about. I see a menu of: TV, Phone, Internet, Radio, Access for People with Disabilities, and Emergency Communications, Affordable Connectivity Program and "Tell us Your Story". None of those initial menu options would even apply - this isn't disrupting your TV, Phone, Internet or broadcast radio services. "Tell us your story" is just a free text entry form - nothing about radio interference/unlicensed.
So maybe you can clarify.
>> Are you hoping they will carve out a slice of new spectrum for AirPods and give it to Apple for free?
> No.
Well then what, really? Why not just call the police then? If each company is selling an FCC certified device that is running within the parameters of its certification (which is likely the case) - the FCC has nothing to act on. You are asking the feds to intervene on no actual rule breaking. Devices sharing the "trash" ISM band are often going to interfere even when operating within specification. You might have a better bet with the FTC or a civil case. Yes, it would be nice if Logitech or Apple did something to play nice, but it's not a federal communications regulations issue.
Also you asked for the FCC to respond. If you look at the FAQ, the FCC does not directly respond to consumer complaints - it would totally overwhelm them with the terrible signal to noise ratio. They indirectly respond insofar as demanding a response from the provider for service related issues https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/2050828...
I consider the chances of a personal response from the FCC to be vanishingly small.
Options that are what's wrong:
They are breaking the rules of the ISM band (the free 2.4GHz band). Transmitting too strongly or with too much leakage. This is the easiest way to cause the problems listed and would get them in the most trouble (because it's trouble with the FCC), but is unlikely.
In spec Bluetooth implementation and in spec ISM band, but logitech are using Bluetooth in a way that's causing a problem for airpods. If this were the case it would be arguably an airpod problem, but it's unlikely because no other device manages to achieve this.
Out of spec Bluetooth implementation, close enough in protocol to do Bluetooth like things (and get a link through) but something like to wide a rolloff on the Bluetooth channels so it interferes with other BT devices in a way it shouldn't. Without getting out a spectrum analyser this is to me the most likely explanation of how you could achieve the described behaviour. Interestingly this doesn't get you in trouble with the FCC, it gets you in trouble with the Bluetooth SIG. The way Bluetooth IP works is that you are only allowed to use it if you use it correctly and are certified. Presumably Logitech fudged some radio tests.
The devices both run in the 2.4 GHz band so, no, leakage outside the band or even excess power is not the “easiest way” this is causing problems - it’s probably much more mundane.
Any vendor can make a device using that band (there are many conditions, but in principle it is open to anyone). One vendors signal is another vendors noise. Each vendor needs to live with that fact. That could, for example, mean accepting that their device will sometimes simply not work.
Compare with licensed bands such as the ones used for LTE. These are (basically) allocated to individual parties for their exclusive use (ie, nobody else can interfere). If a device interferes with those bands, the FCC can take enforcement action (eventually).
My Airpods also caused me lose wifi connectivity on my Macbook when using 2.4Ghz wifi (802.11n to an old Buffalo WZR-HP-AG300H/WZR-600DHP running OpenWRT [1]). The issue only happened when using the airpods, and only when using the 2.4Ghz network. Switching to 5ghz solved the issue, and I've since switched to wired.
I was kind of stunned that Apple's own wifi was incompatible with Apple's own bluetooth.
[1] while I'm at it, anyone have a recommendation for a modern access point that can run OpenWRT with Wifi 5 (ac) or Wifi 6 (ax)?
I like its ergo layout, key feel, and key travel distance [1]. I just bought a new one after the last one would become unreliable on keypresses, and I can't shake the feeling that it was just wireless performance issue, not actual key detection issue.
There appear to be no other keyboard with similar features, but wired (and I'm not up to modding it, as some have done).
I feel frustrated that Apple's keyboards have great wired/wireless connectivity and horrendous ergonomics, and ergonomic keyboards have terrible connectivity options.
(lol: just as I was typing this comment I've started having key issues on this new keyboard too, adding evidence that the previous one just had wireless issues.)
[1] don't get me started on mechanical devices! I actually tried a couple, and even got a Cherry Key sampler, and decided that they really weren't for me.
and I haven't had ANY of the latency or key repeating that I had with the Sculpt.
The Surface Sculpt uses Bluetooth and in my office I'd regularly have the keyboard lagging, like I'd type a word and a few seconds later it would appear. At home it worked fine, but it was unusable in the office.
The Sculpt uses a proprietary dongle, which I still use at home, but macOS on my M1 MacBook Pro has a weird issue where it often does not connect. I need to remove and reinsert the keyboard's dongle from the USB-C dongle - removing and reinserting the USB-C dongle from the laptop does not fix it. I have no issues using it on my Linux laptop with USB-C, so it seems to be an Apple bug.
Another thing you might want to check is that your mobile phone is not near the keyboard or dongle, I find this can also cause key dropping/sluggishness.
It's a shame they insist on using this proprietary dongle, as like you say, it's a great keyboard otherwise – another bad thing about it is that if you lose the dongle, you have to replace the entire set as they are paired in the factory. I'm on my third Sculpt because keys eventually fall off, but it gets pretty heavy usage so I don't feel too hard done to and the last one was replaced under the 3 year warranty.
I have a Linksys EA8300 with openwrt installed. It was simple to flash and works reliably. It supports 802.11ac.
I was unable to find the the opposite combination.
That being said, I think I should have listed it as: Linksys E8450 and Belkin RT3200. Only difference is the Linksys is black and the Belkin is white. Internal HW is (so far) identical.
Unrelated to this issue, I bought a Bluetooth audio-to-analog out dongle to stream to my speakers, only to find out that I could not disconnect any paired device from it. It automatically connected to any paired device if the other device's Bluetooth is on. The moment I forcefully disconnect it forcefully connected again. I searched the web to see others' exact same issue and Logitech was shamelessly marketing this stupid bug as a "feature" that "keeps devices connected" with no way to disable it.
I've quit using it, and never, ever recommended any Logitech product again to anybody.
From what I've seen, Logitech devices seem to have the transmit power set very high. Like use-it-from-multiple-rooms-away high. I have no idea why they do this, but it tends to make my PCs take a bit longer to detect other Bluetooth devices in the area. But not to the point that they won't connect or function. This includes pretty janky stuff like my hand-built keyboard that uses nice!nano boards.
It seems that combining this with the AirPods' existing issues in 2.4GHz-heavy environments and you've got a recipe for connectivity problems.
Regardless, my issue can be solved via software: it's not "always connecting because of high tx power". I have other Bluetooth devices paired and none of them try to connect to other peers when I forcibly disconnect them until I explicitly hit connect or do a power cycle. On the other hand, the Logitech one does, which is literally the single reason for me to ditch it and never recommend a Logitech device to anyone again.
If this notice is specially written for Airpods and not just any Bluetooth headset then it might as well be an Airpods problem.
I've never had issues with the dongles that come with Logitech on any of my devices. Bluetooth is terrible for high-frequency input and audio streaming anyway, so the in my experience the dongles are a much better solution.
My headphones don't have this behavior, my home Bluetooth speakers (not dongle, speakers themselves have BT) don't do it, my Bluetooth audio enabled TV doesn't do it, then why does the dongle do?
I don't see any logical explanation.
So I have three Intel-based MacBook Pros but of different model years - 2017 (15in), early-2019 (13in), and mid-2019 (16in).
The mid-2019 16in MacBook Pro in combination with Logitech MX Mouse (Mac version) and AirPod Pros cause significant interference on the microphone.
The result? I sound like a "robot" on Zoom calls. It drives me crazy - enough to revert back to my early-2019 laptop to handle calls.
I'm not really sure what to do here other than remove one of those factors from the equation... and I'm not sure the dongle is compatible with the Mac-version of the MX Master mouse.
In the beginning, I only had the MX (Mac Specific) mouse, and the problem did not happen very often. On occasion, but not too bad. After one of the OS updates, it was a non-stop issue. Disabling the auto switching (between Apple devices) helped a little.
Later, I also bought the MX Keys (Mac Specific) keyboard. I started having issues with a non-Apple headset on/off out of the blue. I could never use my AirPods with my laptop for anything other than listening to music. I tried everything from killing Bluetooth pref, to resetting my AirPods.
What finally solved it? I deleted all Logitech Devices from my laptop. Reset all Bluetooth settings. Re-paired my AirPods. I have not had a single problem in audio quality for 3 months now.
My Logitech devices are just sitting off to the side collecting dust now.
My solution is: 1. Connect headphones, assuming mouse is already connected. 2. Turn off mouse. 3. Join call. 4. Turn mouse back on.
Since then, Zoom works mostly, google meets requires it every time.
It's mostly fine, but I also step away from my desk. I wish I could also prioritize my microphone.
1. Webcam (if I'm at my desk, I have my webcam) 2. MacBook Pro (if I'm away from my desk, my computer is still probably within range of my MX mouse)
Edited: forgot the words "do not reference"
This might be a silly question, but I'm assuming the AirPods are connected to the same MBP? I'm finding this entire conversation fascinating because I routinely use a Logitech MX (anywhere 3) for Mac mouse and Airpods (Pro). However, the mouse is connected to a Mac Mini and my Airpods to my iphone. I take all of my Zoom calls from my iPhone and dual connect to Zoom if I need to share my screen.
I don't think I've ever had massive amounts of interference between the AirPods and my mouse. I'm wondering if this is a case where connecting to two different devices is somehow mitigating this issue.
I've also done it where my MX mouse is connected to my MBP, but my AirPods are connected to my iPhone. That works fine!
The Bluetooth and USB experience with this machine has been nothing but trouble for me.
Bluetooth audio is in a sorry state, unfortunately.
It’s not clear whether Logitech is the only party at fault here. WiMax could be conflicting with BT, and since WiMax is proprietary, the blame for that rests on Apple.
This kind of response makes me very angry. Apple release betas of their OS a good four months in advance of full release. It is unacceptable for big vendors to not have their products working when the final release drops. Does Logitech really want people to walk into a store and buy a brand new device that doesn’t work with the majority of theoretically supported Apple devices?
I own a bunch of MX Products and everything works just fine when I'm using any of my bluetooth audio devices (sony, creative, bose, plantronics).
Removing the MX products completely solved the problems with every other Bluetooth device I have.
Never had any issues.
They could just have displayed the text but no, they need some gratuitous js.
The way to solve this was to replace my old Bluetooth 4.0 USB adapter with a newer Bluetooth 5.0 USB adapter. The problem disappeared and never came back.
Bluetooth 5.0 has a wider bandwidth and can more easily work with Audio and HID devices.
In that thread people are using built-in Bluetooth adapters so I am afraid they will never completely solve their problems.
And by the way, the numbers "1 2 3" on the Logitech mouse are not "bands" as some on that thread believe. They are just different pairing profiles.
I bought an MX Master 3 for Mac mouse for my Silicon Mac Mini about a year and a half ago but quickly shelved it because the cursor would frequently make irritating little jumps. I replaced it with an Apple Magic Touchpad (I don't love the Magic Mouse) because, at least at the time, I was under the impression that the jumpiness was due to a OS-level bug affecting all non-Apple mice. I did have Airpods at the time but I don't recall if I ever attempted to use them alongside the Logitech mouse.
The timing is fortuitous because, on a whim last night, I got my MX Master 3 out of storage and put it on a charger. I figured that, with ~18 months of macOS updates, perhaps it'll work with my Mac Mini on bluetooth or using the Logi Bolt USB adapter, which I don't own yet (I guess the Bolt is different from the Unifying Receiver... although irritatingly neither comes in USB-C).
I'm intrigued by the hypothesis that Logitech is remaining quiet because their products may be violating FCC rules, specifically, part 15 of the FCC rules: "this device may not cause harmful interference". If I can replicate the AirPods issue, or if I see some other weird behavior with the Logitech mouse, I might just break out my HackRF, YARD Stick One, or Ubertooth One. I'm a total noob at radiofrequency stuff, and I'm only slightly less of a noob with running specialty software, but I wonder if I can spot some unexpected RF emissions.
I think you misunderstand what harmful interference means - it has a specific regulatory meaning - and the fact that it causes you grief with your other Part 15 devices doesn’t apply. If that were the case the FCC would be spending all their time just dealing with everyone’s shitty stereo equipment not working.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/2.1
> but I wonder if I can spot some unexpected RF emissions.
I highly doubt it - this stuff was already certified. On the other hand it’s not surprising that devices physically near running in the same frequency band will have some undesired operation - this is why safety critical communications don’t operate in an unlicensed band. Spread spectrum isn’t completely magic (as an EE I’m still sometimes amazed any of this shit works at all) —- or maybe I should say it is magic but it still has to come to terms with physical realities.
That means that the device can not cause interference to a higher priority service. All the devices are at the same priority.
It also means that the FCC doesn't have to care...
Logi Bolt is actually a proprietary layer on top of Bluetooth Low Energy. Logitech claims that it should suffer less in face of congestion on the band compared to regular BLE, but they have not revealed how: I wonder if they make it worse for other devices by transmitting on more BLE channels.
No squeaky wheel? No grease.
In fact, they probably bet on users giving up and buying the Logitech equivalent wireless earbuds.
I truly hope people at Logi are smarter than this.
Yes. The sell many models of bluetooth keyboards and mice for almost as long as Bluetooth has existed.
I've run into a bug that continues to exist in the most recent version of the iOS app for these cameras that I have to work around using Mitmproxy. The app won't "go live" because whatever it's doing to detect an "Internet connection" is failing on a network I use. Adding Mitmproxy to the mix, paradoxically, solves the problem.
I'd love to pull packet traces, run debug builds of the app, etc, to help fix the problem. I can't be the only one having the problem. The devices suit my purposes well but I hate having to stick one more moving part into the mix just to get them to work.
Is it an issue with just AirPods rather than Pros?
I have two mx master 3's on my desk, and no problems while using the sony wf1000 xm4's which also tend to saturate bluetooth bandwidth.
My money is on Apple doing something non standard, not Logi.
You're not alone in this: https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comments/jfnbbk/til_usb_30...
I've seen this problem cause people with WiFi dongles to lose 2.4GHz connectivity. The solution was often to use a USB 2.0 port, but these days you won't find as many of those.
There’s something about their software that makes me feel like it is going to spy on me and use all my computers resources.
Their craft keyboard also looks super nice, although I can’t imagine the wheel being useful without their software running.
I like flat keyboards. I don’t game. Who else makes premium stuff in the pc office segment?
Apparently their RF protocol is incompatible with having a USB 3 transceiver too close by, and it cannot be fixed.
So, wondering if problems resolve with an extension. If so, it would be odd for Logi not to know about it. They were the source of the original suggestion.
It's just a side effect of the frequency some devices operate at. It's a physics problem that's difficult to solve. Theoretically you could limit the bandwidth if your USB ports to USB2 but that's probably not what you want either.
Random search result that seems to explain the problem with some sources: https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comments/jfnbbk/til_usb_30...
Their software is atrocious, too. Steermouse to the rescue, thankfully.
Disclaimer: sony headphones, hhkb2 keyboard, and nintendo switch gamepad were tested on non-M1/Intel macbooks. The rest were tested on both intel and M1.
It doesn't take all that much interference to get a multi device Bluetooth piconet to see disturbance, perhaps a combination of interference sources is causing the Bluetooth performance on some Bluetooth adapter to fall back to lower speeds, ruining the experience for devices relying on high throughput Bluetooth.
I worked around this through using the unified receiver, but it's pretty crap that this is necessary.
furthermore I am using a Logitech MX Anywhere 3 mouse via bluetooth and at the same time use either Bose QC35 or EarBuds also via bluetooth. no problem. so that's that ...
I never looked back since switching to the unifying receiver.
Somebody needs to check with a SDR what is that Logitech is doing there
A lesson in how not to ask for help with a technical issue from front line support.