BMW M5 Forum and M6 Forums banner
1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,638 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
My current cellphone (Nokia 6100) is not Bluetooth compatible and I will need to get a new one to fit in the car.

I had originally ordered the Professional Telephone (cordless) but this option is no longer available and I have ordered Bluetooth preparation.

Please recommend a mobile phone.

My requirements are:

(1) TriBand for international coverage
(2) Bluetooth (E60 M5) compatible
(3) I prefer not to get a "flip" model
(4) I do not need/use built-in camera etc.

Your suggestions appreciated as always... :byebye:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,810 Posts
Interesting topic, and I would also post it towards the US guys as well (since I doubt the phones are the exact same and available in Europe as well as the US).

Its interesting that this comes up. Here is my take on the "phone situation" as my wife and I call it. And this also is one of my largest rants against iDrive.

My problem with Bluetooth.. and the BMW way of comminucations, is that it does not give you the ability to customize how your phone and car handle calls. Here is what I think BMW should have done with it, or at least what I want.

My understanding of the current system is that if a call comes in, it mutes the music, displays the caller-id info in iDrive, and plays ringtone. Fine. If it is someone that I want to talk to, meaning, it is ok to interupt my moment of solitude with my car.

Say my wife calls. Obviously, a VERY important call. Probably to ask my opinion on dinner plans, decorating ideas, or to harass me to stop driving the toy around and come mow the grass. In this case, I want the car/phone to recognize the caller-id info as an "important" call, and follow the current rules of "Mute music/display caller-id/play ring-tone." Now, say the boss calls, or a coworker/client/etc. Basically, a call I am willing to postpone, whatever that might be. I want my music it be left as it is, iDrive to display the caller-id, possibly a single tone to alert me. Finally, say someone like the "outlaws" (or, in-laws if you actually like them!) calls. I want that call to go directly to voicemail!

I don't see how that is too much to ask.

Will I get Bluetooth in my car? Sure, would be stupid not to, as I might change my mind later. Does that mean I will automatically jump to it and put it in my car? Nope. I don't use any of the phone features of the E39s, not even sure what it would take to get them working, and don't really care. That all said, I do need to get a new phone soon, and will likely go Bluetooth.

As to the question, Ashok, check the BMW website. I know on the US website there is a link that tells you the supported phones, along with the providers that offer them. I imagine that BMW.uk would offer the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
I have both the Motorola V600 (quad-band) and Sony-Ericson T616 (tri-band) and both work equally well with Bluetooth.

As a first gen product, the BMW-Bluetooth works exceptionally well. There are a few bugs...If I get a busy signal (which is rare given voice-mail and call-waiting), there is no way to turn it off. And it takes about 15 seconds to time out.

Joel
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,356 Posts
How does the new system allow you to click between two calls in a call-waiting scenario? That was one of the more annoying limitations of previous BMW systems - there was no way to switch to another call - and am wondering if it is finally fixed.

Tom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Greetings:

I've gone through scads of phones and a handfull of Bluetooth ones. Sony Ericsson T68, Sony Ericsson T610, Motorola V600 and Motorola RAZR V3 are my most recent ones. Bluetooth on the RAZR V3 is a little flaky. I've had to reset it several times when using it with my Palm T3, my Mac, and a Motorola BT headset. The V600 never gave me any trouble, though. The Sony Ericsson seems well-behaved too. Bluetooth tends to drain the battery - I think the V600 battery is the best one I've use so far.

Both Sony Ericcson phones have tiny buttons that need pushing with a fingernail. The keyboard backlighting on these Sony Ericcson phones is poor. The V600 has small buttons too, but they are a little easier to use. Like the Ericcson phones, the keyboard has poor visibility in the dark. In contrast, the V3 buttons are big enough that even a nail-bitten finger can press them - and the backlight on the buttons and screen are great.

At least one of the carriers offers a 30-day return policy. If I had to rely upon Bluetooth, I'd have returned the V3 and went back to the V600.

Here is the link
http://www.bmwtransact.com/bluetooth

Nate
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
342 Posts
I have the Nokia 6130i, it has all but flip cover.
The handle I like very much especially since it is not such a small phone, and the battery last very long

Good hunting :byee55amg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
Ashok,

be carefull with the phone you're gonna buy. There are not more than 3 or 4 models that will give full functionality for the phone / car combination. This is due to the small changes the phone manufacturers are making to the bluetooth protocol they implement in their phones. Check very good with your dealer wich phones / models are advised or released by BMW!

In our 530d we use both a Siemens S55 (the S65 is also released by BMW) and a Sony Erikson T610 (T630 also possible) and they are both working fine.

Guust
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
bernhtp said:
How does the new system allow you to click between two calls in a call-waiting scenario? That was one of the more annoying limitations of previous BMW systems - there was no way to switch to another call - and am wondering if it is finally fixed.

Tom
It's not possible.

Guust
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
383 Posts
The problem with Bluetooth is that unless you buy the arm rest adapter the phone wont take advantage of the boosted car aireal, so I'd recommend you make sure you check that the phone has an adapter available. IMO the Bluetooth is a pointless gimic. Turning Bluetooth on drematically reduces the battery life of any moblie, you plug it in to use the aireal and charge and Bluetooth can be compromised.

I use a fair amount of Bluetooth equipment and you would be amazed how many phones I could take advantage of on the various client site I visit. So I would recommend to anyone using this to make sure you secure any connections you use. I've heard about phones getting hijacked in traffic jams and people like Virgin are now using Bluetooth to hit you with marketing in public places.

With regards to the orignal topic, Ashok phones are now as much a fasion or status icon as clothes, so its a very personal choice depending on the functionality you need. I use a SPV C500 and think it's great, total gadget toy and not bad PIM. I don't think there are any bad ones left on the market but check with www.bmw.co.uk/bluetooth to see what phones have what functionality available with the car, I think this info needs to be updated but not sure if they are keeping upto date with the phone changes.

Sacha...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,638 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Thanks for the replies guys. I will definitely try and get one that sits in a dedicated armrest cradle. I think the Siemens S65 sounds good. I will check with my dealer and let you know what I decide to go with in the end.

A special mention to SUPRA for suggesting Vertu - thanks but no thanks (I wouldn't want to leave a $10000 phone lying around the car) :confused3
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,356 Posts
HomerUK said:
The problem with Bluetooth is that unless you buy the arm rest adapter the phone wont take advantage of the boosted car aireal, so I'd recommend you make sure you check that the phone has an adapter available. IMO the Bluetooth is a pointless gimic. Turning Bluetooth on drematically reduces the battery life of any moblie, you plug it in to use the aireal and charge and Bluetooth can be compromised.
I completely agree. Bluetooth is a stupid connection mechanism for phones in cars. A standard interface certainly needs to exist, but a wireless one has no value inside the car and causes lots of problems. USB would be far more appropriate as it is not only standard and cheap, but also provides power so the phone can charge while connected. A simple plastuc cradle could be used to secure and guide any phone shape into place (armrest).

Tom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
Wired or wireless, compatibility issues will be in the communication protocol, not in the transmission medium. Bluetooth is gaining a lot a traction as of late. In a few years, we will see Bluetooth Ipods streaming music to your car stereo with full Ipod control. Just the simplicity of not having to plug the phone in every time you get in and out of the car is worth it.
 

·
Moderator Emeritus
Joined
·
430 Posts
bernhtp said:
I completely agree. Bluetooth is a stupid connection mechanism for phones in cars. A standard interface certainly needs to exist, but a wireless one has no value inside the car and causes lots of problems. USB would be far more appropriate as it is not only standard and cheap, but also provides power so the phone can charge while connected. A simple plastuc cradle could be used to secure and guide any phone shape into place (armrest).

Tom
I kindly disagree. Cable is evil, one less cable is a good thing. I can't imagine using USB in my car. I'd rather not use it. Besides, what are those problems that Bluetooth cause in cars ? Never heard of any.

The whole problem with Bluetooth is, as my previous poster wrote, the protocol. Every manufacturer is trying to enforce their own standards, so compatibility is still an issue.

That said, I'm using a Siemens S55 in my car. Good reception, no drops. I'm a happy user.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,356 Posts
Deckard said:
I kindly disagree. Cable is evil, one less cable is a good thing. I can't imagine using USB in my car. I'd rather not use it. Besides, what are those problems that Bluetooth cause in cars ? Never heard of any.
First, there needs to be no "wire." The phone has to go somewhere, so put it in a caddy that guides it into a connector in the armrest or dash. Snap! I want an interface that charges my cell phone battery instead of discharges it as happens with Bluetooth. My interface idea requires no wire, but use a cellphone for a while on Bluetooth and you'll need the most obnoxious of all wires: the cable from the lighter to the phone.

I also see the cellphone being connected via GPRS/3G networks to the internet for real-time traffic-Nav integration, music downloads, etc. Don't want a charging cable for that.

The historical problem has been the lack of a standard car-cellphone interface, which created all of those proprietary connectors, phones and firmware, and not the physical connection between the phone and car. So, they "solve" this problem by using Bluetooth, which turns out not to be nearly standard enough, and it drains the crap out of your battery instead of the old scheme that at least charged it while driving. Stupid!

Oh, USB - standard, simple, cheap, small, and it has POWER. Also, since all computers have USB (few have Bludetooth), using USB to connect to your computer could do wonderful things like synchronizing address book, calendar, and downloading pictures.

Tom
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top