Published: June 24, 2024
10 min read
In this article, you'll learn:
1
📚 The Concept of Bluetooth Classic
2
📘 The Concept of Bluetooth Low Energy
3
⚖️ Technical Comparison of Bluetooth Classic and BLE
4
🗂️ Use Cases of Bluetooth Classic and BLE
5
🔎 Our Expertise in BLE Integration
6
💡 Takeaways
In the rapidly evolving world of wireless communication, Bluetooth technology is a pivotal innovation, enabling seamless connectivity across multiple devices. However, with the advent of Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE), businesses often wonder which technology best suits their needs. Although both fall under the Bluetooth umbrella, they serve distinct purposes.
This article aims to clarify the difference between Bluetooth and Bluetooth Low Energy. It will examine the enhancements made in Bluetooth 4.0 and Bluetooth 5.0, explore their features, and discuss their use cases. By understanding the strengths and limitations of each, you can make informed decisions about which technology aligns with your specific requirements, and when to partner with a BLE app development company for your project.
Let’s go! 🚀
Bluetooth Classic, officially known as Bluetooth Basic Rate/Enhanced Data Rate (BR/EDR), is a well-established wireless technology designed to handle continuous, streaming data over short distances using short-wavelength radio waves. It excels in scenarios where high throughput and sustained connections are necessary.
Bluetooth Classic supports high-quality audio streaming between devices over short distances (image by Dmytro Sobkovich)
Key features of Bluetooth Classic include:
Like any other technology, Bluetooth Classic has its advantages and disadvantages. Let’s take a closer look at them.
Bluetooth Classic remains a cornerstone in wireless communication, particularly in applications requiring continuous data transmission and robust audio support. However, Bluetooth's higher power consumption and limited range present challenges, particularly in modern IoT applications. In contrast, BLE often becomes a more suitable choice, like in IoT in healthcare from clinics to mobile apps.
BLE, introduced as part of the Bluetooth 4.0 specification in 2010, is a wireless communication technology that provides reduced power consumption and cost, which can significantly influence IoT project cost estimation, while maintaining a similar communication range to Bluetooth Classic. This innovation caters specifically to the growing demands of modern applications, especially in the realms of wearable devices, smart homes, and the IoT.
BLE operates in the same 2.4 GHz ISM band as Bluetooth Classic but employs a different modulation scheme, allowing for low energy consumption, which is particularly beneficial in IoT for factories where energy efficiency and cost reduction are critical. This technology is optimized for the periodic transfer of small amounts of data, making it ideal for devices that require long battery life and intermittent communication.
BLE technology improves the connectivity of smart home devices, making it easier to control and monitor them seamlessly from mobile devices (image by Paweł Samczuk)
Key features of Bluetooth Low Energy include:
BLE technology offers various advantages and certain limitations that are crucial to understanding its effective utilization in modern applications. Let’s examine them.
BLE stands out as a pivotal technology in wireless communication, particularly for those looking to create wearable device apps where power efficiency and long battery life are paramount. If you’d like to learn more about BLE from the perspective of our CTO, Oleksii Bulavka, you can read his recent Bluetooth Low Energy guide.
As you see, Bluetooth and BLE are multifaceted technologies. Let’s make a comparison Bluetooth and Bluetooth Low Energy tech protocols to understand their differences with the help of our React Native Developer, Dmytro Zasukha.
Tech Characteristics | Bluetooth Classic | BLE |
---|---|---|
Frequency Spectrum | 2.4GHz | 2.4GHz |
Data Rate | 1–3 Mb/s | 125 Kb/s – 2 Mb/s |
Number of Channels | 79 channels with 1 MHz width | 40 channels with 2 MHz width |
Connection Range | 10–30 m | 10–30 m (in ideal conditions — up to 100 m) |
Latency (non-connected -> connected state) | 100 ms | from 6 ms (depending on connection interval) |
Topology | Point-to-Point (1:1) | Point-to-Point (1:1) |
Security and Encryption | 64b/128 bit | 128-bit AES |
When comparing BLE and Bluetooth, it’s also important to consider how the Web Bluetooth API can enhance device connectivity. To sum up the following table, the lower latency, more versatile network topologies, and enhanced security of Low Energy Bluetooth compare to Classic which provides higher data rates. Still, both technologies have found their places in various domains, where developers leverage their strengths for efficient and effective wireless communication solutions.
Exploring ANT vs Bluetooth further reveals how ANT excels in ultra-low-power use cases, while Bluetooth offers broader compatibility.
With its versatile applications, Bluetooth technology is an integral part of our connected world. The 2024 Bluetooth Market Update report by SIG (Special Interest Group) provides us with the following numbers on BLE and Bluetooth smart devices:
Indeed, BLE vs. traditional Bluetooth has distinct characteristics that make them suitable for a range of use cases, from wearables to farming IoT devices. Let’s discover the most popular applications of each technology.
Technology | Use Case | Examples |
---|---|---|
Bluetooth Classic | High-quality Audio Streaming | Wireless headphones, speakers, car audio systems |
Wireless Peripheral Connections | Keyboards, mice, game controllers, printers | |
BLE | Health and Fitness Monitoring | Fitness trackers, heart rate monitors, medical smart devices |
Smart Home Devices | Smart locks, light bulbs, thermostats | |
Asset Tracking | Beacons, tags, location trackers, industrial labs | |
Wearables | Smart glasses, smartwatches, smart clothing | |
IoT Devices | Sports equipment | |
Audio Streaming | LE Audio (since Bluetooth 5.2 update) | |
Robotics | Robots, such as RVR+ and Sphero BOLT |
Up to this day, Bluetooth and BLE aren’t mutually compatible. Therefore, the Bluetooth 4 update introduced Bluetooth dual-mode devices to bridge the Bluetooth vs BLE gap. They support both technologies, providing the best of both worlds. According to the SIG Bluetooth Market report, all new platform devices will have dual-mode Bluetooth by 2024.
When you look at dual-mode Bluetooth versus the Bluetooth Classic, you see that dual-mode works better. It connects more easily to different gadgets like iPhones and Android phones, and anything that needs to send a lot of information back and forth. So, if you need a strong link to many different devices, dual-mode Bluetooth is your best choice.
Dmytro Zasukha, Android | React Native Developer @ Stormotion
With dual-mode support, devices can switch between BR/EDR for high-speed data transfer (e.g., audio streaming) and BLE for low-power applications (e.g., sensors, wearable devices). This flexibility optimizes power consumption while maintaining connectivity.
Dual-mode Bluetooth ensures seamless integration of smartphones with car infotainment services (image by Hemant Bisht)
Here are some use cases of dual-mode Bluetooth with examples:
To sum up, Bluetooth Low Energy vs Bluetooth has unique protocol features that cater to specific use cases. Dual-mode devices offer a flexible solution that bridges the gap between these two technologies.
Stormotion team has a long track record of cases with BLE integration in various spheres, such as EV companion applications, fitness apps, and e-mobility apps. Let’s see how our team has helped the clients to reach their goals.
One of the most recent examples is Egret, a leading e-scooter manufacturer, which faced inconsistent Bluetooth connectivity across different scooter models. The IoT application development process involved reverse engineering the existing protocol and creating a generic protocol handler to ensure BLE connectivity with all scooter models. Now, users can set up and control their e-scooters via a user-friendly app.
The user-friendly design of Egret allows users to connect and monitor their e-scooters via BLE modules (image by Stormotion)
If you’re thinking about integrating BLE in your React Native app, we can tell you about our case with the EV companion application. We created the Norsk Guardian app for a company producing lithium-ion batteries for boating activities.
The development process involved thorough testing, BLE module creation for data transfer, and leveraging the React Native framework for app development (which can also be applied when you want to develop a BMS software for real-time monitoring of battery systems). As a result, the app monitors multiple battery parameters such as temperature, voltage, and charge levels via unique BLE modules, ensuring safe water trips.
The Norsk Guardian app monitors crucial battery parameters for safe boating with lithium-ion batteries (image by Stormotion)
The other notable example is SportPlus. Our task was to develop a mobile app that seamlessly connects with workout equipment. The main challenge was determining how to integrate BLE fitness devices into app and manage the inconsistent communication protocols across four different BLE standards. To address this, the team created a generic protocol handler. Now, the app facilitates smarter, data-driven workouts, helping SportPlus leverage modern technology in the fitness industry.
SportPlus enhances fitness routines overcoming the challenge of integrating multiple BLE fitness devices into the app (image by Stormotion)
Let’s conclude the comparison of Bluetooth Classic and BLE technologies:
If you have questions about implementing Bluetooth or BLE into your project, write to us! Whether you're looking to optimize power efficiency with BLE or achieve seamless audio streaming with Bluetooth Classic, we're here to help!
Was it helpful?
Take a look at how we solve challenges to meet project requirements
Bluetooth Classic and BLE differ primarily in their intended use cases and power consumption profiles. Bluetooth Classic is suitable for continuous, high-quality audio streaming and data-intensive applications. In contrast, BLE operates with significantly lower power consumption, ideal for devices requiring long battery life, intermittent data transfer, and scalability in IoT and wearable technology.
Power consumption comparison reveals Bluetooth Classic consumes more power compared to BLE, resulting in shorter battery life for portable devices utilizing Classic technology. BLE's efficient communication bursts and long sleep periods enable devices to operate on small batteries for extended periods, ranging from months to years.
Bluetooth Classic is generally preferred for high-quality audio streaming due to its higher data rates and robust support for continuous audio transmission. This makes it suitable for applications such as wireless headphones, speakers, and car audio systems. Although, LE Audio enables efficient audio streaming over BLE, supporting features like multi-stream audio and broadcast audio.
BLE is designed for low-power applications and does not support high data rates comparable to Bluetooth Classic. Its focus is on the periodic transfer of small amounts of data, making it less suitable for high-data-rate applications like real-time audio or video streaming.
Bluetooth Classic and BLE operate on different protocols and are not directly compatible with each other. However, dual-mode devices that support both technologies allow for seamless switching between high-speed data transfer (Bluetooth Classic) and low-power applications (BLE), optimizing connectivity based on specific needs.
Common use cases for Bluetooth Low Energy include health and fitness monitoring devices, smart home applications, asset tracking, wearable technology, and IoT devices across various industries. These applications benefit from BLE's low power consumption and efficient data transfer capabilities.
Read also
Our clients say
When I was working with Stormotion, I forgot they were an external agency. They put such effort into my product it might as well have been their own. I’ve never worked with such a client-focused company before.
Alexander Wolff, CPO
Sjut