"Roger 2008" <rwpcs@att.net> wrote in message
news:O7adnWGArqBnIUTanZ2dnUVZ_q2hnZ2d@giganews.com ...

>> The disadvantages of PAN are, a) most other mobile devices can't use it,
>> so you can't hook up a PPC to a WM6 phone, for example, and b) the PC
>> connecting to the device must have Activesync or WMDC installed (because
>> the drivers are integrated into the sync software.)
>>
>> The joys of Windows Mobile upgrades- two steps forward, one step back.
>> ;-)
>
> Exactly and I especially agree with your "disadvantages" paragraph since
> I'm
> thinking of getting an HP IPAQ 211 without it's own internet.
>
> BTW I just looked up "BT DUN" on the internet and found: "Why did we
> remove
> Bluetooth DUN?".
> http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsmobile/...tooth-dun.aspx
>
> It makes it look like they are trying to blame the OEMs for removing BT
> DUN.
> Either way, it is not very fun trying to work around things that have
> changed.

I almost added "PAN is easier for wireless carriers to disable" under
"advantages" (with tongue planted firmly in cheek!) Any carrier that wants
to disallow tethering external devices now simply has to remove the Internet
Sharing applet, rather than try to cripple the bluetooth stack or functions,
so it has major advantages over BT DUN for wireless OEMs. (Ironically, IR
DUN generally still works fine, however, if you can leave both devices
aligned on a desk.)