What’s Next for Bluetooth LE Featuring Silicon Labs and Bluetooth SIG

Hi, everybody. 
Welcome to today's tech talk. 
This is about Bluetooth low energy trends today and tomorrow. 
My name is Parker Doris. 
I'm staff product manager for Bluetooth at Silicon Labs. 
I'm really excited today to have Alfredo Perez, who's the senior technical marketing manager at the Bluetooth SIG. 
Welcome, Alfredo. 
Thank you for having me, Parker. 
A pleasure to be here. 
Yeah. 
So I wanted to get started by setting the table a little bit and talking about the Silicon Labs experience at the Bluetooth SIG. 
We've been active with Bluetooth for over a decade now, driving Bluetooth into the IoT and into our product lines, really propagating it up and down our product lines. 
A lot of leading-edge features that are coming out of the SIG. 
As a feature gets specified and adopted, we're there to support it. 
But of course, the Bluetooth SIG predates our involvement in it. 
I've been around for a long time, and I'm just curious to get your perspective on whether you see the changing dynamics of the market today leading to the Bluetooth SIG having to, in some way, change its trajectory on how it's defining new features or any of the other aspects of the Bluetooth SIG, or does it feel like more of a continuation of what you guys have already been doing successfully? 
That's a great question. 
My impression is that over the last 20 years or more, Bluetooth has been evolving because of needs from the market, because of innovation and contributions from member companies, and because of the management and leadership role of the SIG as a standards body. 
Looking forward, there are still a lot of things coming that will keep advancing Bluetooth, expanding it, and drive this continuous evolution. 
I think what's happening now, it's still part of what's been going on, like those three fundamental factors driving it, but we're also taking steps to adapt to what's needed today. 
And I wouldn't see it as a change in trajectory, as more as we're moving forward, but we're also making adjustments based on what's needed for the technology, for the members, and for the SIG in general. 
Good. 
Yeah, that makes sense. 
I wanted also in this kind of intro section, just talk about how I focus pretty exclusively on the spec, on what's being developed, what's coming out, market reception for what's coming out. 
But the SIG is bigger and broader than that, so I wanted to get your perspective on all the things that the SIG is responsible for and how it functions. 
So, the SIG as a whole is a small organization, about 130 employees. 
But everybody knows the SIG because of the specification and testing that goes on related to Bluetooth. 
There are two other pieces that are important, the membership and qualification piece. 
Every product that you see out in the market with the Bluetooth stamp or labeled as a Bluetooth device has gone through a qualification process that ensures that a device is going to meet performance, that it's going to interoperate with other Bluetooth products, and that happens through the qualification process. 
There's also the marketing and business development part that the SIG takes on, which is important to promote the technology, to educate the public on what's coming, provide baseline content so that everybody starts learning and communicating consistently about features, and then the business development part to start looking forward to what's new, what's coming, what market segments we should pay attention to. 
So those are other pieces of the SIG that maybe not everybody's familiar with. 
Yeah. 
I would just say from a Silicon Labs point of view, those other aspects of the SIG end up giving us, as a silicon vendor, a great advantage because we don't have to walk into a room and sell Bluetooth. 
Bluetooth kind of sells itself, right? 
It's ubiquitous. 
We already all have it on our persons all the time. 
We have it on our wristwatches and in our pockets, right? 
And so that's in part due to the marketing effort that you described, and especially the qualification part, which ensures interoperability and ensures just a certain quality of functionality that it results in reliability, right? 
Yes. 
And so- And I could comment, that has helped Bluetooth to gain the trust from companies to adopt it into their solutions- Yep ... and from the public, right? 
Yep. 
People might not know the details about Bluetooth, but if they have a device that's Bluetooth and it helps them to play music or- Yep ... do whatever they want, they trust it. 
Right. 
Okay. 
Well, so getting back to the sort of trends and inflection points that I see, one of the biggest ones that I see coming is effectively the amount of compute that's coming to the edge. 
That edge processing with AI and other factors, it just seems like there's this trend toward putting more smarts at the edge. 
And I want to hear your thoughts on how, or if, that sort of macro trend in the industry impacts Bluetooth. 
How does it? 
Does it at all? 
I'm not sure. 
So, as you mentioned, right, edge AI is mainly driven by computing, by memory, by the needs for neural processing. 
Uh In that whole picture, what Bluetooth is doing and the SIG is doing is preparing the technology to support use cases where now you need broader data pipelines, where you need now more capacity to handle more devices, more use cases. 
So, just to give some examples, at the SIG right now, we are working on a couple of features geared towards supporting that need. 
One is high data throughput, and the other one is higher bands. 
High data throughput, or HDT, will be increasing the max throughput that's supported by Bluetooth LE significantly, and then the higher bands is going to open up the ability for Bluetooth to operate on other open frequency bands, 5 gigs, 6 gigs. 
So those kind of things are what the Bluetooth SIG is doing to prepare and support AGI use cases. 
Yeah. 
Makes sense. 
I guess as you were answering that, I'm thinking about a key factor here is that essentially the Bluetooth SIG is a member-driven body. 
And so silicon vendors like Silicon Labs and others, we're all trying to see around corners and see what comes next. 
And so to some extent, we're pulling the spec along to meet these new use cases that you're referring to, right? 
So, it's a nice feedback loop that exists at the Bluetooth SIG. 
I would say another trend that we see is the increasing need for spatial awareness in the IoT and in other non-IoT environments as well. 
Mm-hmm. 
And I think the key enhancement to the Bluetooth spec that's happened in the last couple of years to support spatial awareness is Channel Sounding. 
So Channel Sounding was adopted in 2024. 
Silicon Labs has been very active with our support, Channel Sounding with our software stack, with our hardware that supports it, boards. 
We have our own distance estimation algorithm that we developed. 
But here we are, two years after adoption. 
Mm-hmm. 
And I'm just wondering, what do you see as being the markets that are picking up Channel Sounding, which is essentially this distance estimation technology where two Bluetooth endpoints can measure the relative distance from each other. 
Like, where do you see the pickup now, as we kind of go into a stage where normally a Bluetooth feature would kind of start being adopted by the field? 
So, to emphasize first, Channel Sounding is in the market, and it's ready to be adopted, and it's ready for usage. 
Today, we could say that Channel Sounding is being strongly adopted in digital key and access control standards. 
That's one specific case. 
Also, Channel Sounding has been integrated with the Android OS, so we're starting to see some early adoption in some mobile device platforms. 
And another area where we see initial interest is in smart home access applications- Mm-hmm ... like smart locks. 
So Channel Sounding is definitely gaining traction in those areas, and there are more that right now are just escaping my mind. 
Okay. 
Yeah, that kind of matches my experience as a Bluetooth product manager where we have a lot of different business segments that are asking about Channel Sounding, and to me, Channel Sounding seems like one of those technologies that is so broadly applicable that we haven't even uncovered all of the markets where Channel Sounding will end up finding a place. 
Mm-hmm. 
Which is all the more reason for us to kind of keep the foot to the pedal in terms of our enablement. 
And also, when you look at the, so Channel Sounding was released in 6.0. 
In 6.2, there was an enhancement to support amplitude-based attack resilience. 
And in 6.3, which was just released recently, it included inline PCT, which is a Channel Sounding enhancement to increase the update rate incrementally. 
So clearly, it seems like there are these follow-on features. 
What signal should the market take from that? 
Does it mean, yeah, just I want to hear kind of your perspective from the SIG. 
So there have been enhancements coming out related to Channel Sounding, and again, emphasizing, right, Channel Sounding is out there available, ready for market adoption. 
But there are enhancements coming, and this is something commonly seen with features that are developed and released through the Bluetooth SIG. 
Member companies start identifying new use cases, new needs, and as those start surfacing, you start seeing enhancements and improvements and things being added. 
So I think we should expect to see enhancements and improvements keep coming, again, because of the new use cases, the new applications that are being identified by member companies. 
Yep. 
Okay. 
Well, earlier you mentioned a big piece of Channel Sounding's kind of usefulness comes from the ability for people to use their phones to do these different ranging scenarios with their phone. 
So you mentioned Android being, adopting Channel Sounding recently. 
Are you seeing other kind of phone adoption happening or anything you can talk about? 
I know there's a certain amount you can't really talk about, hopefully. 
What I can comment is we know, and I think this is publicly known, that the Google Pixel mobile platform has already announced support for Channel Sounding. 
We are aware of other platforms that are integrating it or that maybe have already added it, but we cannot really disclose much other than I think we'll start seeing the support coming in the mobile platforms strongly in the upcoming years. 
Yep. 
If not months. 
Right. 
Okay. 
That's great. 
Well, maybe we can switch gears again. 
I want to talk about another new feature that is kind of out and publicly known called Ultra-Low Latency for human interface devices. 
So can you just start with a quick overview of what is that feature and what is the target application? 
Yes. 
So, I think many people are familiar with wireless keyboards, mice, applications that were enabled by Bluetooth for human interface device applications. 
These were all based on something we call the HID over GATT profile. 
Mm-hmm. 
The HID over GATT profile required enhancements, improvements to be able to start supporting lower latency communication between these human interface devices. 
And over the last couple of years, maybe, there was development on two specific features to improve the responsiveness of HID devices, reduce latency. 
These two features are currently called the HID ISO, and the second one is HID SCI. 
So HID ISO is basically using isochronous channels to enable faster reporting rates for HID devices. 
HID SCI is using shorter connection intervals, which is a relatively new feature that was just adopted late last year to do the same, start enabling faster report rates. 
With that, we're starting to enable HID solutions that can support reporting rates of one kilohertz or higher to the inverse of that would be enable latency of one millisecond or less. 
Why is this important? 
Because some applications like gaming controllers or AR/VR controllers, or maybe even some productivity applications, require this lower latency or better responsiveness, and without the ultra-low latency HID features, this was not possible before. 
So ULL HID is this enabling this better responsiveness for HID devices. 
And the two features that I mentioned, the way they are being released to the public is through updates to the HID over GATT profile. 
Okay. 
So if anybody goes and looks up the profile version 1.1 introduced HID ISO, and version 1.2 introduced HID SCI. 
These are out publicly. 
Any company can start out taking those and then using them to implement HID solutions with ultra-low latency. 
Okay. 
I guess I just want to add that at Silicon Labs, we're interested in that use case with gaming controllers and mice and keyboards. 
I think that like so many Bluetooth features, the feature itself is more broadly applicable than what that first killer app might be like. 
Uh-huh. 
Another example would be in 5.4, we released periodic advertisements with responses. 
The killer app for that is electronic shelf labels, but at Silicon Labs, we are seeing this propagation of that. 
It's a very versatile, bidirectional, connectionless, massively scalable network. 
Of course, it's more broadly applicable than just electronic shelf labels. 
So I'm positive that we're going to see maybe low latency machine-to-machine communication. 
We could see pickup there and in other cases as well. 
We might even start seeing more broadly applications where people are using HID beyond gaming mice and as you said, in kind of productivity applications as well. 
So that it'll be exciting to see that sort of two years out, kind of, I guess in the 2028 timeframe is when we'll be with these HID enhancements where we are today with Channel Sounding, where we're really seeing that market pick up now. 
Okay. 
Well, to switch gears one more time, you've already mentioned this once, but I wanted to hear more from you about high data throughput. 
So I know that that is not a fully adopted feature at the SIG today. 
But you guys have publicly talked about HDT. 
There's a webinar and there's some other content out there, so I'm hoping you can kind of describe for us what is HDT, how is it implemented, and what are the key use cases? 
Okay. 
So HDT is a major enhancement for Bluetooth Low Energy. 
I mentioned earlier, right? 
HDT is enabling a max throughput of up to 7.5 megabits per second. 
Today, the limit is two megabits per second. 
However, HDT is not just this throughput improvement. 
It's coming in with major enhancements also to enable more reliable communication. 
It's making changes to or not changes, updates to the link layer to support HDT, to support better encryption and This is going to be a major feature that's coming out soon. 
The status of HDT today is that the specification is at a point where there's already communication available for early public access. 
If any member company wants to know and understand the specification, it's available. 
We are going now to the phase of testing, checking interoperability, making sure that everything is fine, and if things go well, HDT should become adopted towards the end of this year. 
As far as the applications, the driver application for HDT is audio based, an audio-based application, high resolution and lossless audio, to enable higher quality audio for audio applications. 
Pardon the redundancy. 
But in general, HDT is not just an audio-based enhancement or for audio. 
It's applicable to any use case where you need to move a lot of data. 
So anything where you involve maybe a firmware update to, I don't know, future applications with video transferring, who knows? 
That might be something that you can enable with higher data throughput. 
Okay. 
Well, you mentioned kind of in keeping with the theme, that sort of killer app for HDT up front is audio. 
With ULL, with ultra-low latency over HID, we saw kind of the core spec updates and a corresponding profile update. 
I guess we should be expecting to see something of the same kind of profile updates on audio for HDT. 
Is that- Yes ... the right way to look at it? 
Definitely, yeah. 
There will be, once HDT and all the pieces are in place to enable high resolution and lossless audio, we should expect to see updates to existing profiles- Yeah ... so that they can all operate using the HDT file. 
And there will also be new profiles to enable the- Yeah ... new use cases, right? 
High-res, lossless. 
Well, and again, another kind of, these things keep occurring, but HDT as a spec is obviously more broadly applicable than just audio. 
Yes. 
It's going to be great and transformative for audio, but it's essentially a bigger data pipe, and so if you can perform an OTA in half the time- Mm-hmm ... that's adding value to an end product. 
Yes. 
If a user can update in 10 seconds instead of 20, that's a win. 
Yeah. 
If there is a diagnostic tool where you can download a log file so fast that you can sort of keep moving past a piece of equipment while you're downloading it because of HDT, that's a win, right? 
So again, once this gets out into the market, we've seen this again and again and again, that we'll see our customers, I'm sure the other Silicon vendors will be the same, finding ways of making use of this. 
I did want to ask, earlier we talked about channel sounding and how we've already seen a couple of enhancements for channel sounding. 
It's a big feature, and you keep adding to it. 
Should the market expect to see something similar with HDT or with, yeah, with HDT? 
Yes. 
HDT is a major feature, and I think just like in the case of channel sounding and like you mentioned, ULL head, this is a feature that's going to keep growing, expanding to support new use cases. 
And we can definitely expect to see other enhancements. 
What exactly? 
I cannot comment on that right now, but there is activity to just capitalize on the benefits of HDT to start doing even better and greater things, so- Right ... there will- Well, and just to tie it back to what we were talking about at the beginning, like you mentioned it then, but HDT is a key technology to help enable the higher data throughput needs of edge processing, of edge AI, right? 
And so it's going to be in place as that sort of macro trend really lifts off. 
Correct. 
Yeah. 
And you know what? 
Sorry, right now it came to mind. 
If anybody in our audience is interested, the capability of HDT, we have been showcasing it lately in demos at different events, and we have a demo video of an actual application doing file transferring with HDT, where you can just see the benefit of moving a file using two megabits per second, taking a certain amount of time, and then you enable HDT and see it happen, and the difference is just impressive. 
And if I recall, that demo is phone to phone. 
I know that you can't talk about any phones that may- ... or may not have HDT, but I mean- Yes ... do you think it's reasonably safe to assume that, especially with audios, the leading use case, that phone adoption will be in the future for HDT? 
I believe so, yes. 
I mean, without any names, but anybody that looks up the demo- Yeah ... they'll identify who's providing that solution. 
HDT will be adopted in mobile platforms and- Right ... any sort of competing platform where Bluetooth has an important role. 
So yeah. 
That makes sense. 
That's expected. 
Yep. 
All right. 
Thanks. 
That was great. 
Yeah. 
I know we're always kind of stepping up to the edge of what we can talk about and can't talk about, but that's good information. 
I guess now we're going to switch over to the Q&A portion of the webinar, and Chandana, our product marketing manager for Bluetooth, is going to read us a couple of the questions we've gotten online. 
Thank you so much, Parker So I pulled together a few audience questions, so let's jump right into it. 
The first one is: Does HDT expand Bluetooth into markets previously dominated by Wi-Fi? 
Ooh, okay. 
That's a you question, I think. 
Go ahead. 
Okay. 
Well, I'll give the Bluetooth SIG perspective, okay? 
HDT is expanding, or it's improving the throughput and capabilities of Bluetooth. 
But from our view, this isn't necessarily something being enabled to cut into applications that have been dominated by other technologies. 
This is more to support the needs of use cases, member companies on the Bluetooth SIG side. 
So, overall, I would say that the throughput improvement is important, but if you want to compare it to Wi-Fi, I wouldn't say that this is necessarily cutting into Wi-Fi dominated spaces or applications. 
There's still a huge difference in the throughput capabilities of both technologies and- Yeah ... at least that's my view. 
What do you think? 
Yeah, that just seems like, obviously, the case, that there are things that Bluetooth is really good at, like low power functionality- Mm-hmm ... the massive, just the ubiquity that we talked about earlier. 
Of course, Wi-Fi shares some of those same characteristics. 
Mm-hmm. 
But I view Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, those are the two essential technologies for a lot of the sort of edge AI and IoT kind of, of course, there's different mesh topologies as well for smart home and for commercial use. 
But in terms of the ubiquity and just the footprint, Bluetooth is so well established, and Wi-Fi is so well established- Mm-hmm ... that I don't see a lot of encroachment. 
It's really just kind of both technologies keeping up with the times. 
It's not as though, Wi-Fi adds new features as well, and that doesn't necessarily encroach on what Bluetooth is doing. 
We have sort of separate and intersecting, but definitely distinct advantages. 
Yeah. 
And you need both. 
And fortunately, Silicon Lab sells both, by the way. 
Thank you. 
Okay, so the next one that we have is: Are new features like Channel Sounding and HDT mandatory for a given Bluetooth version? 
They become mandatory if a product or a member company is going to make a claim that they support Channel Sounding or HDT, right? 
So Channel Sounding, the specification was released as part of Bluetooth Core Spec 6.0. 
Companies can qualify their products to meet certain features that came out with Bluetooth 6.0. 
If they don't make any claims about Channel Sounding support, they can claim they're 6.0 certified, but once they go into the Channel Sounding piece, then it becomes mandatory for them to be able to operate with Bluetooth 6.0, which is where the specification was released, right? 
Yeah. 
Would you agree with that? 
Yeah, so I guess my perspective on this is, most of the new features that are coming out of the SIG, all the features we talked about today, Channel Sounding, ULL, HID, and then HDT as well, these are all, technically speaking, optional features. 
They are not required in order to qualify for 6.x or whatever comes next. 
This was a decision that the SIG made back in 5.0, or maybe before that even. 
But a lot of the features that are coming out don't have the sort of mandatory pull-through. 
Mm-hmm. 
When certain companies require a feature, in order to interoperate- Right ... then it could potentially become de facto kind of mandatory. 
Or for certain use cases, maybe it is just effectively required in order to operate in that business. 
Right. 
So there's this distinction that I think trips some of our customers up between what is technically required in order to go through the qual process and get your listing on the Bluetooth SIG- Mm-hmm ... versus what is required to be successful in the market. 
Mm. 
And so, that's the distinction. 
We try to sort of handhold customers with our documentation and with our apps engineering guidance and stuff to understand that distinction. 
Thank you. 
This next one might also be for both of you. 
So how does HDT impact coexistence with other wireless technologies like Wi-Fi and Zigbee? 
Yeah, what do you think? 
That's a good question. 
So HDT introduces a new PHY that uses more advanced modulation schemes. 
At a high level, the higher throughput that you'll be able to achieve with HDT doesn't necessarily come at the expense of a higher duty cycle. 
So I think that, at least right now, the view we have is that HDT is going to actually maybe be even beneficial for coexistence because you'll be able to move data, leaving more time gaps available for other standards or other coexisting radios in the system- Mm ... to also operate. 
So, I have two questions on that as follow-ups. 
Yeah. 
One, this is just kind of a, the part of the HDT spec includes a 2M PHY operation- Mm ... but it's using the new PHY. 
And yet, we have a legacy PHY that also supports 2M. 
Uh-huh. 
I guess everything you say is applicable to that HDT 2M fi operation, right? 
That it uses an advanced modulation scheme. 
Mm-hmm. 
And so would you say that it would actually have better coex versus the legacy 2M fi? 
That's a very good question. 
The 2M fi that you'll support with HDT is going to be based on the lower modulation rate, which is going to be power over four PSK. 
I know for a fact, at least that with the higher order modulation schemes, 16 QAM and- Yeah ... eight PSK, you will definitely be able to see that benefit in lower duty cycles. 
But I think I'll have to come back to you and answer that question later once we have more data from member companies or from- Yeah, I don't know the answer to that question either. 
I need to look into it. 
I don't know. 
Yeah. 
Okay. 
Well, so, I know the Bluetooth SIG, on their website, there is a specs and development page. 
Mm-hmm. 
And it mentions higher band operation. 
Yes. 
So I just wanted to see if, while we're here talking about new features and roadmaps and stuff, how does higher band operation play into this coex question? 
That's also an interesting question. 
I don't have enough details, and I don't think we can share much about how the interaction or the operation is going to be moving between bands, but just the fact of having more spectrum available, right? 
Yeah. 
To support applications and use cases, that should also be beneficial- Yeah ... for coexistence. 
Yeah. 
So I think the lesson to learn from Alfredo's comments, from what we know is coming from the SIG is that, this is coexistence challenges are something that the member companies at the SIG spend time talking about. 
And we're not operating in a vacuum. 
We know that other technologies exist out there, and Silicon Labs in particular, is very focused on multi-protocol enablement, right? 
And so we know well the sort of puts and takes between using Bluetooth and other technologies at 2.4 gigahertz, and how these new features may or may not impact coex and all the challenges and stuff. 
So, it's a great question because- Yeah ... it is a challenge, but it's something that it really takes a concerted effort across the industry to solve. 
Individual companies like Silicon Labs can make optimizations and kind of nail dynamic multi-protocol scenarios, but it also really requires even a across standards collaboration to get right. 
Yes. 
That is correct. 
Thank you. 
So now we are talking about applications a little. 
Is the HID ULL spec profile update applicable to use cases beyond gaming? 
Yeah. 
I think we kind of touched on that. 
I guess, the speculative, what I would say is, machine-to-machine communication that requires very low latency, it could have a positive impact on those. 
I think that, okay, again, me just kind of speculating, there is a fair number of applications out there that are forced to go into a proprietary, either 2.4 gigahertz or sub-gigahertz kind of model of design because they need to hit certain latency numbers that Bluetooth, before these advances you talked about, Bluetooth simply couldn't hit. 
Correct. 
And so there's just this spray of applications that use proprietary protocols now, and I bet that we're going to see this sort of, it might take a long time, this sort of macro trend moving some of those proprietary applications into a standards-based Bluetooth application because finally now, they can check that box, and they can get the latency numbers that they want. 
HDT is the same. 
Actually, if you think about HDT just kind of opens up some doors for applications that may today use a proprietary interface or something like that, or they've just been holding back on enabling certain features because they couldn't check that box on the sort of throughput that they needed. 
And so I think that ULL falls into that same category and we'll end up, over the next maybe two years, spec starts now, adoption two years from now, we're going to see a lot of exciting new applications that use it. 
Sure. 
I'll just add a, as a comment, right? 
You touched on a very important point. 
We've been talking about the evolution of Bluetooth and what happens. 
So, there are areas, right, where Bluetooth performance hasn't arrived fast enough, and because of that, you've seen proprietary implementations. 
But the key thing of features, say like ultra low latency hit, is that once they come in, they start providing the standardization, the benefit of interoperability, of multiple suppliers now suddenly available for a vendor to enable their solutions. 
So, that also starts driving- Yep ... the enhancements sometimes that are needed. 
Sure. 
The applications. 
So, yeah. 
ULL hit is important in that sense right now, where you will be seeing now the benefits of standardization for applications like gaming and others. 
That's great to know. 
Thank you. 
We have another ULL question, and I'm going to rephrase this a little. 
But when people hear low latency, they often think that it is a software tuning problem. 
So what actually had to change in Bluetooth specifications and profiles to make ULL possible? 
So going back to the example that we were giving earlier, Bluetooth has been a key player in wireless keyboards and mice. 
So the early implementations of these HID solutions were based on the HID over GATT profile. 
The HID over GATT profile was limited in terms of responsiveness or speed by the minimal connection interval that could be supported in Bluetooth LE. 
That number, by definition, was 7.5 milliseconds. 
You couldn't bring down the connection interval of Bluetooth LE to anything lower than that, so that was setting a limit as to how fast could you communicate in a HID application. 
Now, these two features, HID ISO and HID SCI, HID ISO is using the infrastructure that was developed for audio applications to start enabling this faster communication, and then now HID SCI is capitalizing on shorter connection intervals, a new feature that also allowed now Bluetooth LE connection intervals to come down to sub-millisecond levels. 
So that was a fundamental limit that was keeping the HID over GATT profile and HID applications run on Bluetooth from being more responsive and having lower latency. 
Those two things have been addressed now. 
Perfect. 
So another question that I have is about HDT. 
Should developers think of HDT primarily as an audio enabler or as a broader data throughput capability that eventually could support new IoT sensing diagnostics or edge AI use cases? 
Let me know if you want me to repeat that. 
Yeah, no, I think that was something we already covered a little bit in terms of being able to say that these specs always have more broader applicability than what their original killer app kind of intention, not even intention, the killer app that drives the spec. 
There's inertia in getting something adopted at the SIG. 
It's a multi-step drafting and prototyping and approval process that takes multiple companies dedicated resources for 12 months to 24 months. 
It is a big task. 
Yeah. 
And it's also a multidisciplinary task that takes marketing and product management resources that usually give way to very technical resources that are either focused on how a radio works or how the protocol should be changed. 
And all of that comes together to, it's often kind of driven by, frankly, a critical mass of member functions that see a market opportunity that's really big, that's sufficiently big to devote all those resources to doing all those things for two years instead of doing something else. 
And so it is always helpful to have that one killer feature, that killer application, audio for HDT, or maybe it's digital key entry for channel sounding, or it's gaming controllers for ULL HID to get that gravitational pull that allows all these companies to work together, these natural competitors that are working together to together kind of standardize a portion of the industry to bring everybody to the same table. 
And so all that to say, we've already made this big investment, so let's maximize the return on it by finding other applications. 
And fortunately, the SIG does a great job of communicating how the feature works. 
The bluetooth.com site is, I think, just unmatched in terms of the way it communicates how new features work, and you have also the pull-through of silicon vendors like Silicon Labs and others that are constantly running webinars, that are publishing collateral, that talk about how the features work at a technical level, all of it focused on expanding the scope of this feature that may have been focused on audio to a more broad marketplace. 
And so all that to say, yes. 
I think the HDT is destined to have a much wider impact than just audio, like we said, for file transfer, for diagnostic transfers, all these things. 
We'll just see those kind of clicking into place, especially when there's phone pickup. 
That opens up so many doors because so much of the way that we interact with the technology around us is from our phones, and all of our phones have Bluetooth. 
And I would assume that at some point, our phones are all going to have channel sounding. 
I would assume at some point, all phones or most phones will have HDT. 
These things will probably happen if we look at the sort of historical indicators that these new features get picked up in flagship phones and then there's further pull-through later on. 
And so we should expect as these features become more commonplace, their applicability broadens as well. 
Long-winded answer. 
I could have not answered that any better. 
That's right on spot. 
Completely agree. 
Thank you. 
That was actually my last question. 
So thank you again, Parker and Alfredo, for answering these, and thank you everyone for the great questions. 
I will hand it back to you, Parker. 
All right. 
Thanks again for joining this Tech Talk. 
We'll check in again later the next time we can talk about Bluetooth, and thank you, Alfredo, for coming today. 
Really appreciate it. 
Thank you, Parker. 
It's been a pleasure to be here.