What does the “->” mean in the below?
I’m pretty sure it means it’s waiting to switch from the host on the left (currently connected host), to the host on the right (desired host connection), but the second device isn’t yet available. In the case of multiple BLE connections, you’ll need to disconnect the first device before it can switch to the next.
1 Like
BLE doesn’t really work does it? Solidly and intuitively, and with multiple devices…
How do you disconnect from the first device
have tried the switchHost “name” and switchHost name
but no joy
If I am connected to my iPhone I cannot switch to the Macbook BLE stays at “->”
If I then turn off bluetooth in the iPhone, it still does the same “->”
Do I need to force a disconnect at the keyboard level?
Then when I turn back on the bluetooth on the iPhone immediately connects.
On my BLE devices, I have to disconnect on the host device itself before switching. It’s definitely not ideal, but that’s the way it is ATM (for me, at least).
Turn BT off on my iPhone does not let it connect from the MBP
Forgetting it in the iPhone does not let it connect from the MBP
Switching BLE hosts does not seem to work 
Right I am giving up on the BLE, it really does not work reliably at all.
Uhk should disconnect the connection and then wait till the selected connection connects… but there is some bug as mentioned.
1 Like
It sounds like BLE does work reliably. I have some headphones with the same quirk, and it is annoying, but I would not represent this flaw in their operation a an overall failure for them to connect reliably.
I can agree the stated behavior is annoying, but this seems to be a misrepresentation of the feature. It is incomplete, but mostly functional, as has been discussed in other threads that you participated in. This whole thread sounds like merely a rant with the beginning question used as an excuse to start.
There are helpful people in this forum who would likely be happy to find a solution with you if the format of your posts were more solution-oriented. Case-in-point: Your posts were not solution-oriented and they tried anyway.
I disagree completely. Not a rant at all, this is discussion that would come before raising any relevant issues. Other ones i was clear on I raised.
Karel has indicated that he is aware of the issues switching hosts. Fine, I’ll wait for the fix and its not just me. Questions answered.
I also completely disagree with my original question as to what the “->” means. I genuinely didn’t know it.
The BLE implementation has issues, that is freely admitted and not a huge issue. I won’t try using more than one HID at a time now as it is clear it does not work. I will wait for it to be fixed. I am not often in the office where I need to connect to two machines and switch between them.
Discussion here and clarifying if it is an issue, a known issue, or user error, prevents unnecessary issues being raised. Something I have been guilty of in the past.
The tone of this last post was completely different from most of this thread.
I shared the tone I understood from it, a tone that I have understood from other posts in other threads. It sounded like complaining with some helpful troubleshooting details mixed in.
Most of the thread was a real time commentary of trying to get three devices working at the same time over BT and the challenges I had with switch host and agent connections. There are issues created for the > 32 variables issue, the connections issue, and Karel is aware of switch hosts challenges. The last post was after I understood the last of the land and knew where things were at. Hence the tone difference.
I think I also have some more areas to look into with regard to switch hosts, BT connections, and sleeping (and waking) but I cannot fully articulate yet. And i suspect way down any list of priorities.
Firmware issues will get resolved, time and information is all that’s required.
I’m getting used to David’s grumpy attitude.
I think it’s less negativity, and rather more of a straight-to-the-point, tough-love kinda thing with him. Whenever he seems irritated, I just like to imagine that if I zoomed out his avatar, there’d be one of those giant “Don’t talk till I’ve had my coffee” mugs sitting in front of him. 
TBH, we’d probably make good friends IRL, as I can be a bit abrasive offline as well.
2 Likes
That does not seem like a good reason to ignore the perceived tone of what is written publicly and exaggerate the negative parts.
1 Like
I guess my perspective is a little different, and I try to view things from as many angles as I’m capable of. 
1 Like
For me it was a statement of fact, not a rant. YMMV.
3 Likes