4

I'm trying to write a desktop application to access a Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) device.

My target platform in Windows 10, I'm using Visual Studio Community 2015, .NET 4.6.1.

There doesn't seem to be API included for Accessing BLE devices. I found 32feet, but that only supports regular Bluetooth.

I've seen a couple of posts about using the windows UWP libraries and/or WinRT libraries, but that seems like a bit of a hack.

Surely by now, there is a 'nice' way to interact with BLE devices?

As always TIA.

Yabbie
  • 491
  • 1
  • 4
  • 16
  • 1
    Possible duplicate of [Is there any way to use Bluetooth LE from a c# desktop app in windows 10?](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/37333179/is-there-any-way-to-use-bluetooth-le-from-a-c-sharp-desktop-app-in-windows-10) – O'Rooney Feb 07 '17 at 21:21
  • Since Windows mobile has struggled and is currently pretty much dead, the stuff to do BLE properly has probably never been worth doing. Anyway, Microsoft does have an answer, which is to use UWP - if your target is Windows 10 what's the problem? – O'Rooney Feb 07 '17 at 21:23
  • My problem is I'm not familiar with UWP so I'm wanting to develop a C# .NET desktop app, which I specified in my original post. – Yabbie Feb 08 '17 at 01:13
  • I'm afraid Microsoft doesn't really care about your situation. They've moved on to UWP - impractical as that is for many developers! – O'Rooney Feb 08 '17 at 03:30

1 Answers1

5

This is an old thread, but I still come across people that need a well-thought-out library that provides both Bluetooth Classic and full Bluetooth Low Energy functionality.
I have been using the libraries from BTFramework for years. They are reliable, full-featured, and the team there has painfully worked around all the shortcomings of Microsoft's normally partial and not-always-fully-tested API sets. We code in C# dot NET, mainly in desktop apps. I spent months working with Microsoft's UWP approach, then went back to the BTFramework solution. Much easier.

Frank Anderson
  • 81
  • 1
  • 2
  • 2
    I don't know why someone would downvote this. Using a 3rd party software is often a very effective (cost-wise and time-wise). I have not personally used this product yet, but I have researched them and intend to try it. They have both non-code and with-code versions at a very reasonable price. – batpox Jan 29 '20 at 15:38