From a standards design perspective, there is nothing wrong with it. It's the same protocol running on two very different frequency bands. They co-exist and support each other.

The problem is how marketing interacted with it.

They should share a specification (I know this is correctly called a 'standard') but the should have been a separate logo for each non-interoperable group of useful features (a different concept also often called a 'standard'); as USB has proved.