AMPS Upgrade

John Navas wrote:
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Tue, 28 Dec
> 2004 18:13:29 GMT, ".Philip." <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> John Navas wrote:
>>>
>>> In <[email protected]> on Tue, 28 Dec 2004 11:28:02
>>> -0500, "Thomas M. Goethe" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The simplest thing to do is to add Navas to your blocked
>>>> senders list. ...
>>>
>>> Hands clapped over ears, eyes squeezed tight shut, chanting "I can't
>>> hear you!" "I can't hear you!" over and over. Then you take your
>>> baseball and go home.
>>
>> Well John ... your sig line makes clear you are an appologist for
>> GSM, AT&T, etc.
>
> It does? Since I also publish a webpage on CMDA*, does that mean I'm
> a CDMA apologist as well? LOL (Ad hominem is a sure sign that you
> have no real point to make.)

I was specific. If you wish to be all inclusive for the purposes of
diluting/deflecting ... do what you have to do.

---

› See More: AMPS Upgrade

> Not really. As I wrote earlier:
>
> Configuring the available timeslots in pairs, Extended Range GSM
> gives 72 km usable range, but lacks GPRS capability, and halves the
> number of concurrent calls possible. Using more sensitive BTS
> receivers, Enhanced Extended Range GSM been demonstrated to be usable
> at 120 km (with the same drawbacks as ER).
>
> That gives GSM as much range as CDMA, sufficient for even sparse areas.

My practical experience has been that *any* phone in digital mode doesn't
work properly when you're on top of a mountain, probably due to pilot
pollution but it may also be timing related. If the timing issues are to
blame for this, I'd say the extended range GSM system you describe has not
been implemented in the area. That's the great thing about analog fall-back.
It's here today and works without dependencies like knowing if your provider
implemented extended range GSM.

While I do see analog being eliminated from cities, remote rural areas
continue to have usable analog signal. I find the need to force my phone to
analog almost everytime I go hiking in the cascades if I wish to make calls
(Does not matter CDMA/GSM/TDMA-- none of the digital standards work in these
locations).

By the way, I do understand this is a bit esoteric, but for it represents a
significant amount of my free time (I like to hike/ski/snow shoe in the
cascades every chance I get)

-Dan

PS: The groups I hike with almost always have most all cellular technologies
represented between them. The folks who are able to make calls are those
who can choose to force an analog connection (i.e. Sprint, Verizon, Qwest).
As you know, AT&T TDMA phones don't let you force analog if the phone thinks
it has digitial signal-- even an unusable one.

> John Navas wrote:
>> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>>
>> In <[email protected]> on Tue, 28 Dec 2004 11:28:02
>> -0500, "Thomas M. Goethe" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> The simplest thing to do is to add Navas to your blocked senders
>>> list. ...
>>
>> Hands clapped over ears, eyes squeezed tight shut, chanting "I can't
>> hear you!" "I can't hear you!" over and over. Then you take your
>> baseball and go home.
>

Sign, until someone leaves a quote in.....


--
Thomas M. Goethe

John Navas wrote:
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Tue, 28 Dec 2004
> 15:29:22 GMT, ".Philip." <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>John Navas wrote:
>>
>>>In <[email protected]> on Mon, 27 Dec 2004 20:12:43
>>>-0800, "Dan Albrich" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>GSM has a theoretical limit of 30km, or about 20 miles due to timing.
>>>>There's lots
>>>>of places in the rural western US where that doesn't do the trick
>>>>including mountain areas where there's no financial incentive to
>>>>build the necessary tower density.
>>>>
>>>>The Bottom line:
>>>>Analog is absolutely required for much of the rural west and will
>>>>continue to be so.
>>>
>>>Not really. As I wrote earlier:
>>
>>snip
>>
>>I would not agree with you at all. A classic case in point was a recent
>>weekend visit to Beatty, NV. My Verizon service provided 3-4 bars of
>>digital and nearly as strong an analog signal. Two friends having AT&T
>>service had No Service for that entire weekend ... ever. This also was the
>>case for one of their wives having T-Mobile. This was also the case in
>>nearby Furnace Creek (Death Valley). You can talk about the technology
>>all you want ... fact of the matter is that out here (western states),
>>analog still rules many areas away from main thoroughfares.
>
>
> That simply shows that Verizon has good digital coverage in an area where
> ATTWS and T-Mobile have a digital coverage hole. That's certainly no
> surprise. There are likewise areas where ATTWS (now combined with Cingular)
> and/or T-Mobile have good digital coverage where Verizon has a coverage hole.
> And likewise areas without AMPS (analog) coverage, as well as (increasingly)
> areas with digital coverage but no AMPS coverage. That's the nature of
> cellular, and it really doesn't say anything about the need for AMPS.

Actually, I agree with Philip on this one. AMPS is the only universal
technology in the United States. It's a sad story of a country with
universal technology in which carriers have chosen different upgrade
paths.

However, I feel that when AMPS is allowed to be turned off, if CDMA has
not been built out, Verizon Wireless will greatly suffer because many
areas with TDMA/AMPS carriers that are converting to GSM cannot allow
CDMA roaming if a CDMA carrier is not present.


> As always with cellular, choose the service that works best in your particular
> area(s). That may be GSM digital (depending on carrier), CMDA digital
> (depending on carrier), or (for now at least) AMPS. In some areas that might
> be digital plus AMPS, although such areas continue to shrink as digital (not
> AMPS) coverage improves. That's a long way from a blanket generalization that
> AMPS is essential. There's likewise no real basis for claiming that digital
> coverage won't improve in rural areas, because it actually *is* improving in
> rural areas, and there really isn't a tower density issue, since digital is
> capable of sufficient range (particularly in "mountain areas").
>

>>As you know, AT&T TDMA phones don't let you force analog if the phone
>>thinks
>>it has digitial signal-- even an unusable one.
>
> That would be a phone defect -- it should only select the digital signal
> if it
> is usable.

--> Actually this issue with AT&T TDMA phones prefering a digtial signal
(even when it is unusable) has long been known an talked about in usenet for
years. The loss of manual selection for AT&T customers coincided with the
digital one rate plans and tri-mode phones.

Anyway, easy to verify this information first hand, even in your neck of the
woods. Travel to the top of Mt. Tamalpais state park and try to make a
call with *any* digital phone. Bring a phone capable of forcing analog, and
the call will go right through...

I haven't been there in a couple years, so it's possible this is no longer
true.

-Dan

--
Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest

In news:[email protected],
Dan Albrich <[email protected]> typed:
>>> As you know, AT&T TDMA phones don't let you force analog if the
>>> phone thinks it has digitial signal-- even an unusable one.
>>
>> That would be a phone defect -- it should only select the digital
>> signal if it is usable.
>
> --> Actually this issue with AT&T TDMA phones prefering a digtial
> signal (even when it is unusable) has long been known an talked about
> in usenet for years. The loss of manual selection for AT&T customers
> coincided with the digital one rate plans and tri-mode phones.
>
> Anyway, easy to verify this information first hand, even in your neck
> of the woods. Travel to the top of Mt. Tamalpais state park and try
> to make a call with *any* digital phone. Bring a phone capable of
> forcing analog, and the call will go right through...
>
> I haven't been there in a couple years, so it's possible this is no
> longer true.
>
> -Dan

Sounds like a lot of people have phones with that defect. ;-)

"Traveling Man" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> Not necessarily. CDMA towers can adjust the power output of cell phones
> to
> prevent swamping. Your 3W signal could be dropped down into the
> milliwatt
> range if you are close to a tower.

Yes, very true, but they would only scale it back that much if the
additional power was not necessary. I don't care if I am only transmitting
at 100 milliwatts if that is all it takes. My point is just that the output
power can be up to 3 watts. ;-)

> Besides, unless you also have a receive preamp in the amplifier you may
> not
> hear as far as you can transmit.

My BDA from Wilson Cellular (I got it from www.wpsantennas.com) must have a
preamp on the recieve side because when I go from just having the external
antenna plugged in, to having the external anteanna plugged in running
through the BDA I get about 10db signal increase.

-Eric

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Wed, 29 Dec 2004 15:16:11 -0800,
"Dan Albrich" <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>As you know, AT&T TDMA phones don't let you force analog if the phone
>>>thinks
>>>it has digitial signal-- even an unusable one.
>>
>> That would be a phone defect -- it should only select the digital signal
>> if it
>> is usable.
>
>--> Actually this issue with AT&T TDMA phones prefering a digtial signal
>(even when it is unusable) has long been known an talked about in usenet for
>years. ...

It's not a good idea to take chatter on Usenet as gospel, because it anything
but a valid statistical sample. ;-) I've had ATTWS TDMA (IS-136) handsets
that would only select digital when it was usable. The usual problem was in a
moving car, where usable digital might be selected, but the signal might then
fade into being unusable, resulting in a dropped call. That's not the fault
of the phone.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

> It's not a good idea to take chatter on Usenet as gospel, because it
> anything
> but a valid statistical sample. ;-) I've had ATTWS TDMA (IS-136)
> handsets
> that would only select digital when it was usable. The usual problem was
> in a
> moving car, where usable digital might be selected, but the signal might
> then
> fade into being unusable, resulting in a dropped call. That's not the
> fault
> of the phone.

My experience is not just from reading usenet. I was an AT&T TDMA postpaid
customer, and have since carried AT&T network TDMA/analog and GSM prepaid
phones. I have also seen many posts that mirror my own experience in this
regard.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this point.

Regards,
-Dan

--
Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
http://cell.uoregon.edu