Something new Stuff to Media Packages

Many of you may already be aware of this, but Cingular has just opened
at least some of their UDP ports. A while back I posted a message
documenting how Cingular blocked the UDP ports that were required for
Real Audio on a phone. While people could use real audio on a laptop
using TCP, it was a no go on cell phones. Well this week my dad was in
the hospital and I spent much on the time in his room. Unfortunately,
the only source of news on the cable network at the hospital was The
Communist News Network(CNN), so I went hunting for other sources. After
messing with my cell phone I discovered that I could stream real audio
with no elaborate settings. Furthermore, I noticed on Cingular's WAP
page that there is a package you can buy(in addition to Media Works) for
$9.99 that allows you to stream 20 major cable network channels to you
phone.

So it appears that Cinuglar had made some additions as to want UDP ports
they allow. I guess it time to check some other applications that
haven't worked previously. I suspect this change was for real audio
products only, but you never know.

Enjoy

---

› See More: Something new Stuff to Media Packages

"R.M" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Many of you may already be aware of this, but Cingular has just opened
> at least some of their UDP ports. A while back I posted a message
> documenting how Cingular blocked the UDP ports that were required for
> Real Audio on a phone. While people could use real audio on a laptop
> using TCP, it was a no go on cell phones. Well this week my dad was in
> the hospital and I spent much on the time in his room. Unfortunately,
> the only source of news on the cable network at the hospital was The
> Communist News Network(CNN), so I went hunting for other sources. After
> messing with my cell phone I discovered that I could stream real audio
> with no elaborate settings. Furthermore, I noticed on Cingular's WAP
> page that there is a package you can buy(in addition to Media Works) for
> $9.99 that allows you to stream 20 major cable network channels to you
> phone.
>
> So it appears that Cinuglar had made some additions as to want UDP ports
> they allow. I guess it time to check some other applications that
> haven't worked previously. I suspect this change was for real audio
> products only, but you never know.
>
> Enjoy
>

Didn't the hospital have the Fake Or Xenophobic news network?

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

In <[email protected]> on Fri, 10 Dec 2004 17:40:11 GMT, "R.M"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>... Well this week my dad was in
>the hospital and I spent much on the time in his room. Unfortunately,
>the only source of news on the cable network at the hospital was The
>Communist News Network(CNN), so I went hunting for other sources. After
>messing with my cell phone ...

Many (most?) hospitals prohibit the use of cell phones. It seems to silly to
risk interference with hospital equipment just to stream entertainment.

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

John Navas wrote:
> Many (most?) hospitals prohibit the use of cell phones. It seems to silly to
> risk interference with hospital equipment just to stream entertainment.
>


Very true, indeed there were many marked areas such as the ICU and ER
that cell phones were not permitted. However, the floor we were on was a
non-critical area and designated exclusively as a "safe place" to use
them. Had we been on any other floor it would have been different.

I work in the a hospital setting and cell phones do not really interfere
with medical equipment.

ek
"R.M" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> John Navas wrote:
>> Many (most?) hospitals prohibit the use of cell phones. It seems to
>> silly to
>> risk interference with hospital equipment just to stream entertainment.
>>
>
>
> Very true, indeed there were many marked areas such as the ICU and ER that
> cell phones were not permitted. However, the floor we were on was a
> non-critical area and designated exclusively as a "safe place" to use
> them. Had we been on any other floor it would have been different.
>

>I work in the a hospital setting and cell phones do not really interfere
>with medical equipment.
>

Of course not!!!

The building maintenance people's walkie talkies have more potential to
interfere.

The ambient cellular/PCS signal in the air surrounding a hospital/airport/
<insert any other alarmist location> would shut them all down if they did.


--
John S.
e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net

John S. wrote:
>>I work in the a hospital setting and cell phones do not really interfere
>>with medical equipment.
>>
>
>
> Of course not!!!
>
> The building maintenance people's walkie talkies have more potential to
> interfere.
>
> The ambient cellular/PCS signal in the air surrounding a hospital/airport/
> <insert any other alarmist location> would shut them all down if they did.
>
>

Many of the cell phone bans these days are really camera bans. It is too
hard to tell the difference beween a camera or non-camera equipped
phone, so they ban them all. The side benefit is the removal of
obnoxious talkers.

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

In <[email protected]> on Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:59:59 GMT,
"Eric" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"R.M" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...

>> John Navas wrote:

>>> Many (most?) hospitals prohibit the use of cell phones. It seems to
>>> silly to
>>> risk interference with hospital equipment just to stream entertainment.
>>
>> Very true, indeed there were many marked areas such as the ICU and ER that
>> cell phones were not permitted. However, the floor we were on was a
>> non-critical area and designated exclusively as a "safe place" to use
>> them. Had we been on any other floor it would have been different.

>I work in the a hospital setting and cell phones do not really interfere
>with medical equipment.

Some mobile devices can cause interference with critical medical
equipment and it is important these are turned off where a risk
exists, said Prof. Kent Woods, Chief Executive of the [UK Medicines
and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency]. However, he said there is
no reason why mobile technology can't be used in designated areas of
hospitals where there is little or no risk of interference with
critical medical equipment.
<http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news0...hospitals.html>

p.s. It's rude to switch posting styles in mid-thread.

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

Eric wrote:
> I work in the a hospital setting and cell phones do not really interfere
> with medical equipment.
>

Being I'm the one that started the discussion, I'm chime in once more
time. First, as John said in a another post, this is completely wrong.
For those who don't know I am a Ham Radio operator (callsign: wo5m for
those who care) and I can tell you first hand there is not an RF device
that will never cause interference.

There are some other facts I probably should have included, but how I
considered my first message long winded, I skipped over a few facts. As
I said in my first reply, the floor I was on was designated for cell
phone use. Something I didn't bring up , was the fact that just out side
my dad's room was an antenna for Fort Worth's 800mhz public works
trucking system.

Back to the cell phone issue. All the phones I have seen are the
noisiest devices I have ever seen when dealing with RF. For those who
would like a first hand demonstration, find a amplified speaker and
place a cell phone call while near the amplifier. Now I'm no expert on
hospital equipment, but from what I do know, many of them are much more
sensitive than a simple amplifier. I agree with John's first comments
about, using a cell phone is a hospital. I would only add, that you
**MUST** ask before you use one, don't risk messing with their equipment.

This wasn't the original topic of the discussion, but a good topic nun
the less.