Swithched to Verizon PTT

"Larry W4CSC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hmm...thanks for the info.
>
> Does Verizon's PTT work like that? They never talk much about groups and
> group features on it, probably because people will start asking questions
> about why they are not allowed to have 3 phones with the same number that
> all ring at once on one phone number....(c;
>

Verizon PTT has all of the characteristics of a VOIP call, except for the
duplex functionality. It dials the number and the resulting lag is from the
call connecting (as opposed to an instantaneous radio transmission). If I
remember correctly, you also have to 'hang up' when you are done. As far as
group functionality is concerned, I believe it is an option, but I remember
reading that the functionality is extremely limited (number of users in a
group). Also, you have to take more steps to move from a group conversation
to one with a single user. There is absolutely no visible benefit over
Nextel- microscopic user base, extremely long connect times, limited
functionality......no reason to consider it for a business alternative.

---

› See More: Swithched to Verizon PTT

"SS" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> The problem is that there are probably more that you aren't aware of.
> I hear more loud, obnoxious and inappropriate ringtones and more
> people carrying on loud phone calls in the course of a day than the
> 'doink' .

Okay, but there is still a HUGE problem with some folks who use this
technology. If there weren't neither me nor anyone else would know about
the problem, and we wouldn't be talking about it right now!

>> You know that and I know that. Tell all the other morons that!
> Which ones- the ones that yell on the phone or the ones that yell on
> PTT?

Both. But that is not the problem that I have. I will always (for the
most part) hear one end of a conversation. The PTT technology makes me
hear BOTH ends of the conversation. What I don't understand is why people
percieve PTT to be far superior to a real conversation.......

> The myth that all PTT calls are a public conversation.

THEY ARE!!!! Even when I have seen people use the phones discreetly, most
of what is being said can be heard by anyone who wants to listen. My only
point has been that it is somewhat unprofessional.
>
>>
>> >> Most of the guys I deal with, I can't trust them or what they say
>> >> enough to
>> >> talk to them on PTT.
>> > And what prevents them from putting you on speakerphone when you
>> > call them?
>> Nothing. However, I am enough of a businessman to ensure that my
>> communications are never corrupt.
> Really? Emails can never be forwarded without your knowledge? You
> don't call phones that have recording capabilities (be careful with
> this one- many more have this than you would think)? Unless
> everything you do is encrypted and useless to anyone that can't
> encrypt it, you have no guarantee of total privacy.

What do emails have to do with this? Furthermore, I never send emails that
I wouldn't want anyone to forward. That is professionalism. If everyone
had a few more ounces of professionalism in them, none of this would be at
issue.

BigBob

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Is that the official "end of the week" stance now?
>
> I guess the new Nextel phones with the off-network walkie talkie using the
> 900 mhz spectrum were obsolete when introduced???
>
> Check your premises; contradictions can't exist...
>
> The easy way out was to not have to replace all their customer's phones
with
> the 1.9GHz ones, and simply use the 900 MHz spectrum that they are
expanding
> their sites to utilize, while still maintaining the Public Safety spectrum
> that is the cause of so much interference.
>
> However, by your estimate of the current situation and company strategy,
> they just rolled out the off network useage of 900 mhz as VaporWare..
>
>
> I guess this proposed move to 1.9GHz is also why they expanded the Boost
> prepaid system to use the old spectrum, instead of the new spectrum you
> propose.
>
> I could go on, but you should have the general idea by now. Either they
are
> staying with public safety spectrum and expanding to 900 mhz for off
network
> simplex and spill over, or they are trying to double their base in old
> specttrum so they can confidently bankrupt themseves with 100% certainty
by
> having to replace all the 800/900 MHz phones with 1.9 GHz ones.
>
> New slogan, by your estimation will be NEXTEL | BROKE
>
>


You don't have to believe me- try reading from independent sources:

http://www.mobiletracker.net/archive...pproves_ne.php
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1725640,00.asp
http://www.thestreet.com/tech/telecom/10169910.html
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0..._story_related
http://www.internetnews.com/wireless...le.php/3469601

The reason for the multiple links is to show you that the news is anything
but uncommon knowledge. If you had a clue about either the technology
involved or the steps needed to complete the swap, you would not make the
idiotic assumptions and observations written above. And if you don't want
to believe the articles linked to in this post, visit the FCC website and
search on "Nextel spectrum swap". It will show the timeline that the
government set up to complete the process, along with the provisions of the
agreement. You'll notice that some of those provisions were included in my
last post. I don't have the need to make it up- try it some time.

"Big Bob" <nolanr*@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "SS" <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> > The problem is that there are probably more that you aren't aware of.
> > I hear more loud, obnoxious and inappropriate ringtones and more
> > people carrying on loud phone calls in the course of a day than the
> > 'doink' .
>
> Okay, but there is still a HUGE problem with some folks who use this
> technology. If there weren't neither me nor anyone else would know about
> the problem, and we wouldn't be talking about it right now!

And there is a HUGE problem with those who subject us to loud and stupid
ringtones, and there are certainly many more of them. My point- people
don't choose a specific technology to be obnoxious and rude, and the problem
is no worse with any particular technology.

>
> >> You know that and I know that. Tell all the other morons that!
> > Which ones- the ones that yell on the phone or the ones that yell on
> > PTT?
>
> Both. But that is not the problem that I have. I will always (for the
> most part) hear one end of a conversation. The PTT technology makes me
> hear BOTH ends of the conversation. What I don't understand is why people
> percieve PTT to be far superior to a real conversation.......
>
> > The myth that all PTT calls are a public conversation.
>
> THEY ARE!!!! Even when I have seen people use the phones discreetly, most
> of what is being said can be heard by anyone who wants to listen. My only
> point has been that it is somewhat unprofessional.

They are no more a public conversation than the local **** yelling at her
boyfriend in front of Walmart. Or the stock broker discussing his client's
portfolio in the middle of a restaurant.

> >
> >>
> >> >> Most of the guys I deal with, I can't trust them or what they say
> >> >> enough to
> >> >> talk to them on PTT.
> >> > And what prevents them from putting you on speakerphone when you
> >> > call them?
> >> Nothing. However, I am enough of a businessman to ensure that my
> >> communications are never corrupt.
> > Really? Emails can never be forwarded without your knowledge? You
> > don't call phones that have recording capabilities (be careful with
> > this one- many more have this than you would think)? Unless
> > everything you do is encrypted and useless to anyone that can't
> > encrypt it, you have no guarantee of total privacy.
>
> What do emails have to do with this? Furthermore, I never send emails
that
> I wouldn't want anyone to forward. That is professionalism. If everyone
> had a few more ounces of professionalism in them, none of this would be at
> issue.
>

Your statement was that your communications can never be corrupted- I simply
pointed out that this statement may not necessarily be correct. And I was
not commenting on the content of your emails- I do believe you when you say
that your comfortable with the content. However, I can think of no business
that would survive if all communications were of the type that can be freely
shared by the recipient with anyone they wished.

"SS" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> And there is a HUGE problem with those who subject us to loud and
> stupid ringtones, and there are certainly many more of them. My
> point- people don't choose a specific technology to be obnoxious and
> rude, and the problem is no worse with any particular technology.

OK, I will agree that the problem is not with the technology, but the
people. Can we agree however that some technologies are worse than others?

> They are no more a public conversation than the local **** yelling at
> her boyfriend in front of Walmart. Or the stock broker discussing his
> client's portfolio in the middle of a restaurant.

Neither of which are behavioral traits of professional people.

The problem with PTT as far as I see it: this technology can take otherwise
professional people and turn them into undesirables. Why? The technology
is no more sophisticated than the GiJoe walkie-talkies my kid has.

> Your statement was that your communications can never be corrupted- I
> simply pointed out that this statement may not necessarily be correct.
> And I was not commenting on the content of your emails- I do believe
> you when you say that your comfortable with the content. However, I
> can think of no business that would survive if all communications were
> of the type that can be freely shared by the recipient with anyone
> they wished.

Exactly my point. You and I can agree here. In my business, my employees
are forbidden from using this technology. We are extremely careful when
using mobile communications outside our offices. When we must use them, we
use them in such a manner as to keep our conversations private.

It works. It may not be the easiest, but one thing is for sure, my guys
are professionals.

BigBob

"Big Bob" <nolanr*@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "SS" <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> > And there is a HUGE problem with those who subject us to loud and
> > stupid ringtones, and there are certainly many more of them. My
> > point- people don't choose a specific technology to be obnoxious and
> > rude, and the problem is no worse with any particular technology.
>
> OK, I will agree that the problem is not with the technology, but the
> people. Can we agree however that some technologies are worse than
others?

Probably, but if asked which is the worst we would more than likely come up
with two different answers.

>
> > They are no more a public conversation than the local **** yelling at
> > her boyfriend in front of Walmart. Or the stock broker discussing his
> > client's portfolio in the middle of a restaurant.
>
> Neither of which are behavioral traits of professional people.

Agreed, but they happen with more regularity than the 'doink' sound does-
even you would have to admit that.

>
> The problem with PTT as far as I see it: this technology can take
otherwise
> professional people and turn them into undesirables. Why? The technology
> is no more sophisticated than the GiJoe walkie-talkies my kid has.

The sophistication of the technology has no bearing- the functionality is
what is important. Again, I would argue that is not the application, but
the tool (the phone) that has turned people into professional idiots.
Checking and answering the phone has become more important than the
face-to-face conversation they are in. God forbid they should send anyone
to voicemail. Walking down the street paying more attention to the phone
screen than the people they walking into. The cell phone itself has made
people forget basic manners and consideration.

>
> > Your statement was that your communications can never be corrupted- I
> > simply pointed out that this statement may not necessarily be correct.
> > And I was not commenting on the content of your emails- I do believe
> > you when you say that your comfortable with the content. However, I
> > can think of no business that would survive if all communications were
> > of the type that can be freely shared by the recipient with anyone
> > they wished.
>
> Exactly my point. You and I can agree here. In my business, my employees
> are forbidden from using this technology. We are extremely careful when
> using mobile communications outside our offices. When we must use them,
we
> use them in such a manner as to keep our conversations private.
>
> It works. It may not be the easiest, but one thing is for sure, my guys
> are professionals.
>
Actually, we seem to agree on a lot of things. All I see is a difference in
perception of what technologies are really bothersome.

----- Original Message -----
From: "SS" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.cellular.nextel,alt.cellular.verizon
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2005 12:03 AM
Subject: Re: Swithched to Verizon PTT


>
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Is that the official "end of the week" stance now?
>>
>> I guess the new Nextel phones with the off-network walkie talkie using
>> the
>> 900 mhz spectrum were obsolete when introduced???
>>
>> Check your premises; contradictions can't exist...
>>
>> The easy way out was to not have to replace all their customer's phones
> with
>> the 1.9GHz ones, and simply use the 900 MHz spectrum that they are
> expanding
>> their sites to utilize, while still maintaining the Public Safety
>> spectrum
>> that is the cause of so much interference.
>>
>> However, by your estimate of the current situation and company strategy,
>> they just rolled out the off network useage of 900 mhz as VaporWare..
>>
>>
>> I guess this proposed move to 1.9GHz is also why they expanded the Boost
>> prepaid system to use the old spectrum, instead of the new spectrum you
>> propose.
>>
>> I could go on, but you should have the general idea by now. Either they
> are
>> staying with public safety spectrum and expanding to 900 mhz for off
> network
>> simplex and spill over, or they are trying to double their base in old
>> specttrum so they can confidently bankrupt themseves with 100% certainty
> by
>> having to replace all the 800/900 MHz phones with 1.9 GHz ones.
>>
>> New slogan, by your estimation will be NEXTEL | BROKE
>>
>>
>
>
> You don't have to believe me- try reading from independent sources:
>
> http://www.mobiletracker.net/archive...pproves_ne.php
> July 8th 2004 -
The FCC has voted to approve a spectrum swap for Nextel to keep emergency
radio spectrum clean from interference. We let you know that it was likely
to be approved, as late as yesterday.

> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1725640,00.asp November 15th, 2004

The U.S. Government Accountability Office last week cleared the way for the
Federal Communications Commission to move Nextel Communications out of the
800MHz spectrum, where it interferes with police and fire department radio
signals, and into a higher-frequency

> http://www.thestreet.com/tech/telecom/10169910.html July 8th, 2004

Federal regulators Thursday approved a deal handing Nextel (NXTL:Nasdaq -
news - research) a valuable and controversial swath of wireless spectrum.

> http://www.wired.com/news/business/0..._story_related

July 8th, 2004
WASHINGTON -- Federal regulators unanimously approved a plan Thursday aimed
at eliminating cell-phone interference with hundreds of public-safety
communication systems around the country.

> http://www.internetnews.com/wireless...le.php/3469601

February 7, 2005
Nextel Finalizes Spectrum Swap
By Roy Mark

Nextel made its controversial spectrum swap agreement official Monday,
agreeing to the terms of the complicated deal hammered out with the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC).

================================================

So, as of February, there is a positive committment. After following the
technology and bartering for the past 3 years, I did manage to miss this
last announcement. All previous ones have related to proposed sprectrum
swap. As you probably are aware the original 10 year window on Spectrum
Auction ended about the time these negotiations began.

>
> The reason for the multiple links is to show you that the news is anything
> but uncommon knowledge. If you had a clue about either the technology
> involved or the steps needed to complete the swap, you would not make the
> idiotic assumptions and observations written above.

Let's see; technology.....850Mhz as opposed to 1.9 GHz.... Quite a bit of
difference.

All new antennas at the site (at the least)..

Greatly increasing the density of the build out to offset the loss of range
in the higher frequencies.

Offsetting the effects of moisture, vegetation, and other things that "go
bump in the night" affecting the higher frequencies (most of the other
carriers have already done this and have absorbed the cost).

All new transmitters and receivers in the racks [For every channel, with
redundancy - up to the proposed 6:1 uinterleave - as they depart the 3:1
interleave that they had utilized in the past ] .

Possibly a change in the Coaxial Cable to a lower loss type. Possible
pressurized Gas hardline systems to maintain stability and give instant
indication of compromise in feed line quality.

New phones for every subscriber - Even though the current SIM and Codeplug
have provivions for GSM operation (proposedly for overseas operation) At
least for the Condor series. I am not at all familar with the Falcon series
or later. .

Scrapping the 900 MHz spill over, or continuing a build out to support their
off-network simplex enabled phones (if it is practical to continue the new
direction that they rolled out after the Feburary 2005 announcement that
they were leaving the Public Safety bands for spectrum over 2x the frequency
that they had just invested heavily in) .

Abandoning the latest push to compete in the prepaid arena, with the
expanded Boost network, while making a push to saturate the market with
phones that will (quickly?) become inefficient paperweights.

You are right, I don't begin to understand the complexities and cost
involved - the above are just a few random shots that don't even scratch the
surface.



> and if you don't want
> to believe the articles linked to in this post, visit the FCC website and
> search on "Nextel spectrum swap". It will show the timeline that the
> government set up to complete the process, along with the provisions of
> the
> agreement. You'll notice that some of those provisions were included in
> my
> last post. I don't have the need to make it up- try it some time.
>
I will concede that anything is possible; although I still haven't seen Pigs
that could fly. It is possible that Nextel could contract Motorola to build
a Dual Band, Dual Mode Iden phone

PRESS RELEASE

For Immediate Release

800 MHz Transition Administrator Contact: Brett Haan

c/o BearingPoint Phone: (888) 800-8220

1676 International Drive E-mail: [email protected]

McLean, VA 22102

800 MHz Transition Administrator Announces Start Date of 800 MHz Wave 1
Reconfiguration

Wave 1 of the Regional Prioritization Plan set to begin on June 27, 2005 for
non-NPSPAC Licensees

June 13, 2005, Washington, D.C. - The 800 MHz Transition Administrator
("TA") today announced that

Wave 1, Stage 1 reconfiguration will start on June 27, 2005 as previously
scheduled in the Regional

Prioritization Plan ("RPP"). "Wave 1" licensees are in National Public
Safety Planning Advisory

Committee ("NPSPAC") regions covering areas including much of the
Northeastern United States,

Northern California, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Colorado and regions around the
greater Chicago area. 800

MHz licensees in the 806-809 MHz/851-854 MHz band, also known as "Channels
1-120", are considered

Stage 1 or non-NPSPAC licensees. The Federal Communications Commission
("FCC") issued a related

Public Notice on May 27, 2005
(http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...-05-1546A1.pdf).

As required by the FCC, the TA developed a RPP that lists the order in which
the 55 800 MHz NPSPAC

regions will start the process of reconfiguration. The RPP defines four
"Waves" or groupings of NPSPAC

regions to be reconfigured. Within each NPSPAC region, Channels 1-120
("Stage 1") frequencies must

relocate prior to NPSPAC frequencies. To learn more about the RPP, the
reconfiguration Waves, or to

identify the assigned "Wave" for a given license or call sign please visit
the TA's website at

www.800TA.org.

800 MHz licensees should be aware of the following:

?? On May 3, 2005, the TA sent all Wave 1 licensees a reconfiguration
information package. This

package was mailed to the address on file with the FCC. If you are a Wave 1
licensee and have not

received this mailing, please contact the TA at [email protected] or (888)
800-8220. The TA's

reconfiguration guidance is available at www.800TA.org.

?? A separate package will be mailed to Wave 1, Stage 1 licensees,
containing the TA's frequency

proposals for licensees' affected call signs. Completed Frequency Proposal
Reports (FPR) will be

mailed to the address on file with the FCC prior to June 27, 2005.

?? Licensees receiving FPRs will be contacted by Nextel to begin
reconfiguration negotiations. If you

are a Wave 1, Stage 1 licensee and do not hear from Nextel, you should
contact Nextel at

[email protected].

?? Licensees in Waves 2 through 4 will receive information packages before
the start dates of their

reconfigurations. To facilitate this process, please ensure that your
license information on file with the

FCC is current. Licensees in Waves 2-4 can access the most recent
reconfiguration news by visiting

the TA's website at www.800TA.org.

About the 800 MHz Transition Administrator, LLC

800 MHz Transition Administrator, LLC ("TA LLC") is the Transition
Administrator ("TA") for the

reconfiguration of the 800 MHz band mandated by the Federal Communications
Commission ("FCC").

TA LLC has contracted with BearingPoint, Inc., Squire, Sanders & Dempsey
L.L.P. and Baseline

Telecom, Inc. to perform the duties of the TA. Among its duties, the TA
establishes reconfiguration

guidelines, specifies replacement channels, reviews reconfiguration cost
estimates, monitors payment of

reconfiguration costs, manages the relocation schedule, facilitates issue
resolution and administers the

alternate dispute resolution process. TA LLC uses information it receives
solely for the purposes of

administering the 800 MHz reconfiguration process and may disclose such
information to the FCC or

other authorized parties pursuant to the requirements of the 800 MHz Order
or other applicable laws.

**************************************************

As you can see from the most recent activity, the first stage starts Monday,
with Nextel in the drivers seat for the others to negotiate the
reconfiguration.

In the meantime, they will apparently still be expanding both their 900 MHz
coverage and 900 MHz off-network enabled phones; like the i315 and i325;
introduced in the past quarter.

With the current push to expand their 900 MHz utilization, and Nextel being
in charge of the spectrum reconfiguration, I see this as an eventual change
over, but probably not in the lifetime of a major portion of their current
customer base.

Keep in mind that 800 MHz analog operation is still ongoing, permitted by
the FCC at the discretion of the carrier.

Also, I assume that you have been around Cellular long enough to know how
well the industry held to the FCC's requirement for secure communications.
Congress even came up with the ECPA to regulate the public after the
Cellular Carrier's fail to meet the FCC's requirements.

If the FCC enforces this new proposal, it will be a pleasant surprise. If I
were Nextel, I would be more concerned about their tower lighting than
trying to meet the first deadline on this project....





# # #

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

> **************************************************
>
> As you can see from the most recent activity, the first stage starts
Monday,
> with Nextel in the drivers seat for the others to negotiate the
> reconfiguration.
>
> In the meantime, they will apparently still be expanding both their 900
MHz
> coverage and 900 MHz off-network enabled phones; like the i315 and i325;
> introduced in the past quarter.
>
> With the current push to expand their 900 MHz utilization, and Nextel
being
> in charge of the spectrum reconfiguration, I see this as an eventual
change
> over, but probably not in the lifetime of a major portion of their current
> customer base.
>
> Keep in mind that 800 MHz analog operation is still ongoing, permitted by
> the FCC at the discretion of the carrier.
>
> Also, I assume that you have been around Cellular long enough to know how
> well the industry held to the FCC's requirement for secure communications.
> Congress even came up with the ECPA to regulate the public after the
> Cellular Carrier's fail to meet the FCC's requirements.
>
> If the FCC enforces this new proposal, it will be a pleasant surprise. If
I
> were Nextel, I would be more concerned about their tower lighting than
> trying to meet the first deadline on this project....
>

You missed another big piece of the puzzle- the merger with Sprint. As they
gradually roll their consumer base over to 1.9 GHz Sprint CDMA network (a
lot cheaper for the company), there will be less of a need to build out
anything. The new company will continue to provide iDen for the next few
years, but I would very surprised if there is much consumer activation on
that platform going forawrd. In five or six years, most Nextel consumer
users will probably be using the current Sprint network and iDen will revert
to a business/Public Safety product. Its even quite possible that all phone
traffic will be carried over the CDMA network and iDen will strictly be a
PTT network. Nextel had also reserved a good chunk of money specifically
for the spectrum swap, so it is now more of a logistical problem than
financial.

>

"SS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>
>> **************************************************
>>
>> As you can see from the most recent activity, the first stage starts
> Monday,
>> with Nextel in the drivers seat for the others to negotiate the
>> reconfiguration.
>>
>> In the meantime, they will apparently still be expanding both their 900
> MHz
>> coverage and 900 MHz off-network enabled phones; like the i315 and i325;
>> introduced in the past quarter.
>>
>> With the current push to expand their 900 MHz utilization, and Nextel
> being
>> in charge of the spectrum reconfiguration, I see this as an eventual
> change
>> over, but probably not in the lifetime of a major portion of their
>> current
>> customer base.
>>
>> Keep in mind that 800 MHz analog operation is still ongoing, permitted
>> by
>> the FCC at the discretion of the carrier.
>>
>> Also, I assume that you have been around Cellular long enough to know how
>> well the industry held to the FCC's requirement for secure
>> communications.
>> Congress even came up with the ECPA to regulate the public after the
>> Cellular Carrier's fail to meet the FCC's requirements.
>>
>> If the FCC enforces this new proposal, it will be a pleasant surprise.
>> If
> I
>> were Nextel, I would be more concerned about their tower lighting than
>> trying to meet the first deadline on this project....
>>
>
> You missed another big piece of the puzzle- the merger with Sprint. As
> they
> gradually roll their consumer base over to 1.9 GHz Sprint CDMA network (a
> lot cheaper for the company), there will be less of a need to build out
> anything. The new company will continue to provide iDen for the next few
> years, but I would very surprised if there is much consumer activation on
> that platform going forawrd. In five or six years, most Nextel consumer
> users will probably be using the current Sprint network and iDen will
> revert
> to a business/Public Safety product. Its even quite possible that all
> phone
> traffic will be carried over the CDMA network and iDen will strictly be a
> PTT network. Nextel had also reserved a good chunk of money specifically
> for the spectrum swap, so it is now more of a logistical problem than
> financial.
>

I can certainly agree with this assessment. Over on Howard Forums, it has
been estimated that this will be at least a 4 year project; if not for
longer.

It does make a lot more sense to try to migrate the consumer base towards
the Sprint end of the company and keep the PTT and iDen for commercial
users.

I still believe, that when the dust settles, that the iDen continuation of
services will take place on 900 Mhz spectrum. This would make the roll out
of the off-network simplex capable phones make a lot more sense.

Motorola also owns the rights to the software being used with VZ's
VOIP-based PTT service, so it is also possible/feasible that Sprint will try
to fill the gap for Consumer PTT as the migration continues.

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

> >
>
> I can certainly agree with this assessment. Over on Howard Forums, it has
> been estimated that this will be at least a 4 year project; if not for
> longer.
>
> It does make a lot more sense to try to migrate the consumer base towards
> the Sprint end of the company and keep the PTT and iDen for commercial
> users.
>
> I still believe, that when the dust settles, that the iDen continuation of
> services will take place on 900 Mhz spectrum. This would make the roll
out
> of the off-network simplex capable phones make a lot more sense.

I'm not sure I understand your logic here. The off-network stuff is just
that- off network. No need to tie PTT to it. And don't forget- they got a
whole bunch of 1.9GHz spectrum in the swap. They will develop iDen in that
frequency range.

>
> Motorola also owns the rights to the software being used with VZ's
> VOIP-based PTT service, so it is also possible/feasible that Sprint will
try
> to fill the gap for Consumer PTT as the migration continues.

And Nextel has rights to Qualcomm's Q-Chat technology, as well as their iDen
to CDMA bridge technology. It is very likely that phones will be CDMA with
an iDen PTT until the company decides the direction consumer PTT is going to
take.

"SS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>> I still believe, that when the dust settles, that the iDen continuation
>> of
>> services will take place on 900 Mhz spectrum. This would make the roll
> out
>> of the off-network simplex capable phones make a lot more sense.
>
> I'm not sure I understand your logic here. The off-network stuff is just
> that- off network. No need to tie PTT to it. And don't forget- they got
> a
> whole bunch of 1.9GHz spectrum in the swap. They will develop iDen in
> that
> frequency range.
>

I could be off-based in my reasoning here.... The Off-Network traffic still
has to work using a unique identifier for each phone, and it is currently on
900 MHz. In it's current configuration, it provides simplex PTT in areas
not served by the current network. As the 900 MHz backbone expands, there
is the potential to alieviate some of the crowding in the 850MHz by using
that spectrum. The Control Channel software should be able to be easily
configured to take some PTT traffic from the 850 MHz users and distribute it
to the 900 MHz spectrum as on-network PTT without deteriorating the
off-network traffic (which is still in it's infancy).

Here is an old reference to the 900 MHz expansion; originally granted in
June of 1999

http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/...1/da010121.txt

The off-network phones indicate that there is at least progress in the phone
construction. The FCC has already granted the spectrum, and I am
speculating that there will be a continuing build-out end updating of
exiasting sites to utilize 900 MHz.

Also, if the company does weed out the consumers from Iden and migrates them
to Sprint, the 900 MHz build out could possibly be used for commercial
users, provide minumum design changes in current iDen RF designs, and help
defray some of the costs in moving the PTT (LMR based comms) up to 1.9GHz.
This would also go far in lessening the interference to public safety during
the long process of completing the entire migration.

I am looking at this as a way for keeping the 2 technologies separate; by
spectrum. I see very little public safety use of 1.9 GHz, and (only
recently) wide usage of the 850 MHz band. I believe this to be due to the
current level of technology indicating that the 800-900 MHz band is the
Maximum Usable Frequency for dependable comms using readily available and
affordable gear. I know that our small township just went 800 MHz trunking,
and had to add 4 additional simulcasting sites/frequencies; just to fill the
holes in parts of the county. The difference between 150 MHz based and 850
MHz based propagation was apparently more elusive than they originally
projected, and I can forsee some of the same in a move from 850 MHz and 1.9
GHz for Nextel.

>> Motorola also owns the rights to the software being used with VZ's
>> VOIP-based PTT service, so it is also possible/feasible that Sprint will
> try
>> to fill the gap for Consumer PTT as the migration continues.
>
> And Nextel has rights to Qualcomm's Q-Chat technology, as well as their
> iDen
> to CDMA bridge technology. It is very likely that phones will be CDMA
> with
> an iDen PTT until the company decides the direction consumer PTT is going
> to
> take.

I agree here also.... I think that VOIP based PTT will make or break the
consumer-based PTT market. Nextel has a decade head start on the PTT
concept, and a LMR Based PTT Provider with a cellular option will be hard to
beat by a Cellular Based provider trying to duplicate the connect time of an
iDen PTT radio; using a cellphone

So condemn the product because of the users? Using your logic, we should
not drive cars because of Halle Berry. We should not own guns because of
Robert Blake. We should not own knives because of OJ. Tommy Lee carried
out a loud conversation PTT with Pam Anderson on MTV. Maybe we should just
get rid of the celebrities and people will start behaving responsibly
again...


"George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> SS wrote:
> > "Big Bob" <nolanr*@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >>Larry W4CSC <[email protected]> wrote in
> >>news:[email protected]:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Any business where you are standing in front of an important client
> >>>waving large bags of cash at you and HE has to wait those 15 seconds,
> >>>which appear as years as he scowls at you, thinking about taking his
> >>>business elsewhere....that's where.
> >>
> >>OK, but why not just pick up the phone and make a call?
> >>
> >>I just don't understand how anyone thinks they are 'professional' while
> >>standing in front of a client hollering into a phone and making everyone
> >>else listen to your conversation as well.
> >
> >
> > I use PTT for a good portion of my business communication and find that
I
> > speak much lower in volume than most of the morons who scream into their
> > phones when making a regular call. And nobody ever hears the other end
of
> > the conversation except me.
>
>
> Maybe you and 3 other people. Every other Nextel user seems to need to
> use the speakerphone and hold the radio at arms length.
>
>
> >
> > A clue- the PTT uses the same microphoneas the cellular service. The
> > sensitivity of the microphone doesn't change between applications.
> >
> >
> >>Isn't the most professional thing to make a phone call? This way, you
can
> >>speak in a normal voice at normal volume and your client isn't forced to
> >>hear everything on the other end of the conversation?
> >
> >
> > See above- you are doing nothing but perpetuating the myth. It also
shows
> > that you don't know the technology.
> >
> >
> >>Most of the guys I deal with, I can't trust them or what they say enough
> >
> > to
> >
> >>talk to them on PTT.
> >
> >
> > And what prevents them from putting you on speakerphone when you call
them?
> >
> >
> >>Maybe it is just a moot point, but this whole technology seems useless
to
> >>me. We need to go back to the good old days of one-on-one attention,
put
> >>down the walkie-talkies and conduct business in the proper way.
> >>
> >>BigBob
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 20:47:38 -0600, "SS" <[email protected]> chose
to add this to the great equation of life, the universe, and everything:

>Actually, I have rarely (count them on one hand) had that kind of a problem
>with a Nextel phone. I have used the PTT for thousands of hours with only a
>few instances of a busy network. The only problem has been living on the
>very edge of coverage, which isn't their fault.

Not their fault??? It's their network and it's not competing for spectrum
with all the other wireless carriers, so they could certainly expand the
coverage area if they wanted. With VZW, PTT coverage (as I understand it)
extends beyond their own native service areas in certain places, and in
many other places, even when PTT isn't available, you can still use the
phone. Try that with Nextel.

I work in a school. All the administrators and their secretaries have
Nextel phones (which I personally think is a waste of the taxpayers' money,
but that's another subject). When a couple of them traveled with one of our
sports teams to a state championship only 100 miles away, their Nextels
were paperweights. I think they'd be better off with regular cell phones,
with speakerphone if they feel the need (but I have to admit that they
should not get VZW because there is inadequate signal in parts of the
building -- I've seen students yakking away (after school, of course) in
places where my VX4400 is bleeping at me about losing or acquiring signal
every five seconds).

--
David Streeter, "an internet god" -- Dave Barry
http://home.att.net/~dwstreeter
Remove the naughty bit from my address to reply
Expect a train on ANY track at ANY time.
"What excited me about seeing 'Who Framed Roger Rabbit' was the ability to
really believe that animated characters exist." - Paula Abdul

On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 16:58:39 GMT, "Zman53" <[email protected]> chose to add
this to the great equation of life, the universe, and everything:

>"Jimmy D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>newsqnue.9377$Wb.8506@trndny03...
>> However you have to hope that your NEXTEL works when you need it. It's a
>> very poor antiquated system . They are overloaded with Boost Mobile.
>Funny
>> thing happened today for example. I was sitting right next to a current
>> Nextel user. I'm sure you are extremely aware of the annoying Nextel
>noise
>> that the phone makes when the system is screwed up and you can't get
>> through. Well there I am just PTT away with my new Verizon VX4700. The
>> call was going through just smoothly as it has the last four days that I
>had
>> it activated. No busy signals! No User Not Available messages. No stand
>by
>> while the Nextel user your trying to reach is located. I'm sure all you
>> Nextel users all heard that before! My calls just go right on through the
>> way a service that I am paying for should. I am very sure that there is
>> going to be a big pile of JUNK NEXTEL'S somewhere soon. Just wait till
>> Verizon starts the advertising campaign again. LOL!!!
>
>Not sure what NEXTEL you are using. I've been using Nextel for 6 years and
>have yet to get a busy signal or standby when using direct connect. As for
>the User Not Available message, how is it Nextel's fault if the person being
>called is already talking to someone else?

I think Jimmy's point (although I have no personal experience with it) is
NEXTEL will also give you User Not Available if the network is unable to
contact the other user, either because the network is overloaded where he
is or because he has moved outside of NEXTEL's limited coverage area.

--
David Streeter, "an internet god" -- Dave Barry
http://home.att.net/~dwstreeter
Remove the naughty bit from my address to reply
Expect a train on ANY track at ANY time.
"When the Panthers were winning, we even loved ice hockey, for a period of
several hours." - Dave Barry

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:44:50 GMT, Traveling Man <[email protected]> chose to
add this to the great equation of life, the universe, and everything:

>On 21 Jun 2005 20:26:31 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> For the same reason, Police, Firemen, Drivers, industrial workers,
>> security guards do.
>>
>> Ask your self why they don't call each other up on speaker phones.
>
>Actually many police officers do carry cell phones now since they often need
>to call citizens or businesses, and want to avoid the scanner freaks who
>monitor the police radios for "hot" happenings.
>
>Not every PD has the new digital radio systems.

My city (138,000 people) has a nice, modern Motorola trunked radio system.
(So does the next city over, and not only can the police and fire units
come up on the other city's systems when necessary, the dispatchers can
too.) They have eight frequencies and at least 22 channels IDs (that I have
found) for use by all city services that have 2-way radios in their
vehicles. But there is a considerable amount of traffic, on police, fire,
and other channels, that consists of "XXX to XXY" "XXY" "You have your
Nextel?" "Yeah" "Good, I'm gonna call you on it". (At least some of the
time, I've gotten the impression that they already tried calling on the
Nextel and got no response.) Ambulance crews also have cell phones because
the ER nurses are much better about answering a ringing phone than a
squawking radio.

--
David Streeter, "an internet god" -- Dave Barry
http://home.att.net/~dwstreeter
Remove the naughty bit from my address to reply
Expect a train on ANY track at ANY time.
"I am many things. I am an animal. I am a convicted rapist, a hell-raiser,
a loving father, a semi-good husband. You don't really know me." - Mike
Tyson at a news conference where he cursed, jumped on a table, stripped off
his shirt, complained about medication hurting his sex life and threatened
to put "a (expletive) bullet" through the head of rival Lennox Lewis.