A more rational approach -- how I would like to change the cell phone industry.

On Jul 1, 7:24 am, [email protected] wrote in
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
:

> how would u like to change the cell phone industry?

Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
whatever practical radio frequencies available.

Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and
start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and
a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz. In addition, the following must
also apply:

1. In its uncompressed form, the audio must have a bit-resolution of
at least 16-bit

2. The sample-rate of the compressed and the uncompressed version of
the audio must be the same.

---

› See More: A more rational approach -- how I would like to change the cell phone industry.

Radium <[email protected]> hath wroth:

>On Jul 1, 7:24 am, [email protected] wrote in
>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
>> how would u like to change the cell phone industry?

>Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
>whatever practical radio frequencies available.

Why bother? Analog cell phones are going away on Valentine's Day
2008.
<http://dialzero.blogspot.com/2007/06/analog-cellphone-service-to-end-after.html>
I won't be sending you a valentine card. You're not my type.
Are you also working on whale oil products and sealing wax?

>Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and
>start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and
>a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz.

Oh, you want music over your cell phone? Of course that means fewer
users per MHz. Very roughly, the current 8Kbits/sec encoding rate,
compared to your 44Kbit/sec, will only handle about 1/5th the number
of users. So, your cell phone bill goes up about 5 times. Of course
you don't mind because you'll have hi-fi oozing out of your phone. You
might want to research variable rate codecs, such as EVRC.

>1. In its uncompressed form, the audio must have a bit-resolution of
>at least 16-bit

The encoding resolution is not changed by compression. If you encode
something with 16 bit resolution, and compress it, you still have 16
bit data coming out. It's the data rate or thruput that changes with
compression.

>2. The sample-rate of the compressed and the uncompressed version of
>the audio must be the same.

Not possible. If the rate in and rate out are identical, then there's
no compression happening.

At least you're consistent. You got everything wrong, again.

--
Jeff Liebermann [email protected]
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Radium wrote:
> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, [email protected] wrote in
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
> :
>
>> how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>
> Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
> whatever practical radio frequencies available.
>
> Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and
> start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and
> a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz. In addition, the following must
> also apply:
>
> 1. In its uncompressed form, the audio must have a bit-resolution of
> at least 16-bit
>
> 2. The sample-rate of the compressed and the uncompressed version of
> the audio must be the same.
>
Darn:
I was just getting used to your purposed long-wave cell phone.
The approximately mile long antennas would drastically cut down on
people trying to drive and talk at the same time, just think how many
lives that could be saved.
Oh well, I just wait for it to appear along with my Matel Hover board
and "Mr Fusion" reactor for my Delorean.
Ken

Radium wrote:
> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, [email protected] wrote in
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
> :
>
>> how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>
> Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
> whatever practical radio frequencies available.

That idea was touted and attempted over twenty years ago. Back when
cellphone handsets were better described as concrete blocks instead of bricks.

Gosh...I miss my 70 watt Micors and darn near crystal clear audio on IMTS
systems with 30 mile range. But that was thirty years ago.

"Radium" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, [email protected] wrote in
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
> :
>
>> how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>
> Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
> whatever practical radio frequencies available.

You are still a clueless idiot

"Jeff Liebermann" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Radium <[email protected]> hath wroth:
>
>>On Jul 1, 7:24 am, [email protected] wrote in
>>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
>>> how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>
>>Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
>>whatever practical radio frequencies available.
>
> Why bother? Analog cell phones are going away on Valentine's Day
> 2008.
> <http://dialzero.blogspot.com/2007/06/analog-cellphone-service-to-end-after.html>
> I won't be sending you a valentine card. You're not my type.
> Are you also working on whale oil products and sealing wax?

The FCC does not require that analog service be turned off. Only that
carriers are not required to continue analog service past that date.
A good number of rural areas will probably continue to use Analog cellualr
service for a few years after that.
>
>>Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and
>>start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and
>>a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz.
>
> Oh, you want music over your cell phone? Of course that means fewer
> users per MHz. Very roughly, the current 8Kbits/sec encoding rate,
> compared to your 44Kbit/sec, will only handle about 1/5th the number
> of users. So, your cell phone bill goes up about 5 times. Of course
> you don't mind because you'll have hi-fi oozing out of your phone. You
> might want to research variable rate codecs, such as EVRC.
>
>>1. In its uncompressed form, the audio must have a bit-resolution of
>>at least 16-bit
>
> The encoding resolution is not changed by compression. If you encode
> something with 16 bit resolution, and compress it, you still have 16
> bit data coming out. It's the data rate or thruput that changes with
> compression.
>
>>2. The sample-rate of the compressed and the uncompressed version of
>>the audio must be the same.
>
> Not possible. If the rate in and rate out are identical, then there's
> no compression happening.
>
> At least you're consistent. You got everything wrong, again.
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann [email protected]
> 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
> Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Radium <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, [email protected] wrote in
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
> :

> > how would u like to change the cell phone industry?

> Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
> whatever practical radio frequencies available.

As you've been told before, analog cell phones are going away.

What part of "going away" are you too blazingly stupid to understand?

> Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and
> start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and
> a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz. In addition, the following must
> also apply:

The audio bandwidth of the phone system is about 3 KHz.

You are an idiot.

<snip remaining crap>

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:45:00 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Radium <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, [email protected] wrote in
>> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
>> :
>
>> > how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>
>> Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
>> whatever practical radio frequencies available.
>
>As you've been told before, analog cell phones are going away.
>
>What part of "going away" are you too blazingly stupid to understand?
>
>> Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and
>> start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and
>> a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz. In addition, the following must
>> also apply:
>
>The audio bandwidth of the phone system is about 3 KHz.
>
>You are an idiot.
>
><snip remaining crap>


How about just national enforcing Californias proposed Consumer code
for cell phone companies.

On 7/19/07 7:56 AM, in article [email protected],
"[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:45:00 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Radium <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, [email protected] wrote in
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...6abf90c8ed13?h
>>> l=en&
>>> :
>>
>>>> how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>>
>>> Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
>>> whatever practical radio frequencies available.
>>
>> As you've been told before, analog cell phones are going away.
>>
>> What part of "going away" are you too blazingly stupid to understand?
>>
>>> Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and
>>> start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and
>>> a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz. In addition, the following must
>>> also apply:
>>
>> The audio bandwidth of the phone system is about 3 KHz.
>>
>> You are an idiot.
>>
>> <snip remaining crap>
>
>
> How about just national enforcing Californias proposed Consumer code
> for cell phone companies.

How about telling the state of California to go to hell?

If they want a change in National status there is a place to propose it.

DTC <no_spam@move_along_folks.foob> hath wroth:

>Radium wrote:
>> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, [email protected] wrote in
>> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
>>> how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>>
>> Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
>> whatever practical radio frequencies available.

>That idea was touted and attempted over twenty years ago. Back when
>cellphone handsets were better described as concrete blocks instead of bricks.
>
>Gosh...I miss my 70 watt Micors and darn near crystal clear audio on IMTS
>systems with 30 mile range. But that was thirty years ago.

Who said they were gone? Fire up your scanner or service monitor on
the old IMTS frequencies and you'll hear the idle tones or sometimes
idle chatter.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMTS_Frequencies>
There's still some IMTS phone systems running in "rural" areas.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improved_Mobile_Telephone_Service>
Brings back fond memories of the "RCC wars" (radio common carrier).

However, you're right. I really miss my Motorola T1234 mobile
telephone and giant Secode control head. It really impressed the
various ladyfriends in college.
<http://www.privateline.com/PCS/mobilephonepictures.htm>
Too bad (for Mr Radium) it was FM.

I did work on an AM/SSB mobile telephone system in about 1974. I
never saw it but as I vaguely recall, it operated on various HF
frequencies in some part of Africa. Operation was similar to operator
assisted MTS (mobile telephone service) but on HF. It was basically a
phone patch hung on an HF base station. We were trying to add
signaling so that users would not have to listen to the channel noise
all day in order to receive a phone call. Our scheme sorta worked on
SSB, but the tones drove those that didn't have muted receivers nuts,
so it was eventually abandoned. I think the system was up until about
1990, when something blew up and the operator couldn't find parts or
something.

Of course, there's always the HF marine radio telephone service, which
still operates on various HF frequencies with real live human
operators. They're all currently using SSB, although that wasn't
always the case. In the 1960's and 70's, almost everyone was using
AM.

I got a great name for Mr Radius's system. Reactionary Radio.

--
Jeff Liebermann [email protected]
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 10:38:21 -0400, "Dana" <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Why bother? Analog cell phones are going away on Valentine's Day
>> 2008.
>> <http://dialzero.blogspot.com/2007/06/analog-cellphone-service-to-end-after.html>

>The FCC does not require that analog service be turned off. Only that
>carriers are not required to continue analog service past that date.
>A good number of rural areas will probably continue to use Analog cellualr
>service for a few years after that.

True. Analog will probably dribble along for quite a while. The only
plans that I've heard or read are Verizon's. They're going to (or
already have) change the PRL (preferred roaming list) to not include
analog roaming. I know a local die hard who was informed in writing
that analog will be "going away" in Feb 2008 and that they will not
renew his contract for analog after that date. I haven't seen the
actual letter so I don't know if there are any details such as the
date they'll pull the plug on him. I had the same issue with Verizon
and a non-GPS enabled cell phone, where they refused to renew the
contract with the old phone. That means that all analog phones might
be gone by the time the current contracts expire, which would a
maximum of 2 years (probably much less).

at&t will probably do the same thing. The only analog systems they
still operate are the 800MHz TDMA systems they inherited from Dobson,
Cell One, and others. You'll probably get a Valentine greeting card
from at&t announcing the demise of analog.

Incidentally, at&t discontinued its CDPD (cellular digital packet
data) service in mid 2004. Verizon did the same a year later. Yet, I
still am getting sync and carrier for CDPD on my Novatel(?) CDPD
modem. As I mentioned in another thread, there are still IMTS tones
on the air. I guess old services never seem to die completely.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 [email protected]
# http://802.11junk.com [email protected]
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 07:29:35 -0500, DTC
<no_spam@move_along_folks.foob> wrote:

>That idea was touted and attempted over twenty years ago. Back when
>cellphone handsets were better described as concrete blocks instead of bricks.

<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/office/slides/radio-mess.html>
The phone with half the buttons red and the rest white, is a G.E.
"brick" phone. Not only did it look like a brick, but it also weighed
about the same as one. Behind it, against the wall is an Audiovox
TCT-100 "Tranportable" phone, another heavy weight. Just to the left
of the Audiovox but halfway covered is the original Nextel handset.

Someone is sure to ask why I have all that garbage. I sometimes give
talks on the history of mobile phones and like to drag in the
antiques. I drew the line on some of the old trunk mounted MTS, IMTS,
and AMPS phones, as they're just too big and ugly to bring to
meetings.

>Gosh...I miss my 70 watt Micors and darn near crystal clear audio on IMTS
>systems with 30 mile range. But that was thirty years ago.



--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 [email protected]
# http://802.11junk.com [email protected]
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:33:43 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
<[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 10:38:21 -0400, "Dana" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> Why bother? Analog cell phones are going away on Valentine's Day
>>> 2008.
>>> <http://dialzero.blogspot.com/2007/06/analog-cellphone-service-to-end-after.html>
>
>>The FCC does not require that analog service be turned off. Only that
>>carriers are not required to continue analog service past that date.
>>A good number of rural areas will probably continue to use Analog cellualr
>>service for a few years after that.
>
>True. Analog will probably dribble along for quite a while. ...

I seriously doubt it. All the carrier people I know are chomping at the
bit to turn it off, as noted in public statements.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:56:57 -0500, [email protected] wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>How about just national enforcing Californias proposed Consumer code
>for cell phone companies.

Really bad idea. The market works better without government
interference.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:45:00 GMT, [email protected] wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Radium <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and
>> start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and
>> a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz. In addition, the following must
>> also apply:
>
>The audio bandwidth of the phone system is about 3 KHz.

Actually more like 10 KHz.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>