|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > Verizon wireless > January 2006 > Are Tri-Mode phones really all that useful anymore?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Are Tri-Mode phones really all that useful anymore?
|
|
| Bruce E. Stemplewski 2006-01-15, 2:48 am |
| I'm considering trading my new VX6100 for perhaps a VX8100. But it
sounds like the Vx8100 is digital only and the Vx6100 has Tri mode.
I understand that Tri Mode will give you better reception by switching
to analog in poor reception areas. Is tri mode really all that better
with the new digital technologies?
--
Bruce E. Stemplewski
GarXface OCX and C++ Class Library for the Garmin GPS
www.stempsoft.com
| |
| Justin 2006-01-15, 2:48 am |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski wrote on [Sun, 15 Jan 2006 04:12:22 GMT]:
> I'm considering trading my new VX6100 for perhaps a VX8100. But it
> sounds like the Vx8100 is digital only and the Vx6100 has Tri mode.
>
> I understand that Tri Mode will give you better reception by switching
> to analog in poor reception areas. Is tri mode really all that better
> with the new digital technologies?
Considering I am often in analog only service areas they are mandatory
for me.
| |
|
| In article <GYjyf.1507$8r1.624@trndny01>,
Bruce E. Stemplewski <Bruce. Stemplewski@removeno
spamstempsoft.com> wrote:
>I'm considering trading my new VX6100 for perhaps a VX8100. But it
>sounds like the Vx8100 is digital only and the Vx6100 has Tri mode.
>
>I understand that Tri Mode will give you better reception by switching
>to analog in poor reception areas. Is tri mode really all that better
>with the new digital technologies?
I still see analog only service in many areas I frequent. It's the
major reason I haven't updated my phone.
--
http://yosemitenews.info/
| |
| clifto 2006-01-15, 2:48 am |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski wrote:
> I understand that Tri Mode will give you better reception by switching
> to analog in poor reception areas. Is tri mode really all that better
> with the new digital technologies?
Not far from a location where I can get five bars of digital signal, there
is a Menard's where only analog works, in the store or in the parking lot
outside. I pass through that way often and stop at the store most times
I'm there.
This is not to mention the other times I've driven out into the boonies
(like two weeks ago, running the carbon out of my engine) and had access
to only analog for miles and miles and miles.
I opted for a v710 instead of an e815. The 815 has lots of things that would
be desirable to me (EDGE, OBEX, etc.) but it does not have one of the things
I *need*.
--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.
| |
|
| I was woried about tht very same thing. So I bought 3 710's but I found them
so buggy and hard to deal with I traded them off on 3 815's WAY better. Also
I noticed in areas where the tri mode would kick to analogue the 815 gets a
strong digital signal where the 710, and my v60i's and v60s's couldn't begin
to function normally. So no imo I don't think analogue is all that useful
anymore.
Larry
"Bruce E. Stemplewski" <Bruce. Stemplewski@removeno
spamstempsoft.com> wrote
in message news:GYjyf.1507$8r1.624@trndny01...
> I'm considering trading my new VX6100 for perhaps a VX8100. But it sounds
> like the Vx8100 is digital only and the Vx6100 has Tri mode.
>
> I understand that Tri Mode will give you better reception by switching to
> analog in poor reception areas. Is tri mode really all that better with
> the new digital technologies?
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Bruce E. Stemplewski
> GarXface OCX and C++ Class Library for the Garmin GPS
> www.stempsoft.com
| |
| Howard Nelson 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
|
"jdoe" <jdoe@msn.com> wrote in message
news:vPqyf.706712$_o.460809@attbi_s71...
> I was woried about tht very same thing. So I bought 3 710's but I found
them
> so buggy and hard to deal with I traded them off on 3 815's WAY better.
Also
> I noticed in areas where the tri mode would kick to analogue the 815 gets
a
> strong digital signal where the 710, and my v60i's and v60s's couldn't
begin
> to function normally. So no imo I don't think analogue is all that useful
> anymore.
Try Driving from Sacramento to Page Arizona or vacationing in the west using
Digital.:)
Howard
| |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| jdoe wrote:
> I was woried about tht very same thing. So I bought 3 710's but I found them
> so buggy and hard to deal with I traded them off on 3 815's WAY better. Also
> I noticed in areas where the tri mode would kick to analogue the 815 gets a
> strong digital signal where the 710, and my v60i's and v60s's couldn't begin
> to function normally. So no imo I don't think analogue is all that useful
> anymore.
> Larry
That was kind of my point. If I am never going to use it then why
worry? But the poster below brings up a good point, you would think the
west coast being very populated would have all digital but it does not.
--
Bruce E. Stemplewski
GarXface OCX and C++ Class Library for the Garmin GPS
www.stempsoft.com
| |
| George 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski wrote:
> I'm considering trading my new VX6100 for perhaps a VX8100. But it
> sounds like the Vx8100 is digital only and the Vx6100 has Tri mode.
>
> I understand that Tri Mode will give you better reception by switching
> to analog in poor reception areas. Is tri mode really all that better
> with the new digital technologies?
>
It depends where you travel/use your phone. I travel in 5 of the
mid-atlantic/northeast
states. Previously I had a vx4400 and disabled analog to save battery. I
later moved to a vx4500 (digital only). I have not been in a situation
where I couldn't use the phone because it was digital only.
| |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| George wrote:
>
> It depends where you travel/use your phone. I travel in 5 of the
> mid-atlantic/northeast
> states. Previously I had a vx4400 and disabled analog to save battery. I
> later moved to a vx4500 (digital only). I have not been in a situation
> where I couldn't use the phone because it was digital only.
>
That is basically the area where I travel.
--
Bruce E. Stemplewski
GarXface OCX and C++ Class Library for the Garmin GPS
www.stempsoft.com
| |
|
| On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 04:47:12 GMT, Justin <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
>Bruce E. Stemplewski wrote on [Sun, 15 Jan 2006 04:12:22 GMT]:
>
>Considering I am often in analog only service areas they are mandatory
>for me.
same here. it all depends on how your phone is used. we're rv'ers
and frequently find ourselves out in the boonies where analog is king.
73,
rich, n9dko
| |
| Michael Wise 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| In article < tlsks1den1oh32urbaf8
3uk1bh96s7sv5k@4ax.com>,
Rich < rich@donotsendmeemai
l.com> wrote:
>
> same here. it all depends on how your phone is used. we're rv'ers
> and frequently find ourselves out in the boonies where analog is king.
Heck, I live in the the city with the second highest population density
in the country (San Francisco), and there are even areas in the city
where there's no VZW digital signal. There's no way I would consider not
having a dual-mode tri-band phone. I just hope my insured Kyocera 7135
never dies, because VZW says if it does, they replace it with an
inferior (in terms of cellular capabilities Treo 650).
--Mike
| |
|
| When you had that E815 digital signal, was it usable. I have seen with 1 bar
of signal where the phone could not place the call. Where with tri-mode, I
could go over to analog and make it.
"jdoe" <jdoe@msn.com> wrote in message
news:vPqyf.706712$_o.460809@attbi_s71...
>I was woried about tht very same thing. So I bought 3 710's but I found
>them so buggy and hard to deal with I traded them off on 3 815's WAY
>better. Also I noticed in areas where the tri mode would kick to analogue
>the 815 gets a strong digital signal where the 710, and my v60i's and
>v60s's couldn't begin to function normally. So no imo I don't think
>analogue is all that useful anymore.
> Larry
> "Bruce E. Stemplewski" <Bruce. Stemplewski@removeno
spamstempsoft.com> wrote
> in message news:GYjyf.1507$8r1.624@trndny01...
>
>
| |
|
| Lots of places in PA with no digital, as well as lots of New England.
"George" <george@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:qvSdnQ5koNm9-1feRVn-jA@adelphia.com...
> Bruce E. Stemplewski wrote:
>
> It depends where you travel/use your phone. I travel in 5 of the
> mid-atlantic/northeast
> states. Previously I had a vx4400 and disabled analog to save battery. I
> later moved to a vx4500 (digital only). I have not been in a situation
> where I couldn't use the phone because it was digital only.
>
| |
| Frankster 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| > I'm considering trading my new VX6100 for perhaps a VX8100. But it sounds
> like the Vx8100 is digital only and the Vx6100 has Tri mode.
>
> I understand that Tri Mode will give you better reception by switching to
> analog in poor reception areas. Is tri mode really all that better with
> the new digital technologies?
Okay, I'll take the unpopular view. Forget analog. VZW has! So it really
doesn't much matter if your phone supports it anymore. Yeah, I know there
are rare exceptions. But this is reality, IMHO.
-Frank
| |
| Michael Wise 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| In article <G76dnbw1c4LaDlfeRVn-tg@giganews.com>,
"Frankster" <Frank@SPAM2TRASH.com> wrote:
>
> Okay, I'll take the unpopular view. Forget analog. VZW has! So it really
> doesn't much matter if your phone supports it anymore. Yeah, I know there
> are rare exceptions. But this is reality, IMHO.
They have? That's odd, I just bought a tri-mode phone (Motorola v276)
from Verizon for my wife just last month.
--Mike
| |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| Michael Wise wrote:
> In article <G76dnbw1c4LaDlfeRVn-tg@giganews.com>,
> "Frankster" <Frank@SPAM2TRASH.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> They have? That's odd, I just bought a tri-mode phone (Motorola v276)
> from Verizon for my wife just last month.
>
>
>
> --Mike
Does your V276 get good reception?
How well does the voice dial work? What I do not like about the Vx6100
is that allows you to enter multiple numbers on a name but only voice
dial the default. Really lame IMHO.
--
Bruce E. Stemplewski
GarXface OCX and C++ Class Library for the Garmin GPS
www.stempsoft.com
| |
| Michael Wise 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| In article <THxyf.3457$2x4.2864@trndny05>,
"Bruce E. Stemplewski" <Bruce. Stemplewski@removeno
spamstempsoft.com>
wrote:
[color=darkred]
> Does your V276 get good reception?
Reception is excellent.
> How well does the voice dial work? What I do not like about the Vx6100
> is that allows you to enter multiple numbers on a name but only voice
> dial the default. Really lame IMHO.
I don't think she's using voice dialing, but the v276 does not have the
limitation you describe above. IMHO, the v276 is probably the best
all-around phone VZW has right now...if one just wants a cell phone.
Being tri-mode certainly helps in that regard.
--Mike
| |
| Frankster 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| >> Okay, I'll take the unpopular view. Forget analog. VZW has! So it really
>
>
> They have? That's odd, I just bought a tri-mode phone (Motorola v276)
> from Verizon for my wife just last month.
Yeah, I know. And my computer will still boot with a DOS 3.1 disk. So what?
Doesn't mean it's worth anything, to all but a few.
-Frank
| |
| Michael Wise 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| In article <_eqdna2MEPWqN1feRVn-gA@giganews.com>,
"Frankster" <Frank@SPAM2TRASH.com> wrote:
>
> Yeah, I know.
If you know, then why did you say "Forget analog. VZW has!" when they
have not?
> And my computer will still boot with a DOS 3.1 disk. So what?
> Doesn't mean it's worth anything, to all but a few.
Not worth anything to the people who either don't live in, work in, or
travel through area which VZW doesn't have covered with its CDMA
850/1900 footprint...and there are many such areas.
--Mike
| |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| Michael Wise wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Reception is excellent.
>
>
>
>
>
> I don't think she's using voice dialing, but the v276 does not have the
> limitation you describe above. IMHO, the v276 is probably the best
> all-around phone VZW has right now...if one just wants a cell phone.
> Being tri-mode certainly helps in that regard.
>
>
>
> --Mike
The phone gets a lot of really bad reviews on Phone Scoop
http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/us...s.php?phone=549
That worries me.
--
Bruce E. Stemplewski
GarXface OCX and C++ Class Library for the Garmin GPS
www.stempsoft.com
| |
| Michael Wise 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| In article <1lyyf.1626$8r1.1122@trndny01>,
"Bruce E. Stemplewski" <Bruce. Stemplewski@removeno
spamstempsoft.com>
wrote:
> Michael Wise wrote:
>
>
> The phone gets a lot of really bad reviews on Phone Scoop
>
> http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/us...s.php?phone=549
Almost all of those are for the v265...which was the precursor to the
v276. For some reason, phonescoop lumps the v265/266/276 in the same
section for reviews. I don't know why they didn't split out the v276 so
it could be reviewed on its own merits. The only negative people
consistently write about with the v276 is the camera quality. Camera
quality is something I could care less about on a cell phone.
The problems with the v265 were fixed in the v276.
--Mike
| |
| Frankster 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| > Not worth anything to the people who either don't live in, work in, or
> travel through area which VZW doesn't have covered with its CDMA
> 850/1900 footprint...and there are many such areas.
In those areas I would go with a different carrier. VZW is committed to
going all digital. It's just a matter of time. And they are almost there.
I'm not saying we have to like it. Only that it is inevitable.
-Frank
| |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| Michael Wise wrote:
> In article <1lyyf.1626$8r1.1122@trndny01>,
> "Bruce E. Stemplewski" <Bruce. Stemplewski@removeno
spamstempsoft.com>
>
> Almost all of those are for the v265...which was the precursor to the
> v276. For some reason, phonescoop lumps the v265/266/276 in the same
> section for reviews. I don't know why they didn't split out the v276 so
> it could be reviewed on its own merits. The only negative people
> consistently write about with the v276 is the camera quality. Camera
> quality is something I could care less about on a cell phone.
>
>
> The problems with the v265 were fixed in the v276.
>
>
>
> --Mike
Thanks for the tip about them lumping the phones together. In at least
one of the negative reviews mentions it was a 275.
Yes I could care less about picture quality. As long as it is good
enough to snap a picture of a license plate of the drunk that just tried
to hit me or snap a decent pic of Big Foot (should I see him) then that
is just fine with me.
--
Bruce E. Stemplewski
GarXface OCX and C++ Class Library for the Garmin GPS
www.stempsoft.com
| |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| Michael Wise wrote:
>
>
> Almost all of those are for the v265...which was the precursor to the
> v276. For some reason, phonescoop lumps the v265/266/276 in the same
> section for reviews. I don't know why they didn't split out the v276 so
> it could be reviewed on its own merits. The only negative people
> consistently write about with the v276 is the camera quality. Camera
> quality is something I could care less about on a cell phone.
>
>
> The problems with the v265 were fixed in the v276.
>
>
>
> --Mike
What is the screen like on the V267? One complaint I have about the
VX5200 is that some of the fonts are pretty small.
--
Bruce E. Stemplewski
GarXface OCX and C++ Class Library for the Garmin GPS
www.stempsoft.com
| |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| Michael Wise wrote:
> In article <1lyyf.1626$8r1.1122@trndny01>,
> "Bruce E. Stemplewski" <Bruce. Stemplewski@removeno
spamstempsoft.com>
> wrote:
> Almost all of those are for the v265...which was the precursor to the
> v276. For some reason, phonescoop lumps the v265/266/276 in the same
> section for reviews. I don't know why they didn't split out the v276 so
> it could be reviewed on its own merits. The only negative people
> consistently write about with the v276 is the camera quality. Camera
> quality is something I could care less about on a cell phone.
>
>
> The problems with the v265 were fixed in the v276.
>
>
>
> --Mike
Oh and one more favor. Can you check your wife's phone to see how the
voice dial is activated? I was unable to figure it out in the store.
--
Bruce E. Stemplewski
GarXface OCX and C++ Class Library for the Garmin GPS
www.stempsoft.com
| |
|
| That is difficult when you are traveling. Am I supposed to carry phones from
multiple carriers?
"Frankster" <Frank@SPAM2TRASH.com> wrote in message
news:Auudnbi_WJHRKFf
enZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@gi
ganews.com...
>
> In those areas I would go with a different carrier. VZW is committed to
> going all digital. It's just a matter of time. And they are almost there.
> I'm not saying we have to like it. Only that it is inevitable.
>
> -Frank
>
| |
|
| "DonR." wrote:
>
> That is difficult when you are traveling. Am I supposed to carry phones from
> multiple carriers?
>
> <snip>
I actually know someone who does just that.
It's one of the funniest things I've ever seen! <g>
Notan
| |
| Janet Wilder 2006-01-15, 5:48 pm |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski wrote:
> Michael Wise wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Does your V276 get good reception?
>
> How well does the voice dial work? What I do not like about the Vx6100
> is that allows you to enter multiple numbers on a name but only voice
> dial the default. Really lame IMHO.
>
>
>
>
Mine gets good reception. You can extend the antenna. The voice dialing
works quite well. It will recognize more than one voice. You have a
choice of "name dial" or "digit dial" You can even say "voice mail" and
it will get your voice mail. I had a couple of Audiovoxs that had voice
dial and this one beats them hands down. JMHO, YMMV
Janet
--
-----------
Janet Wilder
The Road Princess
http://janetwilder.blogspot.com
| |
| DonR. 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| And quite expensive. You really can't even use Pre-paid for one of them
because pre-paid coverage can be quite spotty. no such thing as Extended
Coverage or Roaming with Pre-paid. Only true home coverage.
"Notan" <notan@ddress.thatcanbespammed> wrote in message
news:43CABA60.F5E37F5D@ddress.thatcanbespammed...
> "DonR." wrote:
>
> I actually know someone who does just that.
>
> It's one of the funniest things I've ever seen! <g>
>
> Notan
| |
| CharlesH 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski wrote:
> jdoe wrote:
>
>
> That was kind of my point. If I am never going to use it then why
> worry? But the poster below brings up a good point, you would think the
> west coast being very populated would have all digital but it does not.
There are big population centers along the Pacific coast, but that's
about it. Not a whole lot of population between there and the Rocky
Mountains. LOTS of mountains and desert.
| |
| Michael Wise 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| In article <XAzyf.3149$Jd.2267@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>,
CharlesH <hoch@exemplary.invalid> wrote:
>
> There are big population centers along the Pacific coast, but that's
> about it. Not a whole lot of population between there and the Rocky
> Mountains. LOTS of mountains and desert.
Even within the big population areas, there are plenty of areas not
covered by a VZW digital signal. The SF Bay Area is one such example.
--Mike
| |
| Michael Wise 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| In article < Auudnbi_WJHRKFfenZ2d
nUVZ_smdnZ2d@giganew
s.com>,
"Frankster" <Frank@SPAM2TRASH.com> wrote:
>
> In those areas I would go with a different carrier.
Who wants to carry around two cell phones? There are too many areas in
the country not covered by any carrier's digital footprint, but with
AMPS coverage.
Does VZW have the best digital foot print? Yes. Does their digital foot
print cover anything approaching the area their combined digital/AMPS
footprint does? No way.
> VZW is committed to going all digital.
And every administration is committed to lowering taxes as well.
"Committed" doesn't mean squat. As long as there are huge holes in
digital coverage covered by AMPS, I can't see VZW getting rid of AMPS.
That's why they keep extending their "committed" date. Presently, they
are saying 2008. Since that's two years away (light years in cell terms)
why should anybody give a fig about it now?
> It's just a matter of time. And they are almost there.
Please quantify "almost there"? They still sell tri-mode phones and are
saying they plan on being all digital in 2008. How does that equal
"almost"?
> I'm not saying we have to like it. Only that it is inevitable.
Come back and talk when 2008 is here or VZW's digital footprint matches
the size and coverage area of their combined digital/AMPS one.
--Mike
| |
| Michael Wise 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| In article <VFyyf.1633$8r1.238@trndny01>,
"Bruce E. Stemplewski" <Bruce. Stemplewski@removeno
spamstempsoft.com>
wrote:
[color=darkred]
> Oh and one more favor. Can you check your wife's phone to see how the
> voice dial is activated? I was unable to figure it out in the store.
She's at work with it now, so I can't say for sure...but you can d/l the
v276 manual (pdf) at the below link. It documents how voice dialing is
activated:
http://tinyurl.com/bnjok
1
--Mike
| |
| Michael Wise 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| In article <LByyf.1630$8r1.37@trndny01>,
"Bruce E. Stemplewski" <Bruce. Stemplewski@removeno
spamstempsoft.com>
wrote:
[color=darkred]
>
> What is the screen like on the V267? One complaint I have about the
> VX5200 is that some of the fonts are pretty small.
It is a little bit tiny for my tastes, but I'm used to my Kyocera 7135's
screen.
--Mike
| |
| Michael Wise 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| In article <Czyyf.1629$8r1.707@trndny01>,
"Bruce E. Stemplewski" <Bruce. Stemplewski@removeno
spamstempsoft.com>
wrote:
[color=darkred]
> Thanks for the tip about them lumping the phones together. In at least
> one of the negative reviews mentions it was a 275.
Yes, one person complaining about batter life. We've found that
assertion to be lacking in merit.
> Yes I could care less about picture quality. As long as it is good
> enough to snap a picture of a license plate of the drunk that just tried
> to hit me or snap a decent pic of Big Foot (should I see him) then that
> is just fine with me.
hah.
--Mike
| |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| Michael Wise wrote:
>
>
> It is a little bit tiny for my tastes, but I'm used to my Kyocera 7135's
> screen.
>
>
> --Mike
I don't care too much about the size of the screen. What is important
is the size of the font. If it can be read ok by aging eyesight and I
just need to scroll a bit then that is fine with me.
--
Bruce E. Stemplewski
GarXface OCX and C++ Class Library for the Garmin GPS
www.stempsoft.com
| |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| Michael Wise wrote:
> In article <VFyyf.1633$8r1.238@trndny01>,
> "Bruce E. Stemplewski" <Bruce. Stemplewski@removeno
spamstempsoft.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> She's at work with it now, so I can't say for sure...but you can d/l the
> v276 manual (pdf) at the below link. It documents how voice dialing is
> activated:
>
>
> http://tinyurl.com/bnjok
> 1
>
>
>
> --Mike
It looks to me like the Moto has the same drawbacks to voice dialing as
my LG. Instructions do not mention that the phone asks for which phone
number under a name.
--
Bruce E. Stemplewski
GarXface OCX and C++ Class Library for the Garmin GPS
www.stempsoft.com
| |
| Michael Wise 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| In article <dnAyf.912$Ym3.137@trndny09>,
"Bruce E. Stemplewski" <Bruce. Stemplewski@removeno
spamstempsoft.com>
wrote:
[color=darkred]
> I don't care too much about the size of the screen. What is important
> is the size of the font. If it can be read ok by aging eyesight and I
> just need to scroll a bit then that is fine with me.
Font size looks to be about 16 pt: very readable.
--Mike
| |
| Richard Blood 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| At least on the Motorola E815, voice dialing distinguishes between an entry
under "home," "work," or "mobile." If you don't specify which in your
initial request, a voice responds with "which number?"
"Bruce E. Stemplewski" <Bruce. Stemplewski@removeno
spamstempsoft.com> wrote
in message news:rvAyf.2490$8r1.1228@trndny01...
> Michael Wise wrote:
>
>
>
> It looks to me like the Moto has the same drawbacks to voice dialing as my
> LG. Instructions do not mention that the phone asks for which phone
> number under a name.
>
>
> --
> Bruce E. Stemplewski
> GarXface OCX and C++ Class Library for the Garmin GPS
> www.stempsoft.com
| |
| Michael Wise 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| In article <rvAyf.2490$8r1.1228@trndny01>,
"Bruce E. Stemplewski" <Bruce. Stemplewski@removeno
spamstempsoft.com>
wrote:
[color=darkred]
> It looks to me like the Moto has the same drawbacks to voice dialing as
> my LG. Instructions do not mention that the phone asks for which phone
> number under a name.
I have her phone with me now, so I can better comment on this topic.
One of the things that has always irked me about Motorola phone is that
multiple numbers (e.g., cell, work, home, etc.) for a single contact
cannot be associated within the listing of a single contact in Motorola
cell phones. Instead, one has to make separate contact records for the
same person. I'm not sure if this is the case with all Motorola phones,
but its been the case of all the ones I have purchased:
StarTacs/TimePorts and now the v276.
However, in your case its good news, as it means even through you have
to make separate records for John Q. Smith's cell phone and work number,
each of those entries is trainable to have its own voice activated
record.
--Mike
| |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| Michael Wise wrote:
> In article <rvAyf.2490$8r1.1228@trndny01>,
> "Bruce E. Stemplewski" <Bruce. Stemplewski@removeno
spamstempsoft.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> However, in your case its good news, as it means even through you have
> to make separate records for John Q. Smith's cell phone and work number,
> each of those entries is trainable to have its own voice activated
> record.
>
>
>
> --Mike
Yes but I can do that with my LG6100. :)
But another post to this thread seems to contradict your findings,
unless the poster meant to use the method that you recommend.
But the user manual does seem to mention a "Type" field (work, home etc)
for the phone number.
--
Bruce E. Stemplewski
GarXface OCX and C++ Class Library for the Garmin GPS
www.stempsoft.com
| |
|
|
| Richard Blood 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| The newer Motorola phones (newer than v60i) allow you to view either "All
Contacts" or "Primary Contacts." You make that choice in the setup menu of
the contacts feature.
"Michael Wise" <usenet@okean.invalid> wrote in message
news:usenet-A9DE05.15373715012006@news.easynews.com...
> In article <rvAyf.2490$8r1.1228@trndny01>,
> "Bruce E. Stemplewski" <Bruce. Stemplewski@removeno
spamstempsoft.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I have her phone with me now, so I can better comment on this topic.
>
> One of the things that has always irked me about Motorola phone is that
> multiple numbers (e.g., cell, work, home, etc.) for a single contact
> cannot be associated within the listing of a single contact in Motorola
> cell phones. Instead, one has to make separate contact records for the
> same person. I'm not sure if this is the case with all Motorola phones,
> but its been the case of all the ones I have purchased:
> StarTacs/TimePorts and now the v276.
>
>
> However, in your case its good news, as it means even through you have
> to make separate records for John Q. Smith's cell phone and work number,
> each of those entries is trainable to have its own voice activated
> record.
>
>
>
> --Mike
| |
| Janet Wilder 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski wrote:
> Michael Wise wrote:
>
>
>
> What is the screen like on the V267? One complaint I have about the
> VX5200 is that some of the fonts are pretty small.
>
>
>
Everything is clear on the screen. I think it's a little busy, but this
is my first phone with a big color screen. It's rather easy to get to
what you need by using the icons. A whole lot easier than the Audiovox
CDM 9550 I traded in for it. I really do like this little phone. The
only complaint I have is that it I haven't a clue how to get it to play
Yankee Doodle or Take Me Out to the Ball Game as a ring tone. The
website stuff is really beyond me.
Janet
--
-----------
Janet Wilder
The Road Princess
http://janetwilder.blogspot.com
| |
| Janet Wilder 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| Bruce E. Stemplewski wrote:
> Michael Wise wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Oh and one more favor. Can you check your wife's phone to see how the
> voice dial is activated? I was unable to figure it out in the store.
>
Push the button on the side. The phone will ask you what you want to do.
Tell it "name dial" and then it will ask you for the name.
J
--
-----------
Janet Wilder
The Road Princess
http://janetwilder.blogspot.com
| |
| DonR. 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| The biggest problem with converting AMPS to digital is the need for more
towers, as digital signals do not travel as far as AMPS. People are fighting
them like crazy. And in the National Parks, they were opposed until a
National Standard for how they would look was decided upon.
"Michael Wise" <mike@okean.invalid> wrote in message
news:mike-D40710.14155815012006@news.easynews.com...
> In article < Auudnbi_WJHRKFfenZ2d
nUVZ_smdnZ2d@giganew
s.com>,
> "Frankster" <Frank@SPAM2TRASH.com> wrote:
>
>
> Who wants to carry around two cell phones? There are too many areas in
> the country not covered by any carrier's digital footprint, but with
> AMPS coverage.
>
> Does VZW have the best digital foot print? Yes. Does their digital foot
> print cover anything approaching the area their combined digital/AMPS
> footprint does? No way.
>
>
>
>
> And every administration is committed to lowering taxes as well.
> "Committed" doesn't mean squat. As long as there are huge holes in
> digital coverage covered by AMPS, I can't see VZW getting rid of AMPS.
> That's why they keep extending their "committed" date. Presently, they
> are saying 2008. Since that's two years away (light years in cell terms)
> why should anybody give a fig about it now?
>
>
>
>
> Please quantify "almost there"? They still sell tri-mode phones and are
> saying they plan on being all digital in 2008. How does that equal
> "almost"?
>
>
>
>
> Come back and talk when 2008 is here or VZW's digital footprint matches
> the size and coverage area of their combined digital/AMPS one.
>
>
> --Mike
| |
| Janet Wilder 2006-01-15, 11:48 pm |
| Michael Wise wrote:
> However, in your case its good news, as it means even through you have
> to make separate records for John Q. Smith's cell phone and work number,
> each of those entries is trainable to have its own voice activated
> record.
>
>
>
> --Mike
That's how I set mine up. If I want to call one of my kids, I say
"kidsname home" or "kidsname cell" The phone alphabetizes the names for
me which I like. I can also dial them by number with "digit dial" so if
my son's cell # is 30, I just say "30"
there is a datebook and a calculator in the phone, too. It's like a
mini personal organizer.
J
--
-----------
Janet Wilder
The Road Princess
http://janetwilder.blogspot.com
| |
|
| Get your self a VZW Map of the US, and look at all the pink areas. If
you don't expect to EVER been in one (or driving through one when you
blow a tire) then don't get the analog phone. Its that simple. I have
my phone mainly for emergency use, so Analog is a requirement.
For those who say digital should be in all the areas now served by
analog only, you will have to remember that analog was install in the
days when your local phone company owned the towers. There were
different laws back then. Verizon is no longer required to service
their customers out in the boonies. So when Analog goes away in a few
years, there just might not be any more coverage in those areas.
| |
|
| MarkS wrote:
>
> Get your self a VZW Map of the US, and look at all the pink areas. If
> you don't expect to EVER been in one (or driving through one when you
> blow a tire) then don't get the analog phone. Its that simple. I have
> my phone mainly for emergency use, so Analog is a requirement.
>
> For those who say digital should be in all the areas now served by
> analog only, you will have to remember that analog was install in the
> days when your local phone company owned the towers. There were
> different laws back then. Verizon is no longer required to service
> their customers out in the boonies. So when Analog goes away in a few
> years, there just might not be any more coverage in those areas.
Like all carriers, Verizon's maps aren't *that* accurate. It's easy
to drive through many a "pink area" and lose one's signal.
Notan
| |
|
| In article < Auudnbi_WJHRKFfenZ2d
nUVZ_smdnZ2d@giganew
s.com>,
Frankster <Frank@SPAM2TRASH.com> wrote:
>In those areas I would go with a different carrier. VZW is committed to
>going all digital.
Committed is not the same as done. Verizon has plenty of analog towers
left.
| |
| clifto 2006-01-16, 5:48 am |
| George wrote:
> I have not been in a situation
> where I couldn't use the phone because it was digital only.
Good on ya! I get in that situation any time I go to a certain Menard's,
not to mention that one of my first trips with a cell phone put me far out
of digital range.
--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.
| |
|
| Frankster wrote:
>
> In those areas I would go with a different carrier. VZW
> is committed to going all digital. It's just a matter of
> time. And they are almost there. I'm not saying we have
> to like it. Only that it is inevitable.
This doesn't make sense to me...
Yes VZW is committed to going all digital.
That means that they may convert some areas of analog
to digital.
In areas covered by both analog and digital they may
turn off the analog.
But in areas where they only have analog why would
they just turn it off? The equipment itself doesn't have
different operating costs. If they don't convert it to digital
why would they simply turn it off and reduce coverage?
-Quick
| |
|
| In article <1137395602.692215@localhost.localdomain>, ellis@no.spam ()
wrote:
> In article < Auudnbi_WJHRKFfenZ2d
nUVZ_smdnZ2d@giganew
s.com>,
> Frankster <Frank@SPAM2TRASH.com> wrote:
>
>
> Committed is not the same as done. Verizon has plenty of analog towers
> left.
I wanted to switch on my old analog Motorola phone on but they wouldn't
do it because it was not digital. The word I got was that eventually
analog will be replaced by all digital. When a analog site goes down
they replace it with digital rather than repair it. In time there will
be no analog sites anywhere.
| |
|
| NOt just useful but perfectly clear.
Larry
"DonR." < drennardnospam@earth
link.net> wrote in message
news:N6wyf.9823$M%4.7516@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> When you had that E815 digital signal, was it usable. I have seen with 1
> bar of signal where the phone could not place the call. Where with
> tri-mode, I could go over to analog and make it.
>
> "jdoe" <jdoe@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:vPqyf.706712$_o.460809@attbi_s71...
>
>
| |
|
| ellis@no.spam () wrote in news:1137395602.692215@localhost.localdomain:
> Committed is not the same as done. Verizon has plenty of analog towers
> left.
>
>
And they will until the FCC, not Verizon, decides to turn them off.
| |
|
| "Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in news:czIyf.9900
$dW3.4791@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com:
> That means that they may convert some areas of analog
> to digital.
If they have an analog site, FCC forces them to continue it, not shut it
down...until FCC has determined everyone can shut it down.
>
> In areas covered by both analog and digital they may
> turn off the analog.
Nope...FCC says they must continue analog to a date, 2008 I think.
>
> But in areas where they only have analog why would
> they just turn it off? The equipment itself doesn't have
> different operating costs. If they don't convert it to digital
> why would they simply turn it off and reduce coverage?
Cellphone companies only want to operate in profitable urban areas and
the interstates connecting them. To get licenses in those profit
centers, they must license a whole area and give cursory service to rural
areas they want nothing to do with. So, they must play along.
In those profit center urban areas, more channels means more profit as
the system overloads often. So, analog has gotta go, converting what's
left of the AMPS channels to CDMA. FCC says they can't shut analog down
until customers stop using it. So, don't let customers have analog
phones is a quick-and-dirty way to satisfy FCC noone is using AMPS. As
soon as FCC shuts down AMPS, those channels can be converted to more
profitable digital users....and noone gives a shit if rural customers
with towers 10 miles apart have digital service, anyways.
| |
|
| Bruce E. Stemplewski wrote:
> I'm considering trading my new VX6100 for perhaps a VX8100. But it
> sounds like the Vx8100 is digital only and the Vx6100 has Tri mode.
>
> I understand that Tri Mode will give you better reception by switching
> to analog in poor reception areas. Is tri mode really all that better
> with the new digital technologies?
I often find areas where it's either AMPS or nothing, no GSM, no CDMA,
no TDMA (and of course no iDEN). From the SF Bay Area, up to Lake Tahoe,
there are long stretches on some of the highways with only AMPS coverage
(and some "No Service" areas as well). I can drive ten miles from my
house in the heart of Silicon Valley, and be hiking in the hills where
there is no digital coverage, but AMPS works.
Of course YMMV. If you spend all your time in the metro area, then maybe
you'll be fine.
| |
|
| Bruce E. Stemplewski wrote:
> That was kind of my point. If I am never going to use it then why
> worry? But the poster below brings up a good point, you would think the
> west coast being very populated would have all digital but it does not.
There are still areas of the west that are sparsely populated, and roads
between these areas and the populated areas. The rural carriers serving
these areas couldn't possibly afford to construct enough towers for
digital coverage to be as good as the AMPS coverage.
There is one Cingular GSM subscriber in California that gets digital
coverage everywhere in the state, no matter how sparsely populated, even
when no one else has digital coverage.
| |
| Michael Wise 2006-01-16, 5:48 pm |
| In article < 43cbbf14$0$95965$742
ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
> There are still areas of the west that are sparsely populated, and roads
> between these areas and the populated areas. The rural carriers serving
> these areas couldn't possibly afford to construct enough towers for
> digital coverage to be as good as the AMPS coverage.
>
> There is one Cingular GSM subscriber in California that gets digital
> coverage everywhere in the state, no matter how sparsely populated, even
> when no one else has digital coverage.
I wonder who that could be. ; )
--Mike
| |
| kevin weaver 2006-01-16, 5:48 pm |
| What happens to on-star systems after this 2008 date ? Or has on-star
started the change over already ?
"Larry" <noone@home.com> wrote in message
news:Xns974D5ED2AED2
4noonehomecom@208.49.80.253...
> "Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in news:czIyf.9900
> $dW3.4791@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com:
>
>
> If they have an analog site, FCC forces them to continue it, not shut it
> down...until FCC has determined everyone can shut it down.
>
>
> Nope...FCC says they must continue analog to a date, 2008 I think.
>
>
> Cellphone companies only want to operate in profitable urban areas and
> the interstates connecting them. To get licenses in those profit
> centers, they must license a whole area and give cursory service to rural
> areas they want nothing to do with. So, they must play along.
>
> In those profit center urban areas, more channels means more profit as
> the system overloads often. So, analog has gotta go, converting what's
> left of the AMPS channels to CDMA. FCC says they can't shut analog down
> until customers stop using it. So, don't let customers have analog
> phones is a quick-and-dirty way to satisfy FCC noone is using AMPS. As
> soon as FCC shuts down AMPS, those channels can be converted to more
> profitable digital users....and noone gives a shit if rural customers
> with towers 10 miles apart have digital service, anyways.
>
>
| |
|
| kevin weaver wrote:
> What happens to on-star systems after this 2008 date ? Or has on-star
> started the change over already ?
I think that they've started.
Remember that carriers are _permitted_ to turn off AMPS, they are not
required to turn it off. In areas where there is also digital coverage,
AMPS will be turned off. In rural areas where there is no digital
coverage, it will probably remain on (a lot of roaming revenue).
There are also areas kind of in limbo. I.e., even in urban areas, like
the San Francisco Bay Area, there are places where AMPS is still the
only service, such as greenbelt areas, parks, etc., that are receiving
AMPS coverage from quite a distance away. When AMPS is turned off in
urban areas, then the fringe areas will lose all coverage. Maybe the
drive toward phones without AMPS is to condition people to not having
services in those areas.
| |
| Larry 2006-01-16, 11:48 pm |
| SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in news:43cbee9d$0$9601
3
$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net:
> Maybe the
> drive toward phones without AMPS is to condition people to not having
> services in those areas.
>
Or it could be "customer-based testing" to see how much bitching they get
from digital-only customers to see if they have to spend the money to put
digital in those AMPS-only areas. If noone bitches, they have no incentive
to fix the holes.
| |
| Quick 2006-01-16, 11:48 pm |
| Larry wrote:
> SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in
> news:43cbee9d$0$9601
3 $742ec2ed@news.sonic.net:
>
>
> Or it could be "customer-based testing" to see how much
> bitching they get from digital-only customers to see if
> they have to spend the money to put digital in those
> AMPS-only areas. If noone bitches, they have no
> incentive to fix the holes.
errr, yea, that's the ticket. Many multi-billion dollar companies
do their network and facilities planning this way.
-Quick
| |
| David L 2006-01-17, 2:48 am |
| Yes, if you hike or camp, or get out of your car and walk around in the
SF Bay Area, analog is important. While travelling in the mountains
you'll be using VZW "roaming partners" which often neither have the
money or sustained traffic to convert analog towers to all digital. If
they did convert to digital the tower spacing originally designed for
3watt analog would go from bad to worse and remove out a huge amont of
coverage for the local (ranchers truckers loggers) who really depend
upon analog for their communication needs. Since there isn't a large
numerical population of folks effected, it's easy for large Cellcos to
ignore them.
There are lots of bad things that can happen mountain driving or out in
the woods of which having a car breakdown on a family vacation would be
the mildest event. I want an analog phone that continues to get a
signal in the "middle of nowhere", where you or I might need it most!
If one goes with all digital, at least carry an old analog cellphone
(+charger and charged battery) for FREE emergency 911 dialing (or non
emergency credit card calls). Not being able to directly connect to
emergency services or roadside assistance on a cell phone, leaves one
to rely upon the kindness of strangers passing by....or a long walk in
some cases!
Cheap insurance!
-
Dave
| |
| haley1001@my-deja.com 2006-01-17, 5:48 am |
| Will any charged cell phone work as a 911 phone (or to use with a
credit card)? Even an old, deactivated one you one used with your
current service? I've never heard of that. Or do you have to buy one
of those pay-as-you-go phones they sell with calling cards to use as
your back-up?
I just bought an all-digital Motorola e815 for the whiz-bang stuff on
my new-every-2 Verizon deal, and now I'm starting to regret it after
reading this thread. Can I survive in analog areas if I hang on to my
old Nokia for emergency-only service, without sending back the new
phone?
| |
|
| In article <mar.sv-D77738.06332016012006@news-rdr-03.rdc-kc.rr.com>,
rocky <mar.sv@mars.com> wrote:
>In article <1137395602.692215@localhost.localdomain>, ellis@no.spam ()
>wrote:
>
>
>I wanted to switch on my old analog Motorola phone on but they wouldn't
>do it because it was not digital. The word I got was that eventually
>analog will be replaced by all digital. When a analog site goes down
>they replace it with digital rather than repair it. In time there will
>be no analog sites anywhere.
How is that relevant to this discussion? We are talking about
having a phone that does both, not a phone that's only analog.
--
http://yosemitephotos.net/
| |
|
| In article < Xns974D5DB262545noon
ehomecom@208.49.80.253>,
Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>ellis@no.spam () wrote in news:1137395602.692215@localhost.localdomain:
>
>
>And they will until the FCC, not Verizon, decides to turn them off.
I doubt that the FCC is in any big hurry to turn off analog in the
boonies.
--
http://yosemitephotos.net/
| |
|
| In article <1137480988.445573.43450@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
<haley1001@my-deja.com> wrote:
>Will any charged cell phone work as a 911 phone (or to use with a
>credit card)?
Not if it is in an analog only area and the phone doesn't
do analog.
--
http://yosemitenews.into/
| |
|
| ellis@no.spam wrote:
> In article < Xns974D5DB262545noon
ehomecom@208.49.80.253>,
> Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>
> I doubt that the FCC is in any big hurry to turn off
> analog in the boonies.
Ummm, it's just Larry... Why would the FCC decide to
turn them off? I can imagine that the FCC might require
a carrier to provide service as a condition of being
granted bandwidth. But turn it off? I could even make
a real stretch and imagine that the FCC might go as
far as trying to force a carrier to switch from analog to
digital. But turn it off?
Oh, I forgot... They might do that to cut Larry off since
he has been such a thorn in their side and nearly
exposed a number of their plots over the years.
-Quick
| |
| haley1001@my-deja.com 2006-01-17, 5:48 am |
| So, I guess if it's a tri-mode (which my Nokia is, as well as my old
Motorola which is still around somewhere), it will work. I looked this
up, and it's true. I did not know that until I read that post, thanks
for the info. I do go places in the Sierra sometimes, and it could
come in handy.
| |
| Justin 2006-01-18, 5:48 pm |
| Frankster wrote on [Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:49:15 - 0700]:
>
> In those areas I would go with a different carrier. VZW is committed to
In many of those areas around here the other carrier has zero signal
| |
| David S 2006-01-18, 11:48 pm |
| On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 12:33:21 GMT, rocky <mar.sv@mars.com> chose to add
this to the great equation of life, the universe, and everything:
>In article <1137395602.692215@localhost.localdomain>, ellis@no.spam ()
>wrote:
>
>
>I wanted to switch on my old analog Motorola phone on but they wouldn't
>do it because it was not digital. The word I got was that eventually
>analog will be replaced by all digital. When a analog site goes down
>they replace it with digital rather than repair it. In time there will
>be no analog sites anywhere.
I'm really surprised no one else has jumped on this grossly incorrect
statement. By FCC regulation, no carrier can turn off any existing analog
service anywhere. They can reduce capacity, but not all the way down to
zero. This is in effect for about two more years, which can be extended
(but, contrary to what Larry would tell you, hasn't yet and likely won't).
--
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.
"This is America. I'd'a beat you, rich or poor." - Detective Andy Sipowicz
to a poor immigrant suspect
| |
| David L 2006-01-19, 5:48 pm |
| For best results set the old cellphone to the phone number
123-456-7890. This is the universal unactivated cell phone number. This
number will indictate to an E-911 operator that the call is being made
from an unactivated phone and there is no call back number. Tis would
be important info for the operator to know. Having a call back number
requires some kind of cellular service (or prepaid plan) but it's
considerably more useful, especially since a cellular connection can be
lost.
Personally, I think it's better to use a prepaid phone, where there is
some kind of call back number. Calling from an unactivated cellphone is
somewhat unpredictable, until you figure out the rules used by the
local serving Cellco. In some cases Credit Card calls (or collect) work
just fine, IIRC $3 to set up the call and around $2-$3 per minute.
For instance, I could not connect in analog mode to make a credit card
call up in Lassen county. Apparently the network was rejecting analog
calls from unsubcribed cell phones. Probably to conserve bandwith for
pay customers only. I suspect, but did not test, that a 911 call from
the same analog cell phone would go through. Emergency calls are
required to be connected where there is compatible equipment and
bypasses the normal protocals.
However if my car broke down, that really wouldn't be an E-911
emergency (there seems to be some interpretive leeway in how rural
E-911 operaters define and react to incoming non-emergency, but urgent
calls. Running out of gas in a blizzard could turn from roadside tow
evet to an emerency life or death event rapidly, say if that person
were elderly. Same could be said for a breakdown at night in the middle
of nowhere. I suppose if you think your life is at risk, it's better to
try to call 91, than following some rigid guidlines.
The whole point is not to distract emergency response providers or call
center personel from saving someone elses life! The life you save could
be your own!
Like any call center, somtimes they are busy and sometimes they are
not.
I believe it's one's personal resposibility to safeguard their own rear
ends, with whatever kind of technology or insurance they can resonably
afford. Just like insurance. However insurance often applies to what
happens after accident or untimely event.
If one were keeping a cell phone for emeergecies and can afford it
it's much better to get a prepaid phone and have one les variable to
worry about rather than wondering if I can connect to the network or
recieve a cal back under possible life threatening or stressfull
situations.
Keeping an unactivated trimode phone or better yet a prepaid trimode
phone (that is known to work in the areas we will be travelling) is
some valuable pre-need insurance.
There are any number of circumstances where the value of the ability to
make one phone call would easily be worth the price of a years prepaid
service.
Just think how much money is spent on car insurance and the cost of
roadside tow service, and how seldom it is used. Roadside auto service
works much better when a call can be made for a tow!
I'm still amazed at the concept of a small device that when brought
into range of sometimes a far off tower allows a call to be placed to
much of the inhabited earth.
*My tips for emergency phones.
Find out what works in the areas you will travel. Locales, contactors,
cab and tow truck operators seem to be good sources.
Get a phone that is able to use the analog network, when travelling in
rural areas.
If you can afford it keep a prepaid phone. Depending upon a GSM phone
for mountain/rural travel is a poor choice for the forseable future.
PRACTISE making calls from your equipment, so you know what to expect.
Make sure the netowork settings are correct or optimized for the kind
of calls you are making.
KEEP A CHARGER and a charged battery! Your phone is only as good as
the charge it holds and the networks it connects to! A phone sitting
in the trunk for a year may go dead. Lithium Ion batteries tend to keep
a charge longer and the batteries store better too.
If your car beaks down and/or you can't get a cellular signal, walk up
to the top of any nearby hill. Just a small change in altitude can
effect cellular reception dramatically.
Pull that antenna up!
If your a complete cellphone nut, or need the best coverage from a
fixed location (like a mountain cabin or campsite) get a phone that can
also connect to a Yagi type antenna, using a hardwire external antenna
adapter, for maximum signal gain. Since the Yagi antenna can be aimed
at a tower, one can optimise the signal gain.
Just in case....
If your moderately wealthy get a satellite phone too (phone ~$500 and
~$60 month plan)...they work almost everywhere there's a clear view of
the sky is available! With a GPS receiver as well, one could
communicate their exact coordinates and location from built GPS maps
(again provided a partial view of the sky) to anyone else for a rescue.
A new wide beam $90 laser beacon can be seen from an airplane or
rescuer from miles away.
-
Dave
| |
|
|
|
| David L wrote:
> Got a little carried away with emergency location
> devices... Here's some links for equipment mentioned
> above.
Darn... I just had to look at the laser beacon but the
link didn't work.
-Quick
| |
|
| On 19 Jan 2006 02:03:51 -0800, "David L" <davlindi@hotmail.com> wrote:
>For best results set the old cellphone to the phone number
>123-456-7890. This is the universal unactivated cell phone number. This
>number will indictate to an E-911 operator that the call is being made
>from an unactivated phone and there is no call back number. Tis would
>be important info for the operator to know. Having a call back number
>requires some kind of cellular service (or prepaid plan) but it's
>considerably more useful, especially since a cellular connection can be
>lost.
as a retired 9-1-1 center administrator i can tell you that your
statement is partially true. the display our operators use has a spot
for the ANI (automatic number identification) or cellphone number..the
number the caller is calling from. if the phone is not activated that
space will be blank. filling it with 123-456-7890 will just create
confusion.
>Personally, I think it's better to use a prepaid phone, where there is
>some kind of call back number. Calling from an unactivated cellphone is
>somewhat unpredictable, until you figure out the rules used by the
>local serving Cellco. In some cases Credit Card calls (or collect) work
>just fine, IIRC $3 to set up the call and around $2-$3 per minute.
>
agreed.
>For instance, I could not connect in analog mode to make a credit card
>call up in Lassen county. Apparently the network was rejecting analog
>calls from unsubcribed cell phones. Probably to conserve bandwith for
>pay customers only. I suspect, but did not test, that a 911 call from
>the same analog cell phone would go through. Emergency calls are
>required to be connected where there is compatible equipment and
>bypasses the normal protocals.
9-1-1 calls are required by law and fcc rules to be routed. this
presumes that a public safety agency in the area has agreed to accept
wireless 9-1-1 calls. here in illinois if no local agency agrees to
accept wireless 9-1-1 calls the call will be routed to the state
police. there still may be areas in the country where wireline and/or
wireless 9-1-1 service does not yet exist. and just because an area
has wireline 9-1-1 service doesn't mean that wireless 9-1-1 service
exists.
if the receiving agency is not prepared to receive the ALI (automatic
location information) from the phone OR if the carrier is not sending
the ALI information then the 9-1-1 operator will not have a good idea
of where the caller is located. even with ALI data the error can be
as much as 100-300 meters. it is ALWAYS best for the caller to know
where they are.
>However if my car broke down, that really wouldn't be an E-911
>emergency (there seems to be some interpretive leeway in how rural
>E-911 operaters define and react to incoming non-emergency, but urgent
>calls. Running out of gas in a blizzard could turn from roadside tow
>evet to an emerency life or death event rapidly, say if that person
>were elderly. Same could be said for a breakdown at night in the middle
>of nowhere. I suppose if you think your life is at risk, it's better to
>try to call 91, than following some rigid guidlines.
absolutely. in our area 9-1-1 was used anytime a police officer,
firefighter or paramedic was needed to be dispatched for anything.
parking complaints to violent crime..they all came in via 9-1-1. our
operators dispatched based on priority and not first call in. busy
signals due to BS calls? nope, nary a one other than during heavy
storms. every 9-1-1 center has their own rules but if you're on the
road and need the police, fire or medics try 9-1-1 first. nobody is
gonna XXXXX at you for reporting a no-injury accident or a stalled
motorist.
>The whole point is not to distract emergency response providers or call
>center personel from saving someone elses life! The life you save could
>be your own! Like any call center, somtimes they are busy and sometimes they are
>not.
we handled, on average, 700-800 9-1-1 calls per day, a pretty busy
center. our service population was about 1 million during the day and
about 700,000-800,000 at night. we service 12 police and 15 fire
departments.
>I believe it's one's personal resposibility to safeguard their own rear
>ends, with whatever kind of technology or insurance they can resonably
>afford. Just like insurance. However insurance often applies to what
>happens after accident or untimely event.
>If one were keeping a cell phone for emeergecies and can afford it
>it's much better to get a prepaid phone and have one les variable to
>worry about rather than wondering if I can connect to the network or
>recieve a cal back under possible life threatening or stressfull
>situations.
cellphones and basic plans are pretty inexpensive these days but i
recognize that not everyone can afford them. the next best thing is a
pre-paid phone so that there is a way for the 9-1-1 op to call you
back. if still too expensive then an old, inactive phone is ok. but
if it is an analog phone and you're in a digital only area you might
not have access. a tri-band phone is best.
>Keeping an unactivated trimode phone or better yet a prepaid trimode
>phone (that is known to work in the areas we will be travelling) is
>some valuable pre-need insurance.
>There are any number of circumstances where the value of the ability to
>make one phone call would easily be worth the price of a years prepaid
>service.
>
>Just think how much money is spent on car insurance and the cost of
>roadside tow service, and how seldom it is used. Roadside auto service
>works much better when a call can be made for a tow!
>I'm still amazed at the concept of a small device that when brought
>into range of sometimes a far off tower allows a call to be placed to
>much of the inhabited earth.
>
>*My tips for emergency phones.
>
>Find out what works in the areas you will travel. Locales, contactors,
>cab and tow truck operators seem to be good sources.
>
>Get a phone that is able to use the analog network, when travelling in
>rural areas.
>If you can afford it keep a prepaid phone. Depending upon a GSM phone
>for mountain/rural travel is a poor choice for the forseable future.
>
>PRACTISE making calls from your equipment, so you know what to expect.
>Make sure the netowork settings are correct or optimized for the kind
>of calls you are making.
i would not recommend making practice calls to 9-1-1. when you find
you have to call 9-1-1 simply state that you want to report a ______
and then stop. let the 9-1-1 op conduct the interview. things will
go a lot smoother if you do this and don't try to force feed
information to the op. when i've called 9-1-1 from the camper i tell
the op that i'm on a cellphone and ask if they can hear me ok and then
i tell them that i am reporting a _________.
>KEEP A CHARGER and a charged battery! Your phone is only as good as
>the charge it holds and the networks it connects to! A phone sitting
>in the trunk for a year may go dead. Lithium Ion batteries tend to keep
>a charge longer and the batteries store better too.
>
>If your car beaks down and/or you can't get a cellular signal, walk up
>to the top of any nearby hill. Just a small change in altitude can
>effect cellular reception dramatically.
>
>Pull that antenna up!
>If your a complete cellphone nut, or need the best coverage from a
>fixed location (like a mountain cabin or campsite) get a phone that can
>also connect to a Yagi type antenna, using a hardwire external antenna
>adapter, for maximum signal gain. Since the Yagi antenna can be aimed
>at a tower, one can optimise the signal gain.
>
>Just in case....
>If your moderately wealthy get a satellite phone too (phone ~$500 and
>~$60 month plan)...they work almost everywhere there's a clear view of
>the sky is available! With a GPS receiver as well, one could
>communicate their exact coordinates and location from built GPS maps
>(again provided a partial view of the sky) to anyone else for a rescue.
>A new wide beam $90 laser beacon can be seen from an airplane or
>rescuer from miles away.
>
>-
>Dave
all great advice.
73,
rich, n9dko
| |
| clifto 2006-01-19, 5:48 pm |
| Quick wrote:
> Darn... I just had to look at the laser beacon but the
> link didn't work.
I wonder if they still make them, now that shining a laser at an aircraft
is a felony.
--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.
|
|
|
|
|