1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Expecting Cell Phone Forums? We recently moved Verizon specific content to VerizonForums.com. If you previously had an account on CPF, it has been transferred!
    Dismiss Notice

Analog systems, remaining channel capacity.

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by N9WOS, Dec 21, 2003.

  1. Larry W4CSC

    Larry W4CSC Guest

    On 30 Dec 2003 05:19:48 GMT, hoch@exemplary.invalid (CharlesH) wrote:


    >You mean the caller ID name on the mobile phone? Does ANY system send
    >the caller ID name info to the mobile? (Distinct from the phone looking
    >up the number in its phone book and displaying the name if found.)
    >
    >Or the mobile user's name on landline phones' caller ID? This seems to
    >depend on whether the landline company and the wireless company have
    >come to financial terms on the cost of access to the wireless company's
    >name database, and if the wireless company is technically able to
    >provide it. The name is not carried in the caller id info.


    Both. The phones are fully capable of displaying Name and Number.
    The POTS company is delivering that data to them, just like they do
    your home phone.

    If I can get that data from a $20 gadget from Radio Shack, there must
    be a way a multibillion-dollar corporation can transmit it to a phone.
     



    › See More: Analog systems, remaining channel capacity.
  2. Brian Oakley

    Brian Oakley Guest

    "The Ghost of General Lee" <ghost@general.lee> wrote in message
    news:tvhfuv0q8fjtjfpnj07uij9lf2lbjj05le@4ax.com...
    > On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 23:49:33 GMT, noone@home.com (Larry W4CSC) wrote:
    >
    > >I'm convinced cellular either doesn't have this kind of
    > >automated operational tests, or chooses to ignore them, because they
    > >always seem quite interested in my outage reports as if it were the
    > >first they'd heard that the equipment in X location was dead.


    Well, they actually do have that kind of equipment, but there is still the
    human element involved unfortunately. I speak with experience. If they would
    just automate the notice system insted of relying on a human to relay it to
    the tech, things would get taken care of much more quickly. I have to say
    one thing in the op centers defence. Usually an outage is caused by landline
    problems, not cell problems, so they see the alarm and make the judgement
    call as to who needs to receive the trouble ticket. Its a process, but a
    good one. And not quite so simple as a paging network in that you have MANY
    telco lines involved because of the bandwidth.
    >
    > Yeah, kind of reminds me of every time I would talk to a CSR about the
    > well known (at least in this group) SMS bugs with the 3035, it was
    > always the "first time we've ever heard of it." Didn't matter that at
    > one time I had six trouble tickets open on the matter. Communications
    > companies generally do a piss poor job of communicating within their
    > own company.


    I have to agree with you on this. I work for a communications company, and
    very often never hear of changes that I need to know about until its way too
    late to make adjustments.
    B.
     
  3. Brian Oakley

    Brian Oakley Guest

    You actually have automatically generated trouble tickets? What market are
    you refering to??
    B

    "John Smith" <oss1943@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:3ff0b270$0$4759$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
    > >After years of experience with cellular, literally from its first
    > >installations, I'm convinced cellular either doesn't have this kind of
    > >automated operational tests,

    >
    > Yes it does. Starting around 1995 with Lucent's Series II equipment. It

    does
    > all that and more. Radios -and- antennas are routinely checked every 10-30
    > minutes. Pain in the butt since the microprocessors sometimes get

    confuzzed
    > and "forget" to tell the radio to transmit, triggering a bogus automated
    > trouble ticket. There are a lot of other unrelated causes of false

    positives
    > as well. Nearly all the major cellular base station platforms do this now
    > (Nokia, Ericsson, Lucent, etc).
    >
    > >.....bringing back
    > >some fond paging memories at 1AM on Sunday night after a massive storm
    > >front passage. Ah, the smell of burning hardline....(c;

    >
    > And burning brakes if you towed generators.
    >
    > Try pager therapy. That's adapting a skeet-throwing machine to sling old
    > inoperative pagers. Consider enlisting a reloading friend make 'hideous'
    > rounds (ground up glass & wire brad nails instead of lead shot)...it's
    > gratifying to see that cloud of misery hit a flying pager. Plus, you

    should
    > find a nearly endless supply of non-working (but otherwise intact) pagers
    > from stores, repair centers & carriers. Resist the urge to use machine

    guns,
    > as the surviving locals will be really annoyed at you. [8^)
    >
    >
     
  4. Brian Oakley

    Brian Oakley Guest

    But did it show your name to EVERYONE you called or just to those that had
    your number and name in the cell phone book?
    B

    "Eric Rosenberry" <erics@n0-spam.rosenberry.org> wrote in message
    news:-IKdnUVUE71Ru2yiRVn-jg@comcast.com...
    > > Or the mobile user's name on landline phones' caller ID? This seems to
    > > depend on whether the landline company and the wireless company have
    > > come to financial terms on the cost of access to the wireless company's
    > > name database, and if the wireless company is technically able to
    > > provide it. The name is not carried in the caller id info.

    >
    > I was a T-mobile customer for 6 years until a few days ago when I moved to
    > Verizon. In the last 6 months or so on T-Mobile when I made calls to

    people
    > with caller ID that could display names it would show my name.
    >
    > -Eric
    >
    >
     
  5. Brian Oakley

    Brian Oakley Guest

    But do you actually get the name even with landline caller ID? I thought it
    had to be in the list on your unit to display the actual name of the person
    calling. I thought only the number showed up.
    B

    "Larry W4CSC" <not@home.com> wrote in message
    news:3ff17808.168022830@news.knology.net...
    > On 30 Dec 2003 05:19:48 GMT, hoch@exemplary.invalid (CharlesH) wrote:
    >
    >
    > >You mean the caller ID name on the mobile phone? Does ANY system send
    > >the caller ID name info to the mobile? (Distinct from the phone looking
    > >up the number in its phone book and displaying the name if found.)
    > >
    > >Or the mobile user's name on landline phones' caller ID? This seems to
    > >depend on whether the landline company and the wireless company have
    > >come to financial terms on the cost of access to the wireless company's
    > >name database, and if the wireless company is technically able to
    > >provide it. The name is not carried in the caller id info.

    >
    > Both. The phones are fully capable of displaying Name and Number.
    > The POTS company is delivering that data to them, just like they do
    > your home phone.
    >
    > If I can get that data from a $20 gadget from Radio Shack, there must
    > be a way a multibillion-dollar corporation can transmit it to a phone.
    >
    >
     
  6. Brian Oakley

    Brian Oakley Guest

    you really think the prezes limo is amps? I cant imagine why, digital is
    much more secure as it is.
    B.

    "Larry W4CSC" <noone@home.com> wrote in message
    news:3fe631e2.27884851@news.knology.net...
    > On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 08:10:17 -0600, Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote:
    >
    > >
    > >Yes, legacy AMPS is on the way out, and a number of subscription
    > >services are going to grind to a halt if they don't upgrade. Highway
    > >Master, UPS, and OnStar are often mentioned. Does anyone know if these
    > >(or any other) subscription services are considering upgrades to digital?
    > >

    > Sorry to bust yer bubble, jer, but the current date FCC has said they
    > don't HAVE to provide service to AMPS is February 16th, 2008. FCC
    > regulations say they MUST provide service until then.
    >
    > FCC will extend this date UNLESS the carriers can convince them that
    > there is no appreciable use on AMPS after that date.
    >
    > As long as the crypto voice from the President's limo is on AMPS, I'd
    > say we're quite safe for a while....(c;
    >
    >
    > Larry W4CSC
    >
    > NNNN
     
  7. Aboutdakota

    Aboutdakota Guest

    Brian Oakley wrote:
    > you really think the prezes limo is amps? I cant imagine why, digital is
    > much more secure as it is.
    > B.


    But, with Digital, you would be strapped to the 1x data network or GPRS
    network for extra encryption. Basic digital is more secure than basic
    AMPS, but because AMPS has much more badwidth, it is much easier to
    encrypt the signal yourself, giving you the extra bandwidth.

    ==AD
     
  8. Larry W4CSC

    Larry W4CSC Guest

    On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 15:46:18 -0600, "Brian Oakley"
    <brianoakley@ispwest.com> wrote:

    >But do you actually get the name even with landline caller ID? I thought it
    >had to be in the list on your unit to display the actual name of the person
    >calling. I thought only the number showed up.
    >B
    >

    Full caller ID in SC shows the name on the telephone account....
     
  9. Larry W4CSC

    Larry W4CSC Guest

    On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 15:48:43 -0600, "Brian Oakley"
    <brianoakley@ispwest.com> wrote:

    >you really think the prezes limo is amps? I cant imagine why, digital is
    >much more secure as it is.
    >B.
    >

    Government communications doesn't use easily-decoded CDMA or any other
    scheme. The only thing it's secure against is the kid with the open
    scanner. Government uses crypto voice, deeply encoded into a
    white-noise-sounding hiss that low-resolution, low-sample-rate
    cellular phone schemes or slow digital modes could never keep up with.
    So, they use FM radios....AMPS.
     
  10. Larry,

    Spread spectrum is what the government uses for really secure
    communication. It is actually somewhat like CDMA according to the folks I
    talked to. And before the communication hits the air, it is, of course,
    converted to digital and it is encrypted.

    No, they aren't using what VZW and Alltel are using, but the concept is
    similar, but much better.

    Secret Service was using Motorola DES, which does sound like an
    unsquelched FM radio, It was on high band VHF FM two-way radio channels.
    There was a serious loss of range issue which left a lot of communications
    going in the clear. I haven't monitored them for quite a while, but the
    sources I have indicate that there wouldn't be much point any more. Dittos
    for the FBI.

    And, so far as I have seen on the Internet, the schemes used by VZW and
    Alltel haven't been broken with freeware as has GSM. I'm not worried about
    my own stuff, but if CDMA cellular is really easy to break, could you
    provide some details?

    I am sure the limo has an AMPS phone, but it is just for backup.

    --
    Thomas M. Goethe

    "Larry W4CSC" <not@home.com> wrote in message
    news:3ff241d8.9855550@news.knology.net...
    > On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 15:48:43 -0600, "Brian Oakley"
    > <brianoakley@ispwest.com> wrote:
    >
    > >you really think the prezes limo is amps? I cant imagine why, digital is
    > >much more secure as it is.
    > >B.
    > >

    > Government communications doesn't use easily-decoded CDMA or any other
    > scheme. The only thing it's secure against is the kid with the open
    > scanner. Government uses crypto voice, deeply encoded into a
    > white-noise-sounding hiss that low-resolution, low-sample-rate
    > cellular phone schemes or slow digital modes could never keep up with.
    > So, they use FM radios....AMPS.
    >
    >
     
  11. User-Agent: tin/1.5.18-20030602 ("Darts") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.8-RC (i386))
    Message-ID: <psCdnezDEYUu_HqiRVn-jA@lmi.net>
    Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 15:27:15 -0600
    Lines: 20
    NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.117.140.246
    X-Trace: sv3-trdCKJ7QRUM+IC1E69hx7CzkeaOkykhP0rBG/dcJ1UO+OJkrjktGUT+uRhGdxPCu40+II3H2AAywBIN!8u+e60dYAsq1l+83N9SuAY4vmnSNqDKTohjNH2Y+IE6I7Q9zBWp1YTVdMezMJQa3Yw==
    X-Complaints-To: abuse@lmi.net
    X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@lmi.net
    X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
    X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
    X-Postfilter: 1.1
    Xref: news.newshosting.com alt.cellular:43789 alt.cellular.cingular:26437 alt.cellular.verizon:131990

    In alt.cellular Daoler <daoler_no_sp@m_poczta.onet.pl> wrote:
    >> Just out of curiousity, which tri-modes will they be supporting?
    >> GSM? TDMA? CDMA? 850Mhz cellular? 1900MHz PCS?
    >>

    >
    > 1900MHz PCS is actually GSM;


    No. 1900MHz PCS could also be CDMA or TDMA.

    > and GSM is one of the TDMA systems
    > CDMA works on 850MHz band


    Tell that to Sprint and Verizon. Both use CDMA on 1900 MHZ in the US.
    Verizon also uses 800 MHz.

    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services
    22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
    Steve Sobol, Geek In Charge * 888.480.4NET (4638) * sjsobol@JustThe.net
     

Welcome to VerizonForums!

Unfortunately you can't reply until you log in or sign up.


Forgot your password?