1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
  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!

Cellular Repeaters (in the USA)

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by John Navas, Dec 4, 2003.

  1. John Navas

    John Navas Guest

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

    In <oft4tv8cdb11op5uatuj02q2gajlkk1v88@Pern.rk> on Sun, 07 Dec 2003 00:36:50
    GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote:

    >On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 22:53:12 GMT, John Navas
    ><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:
    >
    >>[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >>In <q5o2tvghibfr29o7hqr13fktc738ilcg2p@Pern.rk> on Sat, 06 Dec 2003 04:53:29
    >>GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote:
    >>>On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:40:20 GMT, John Navas
    >>><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

    >
    >>>>So-called "passive repeaters" do not work.

    >
    >>>How many have you personally field tested?

    >
    >>Perhaps half a dozen.

    >
    >Do you want to put in the effort to find out what you've been doing
    >wrong?


    I haven't been doing anything wrong. And you?

    >(They DO work - as Larry, and many others, can testify.)


    They can be made to work in certain circumstances, but they aren't a
    general-purpose solution.

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



    › See More: Cellular Repeaters (in the USA)
  2. ADVANSPEC

    ADVANSPEC Guest

    x-no-archive:yes
    >From: Tim Harrick Tim233@hotmail.com:


    "Only problem is that's it's usually not in the entire mall to service
    shoppers, it's ONLY in the cellular store (and right outside the doors). Since
    it doesn't help ANYONE unless they are in the store, what could it be besides a
    sales trick?..."
    ..."A deceptive sales practice is the legal term...."

    Gee, If a Store selling stereos Puts a roof antenna on the outside of the
    store so they can demo their equipment, or if a TV store puts an outside
    antenna to demo their screens ......
    Seems no different to me, & this has been going on for decades.
    In this day & age, people understand that Reception indoors will vary on
    Radios, cellphones ect...
  3. "Larry W4CSC" <nospam@home.com> wrote in message
    news:3fcff0d5.97198072@news.knology.net...
    > We all know about them, John. Verizon uses them in their mall stores,


    As do all the carriers when the in-mall signal is normally not sufficient.
    However I expect that the repeaters are also installed for subscribers as
    well, since malls are a high use area for mobile phones.

    Few businesses are going to spend the money themselves for a cellular
    repeater. The best approach is to choose a carrier that works inside the
    buildings you visit the most. Try to stick with an 800 Mhz carrier for best
    in-building coverage.

    "PCS phones are the most fragile because they use higher frequencies whose
    radio waves are more easily disturbed and because they use weaker signals to
    begin with. Inside building performance is so unreliable that the newest
    systems such as IS-136 permit incorporating base stations within a structure
    itself, an expensive arrangement for high rise office buildings and such."

    and

    "1900 MHz however, is much more of a challenge as far as coverage and
    in-building penetration than 800 Mhz. More transmission sites are needed
    than an 800 system, even with similar technologies (i.e., TDMA, CDMA, etc).
    This is because the higher frequency radio waves don't travel as far as
    lower ones, are much more directional, and are attenuated more by trees,
    foliage, obstructions, etc than 800MHz. "
  4. Larry W4CSC

    Larry W4CSC Guest

    On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 17:10:06 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio
    <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

    >In article <3fd1422b.183569129@news.knology.net>
    >nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) wrote:
    >
    >Actually, this chick needed very little training in saying "I'm not sure
    >of that." It's a shame when the client has a better working knowledge of
    >the technology than those assigned to "advise" the customer.
    >

    Even then, the savvy customer will be treated like a 2-year-old during
    potty training.


    Larry W4CSC

    NNNN
  5. Larry W4CSC

    Larry W4CSC Guest

    On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 14:40:59 -0800, "Peter Pan"
    <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote:

    >
    >Only problem is that's it's usually not in the entire mall to service
    >shoppers, it's ONLY in the cellular store (and right outside the doors).
    >Since it doesn't help ANYONE unless they are in the store, what could it be
    >besides a sales trick?
    >

    Same here. The toyphones won't work out in the mall at the RESELLERS'
    booths, either......

    Probably best I'm not one of the resellers. The temptation to pin
    their coax real early in the morning would be overwhelming...(c;



    Larry W4CSC

    NNNN
  6. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 05:41:41 GMT, "Trey" <treydog90spam@hotmail.com>
    posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

    >hm... that would be worth trying. Its ether that, or trying a new phone
    >that has 850/1900gsm. but I cant find out if there is and GSM 850 in my
    >area. I have tried news groups and google searches, and nothing has come up
    >for Orange county.


    Can't help you there, if you mean California. I've never even been in
    Orange County, unless it's part of the holding pattern for LAX.
  7. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 08:30:05 GMT, John Navas
    <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

    >[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >In <7g05tvcrvnk33msoajga27p2qh80r5pmjq@Pern.rk> on Sun, 07 Dec 2003 02:49:57
    >GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote:
    >>On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 22:32:51 GMT, John Navas
    >><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:
    >>>In <584a61bdc20af9dfedf9ab2e3cee5a47@dizum.com> on Sat, 6 Dec 2003 17:10:06
    >>>+0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
    >>>>In article <3fd1422b.183569129@news.knology.net>
    >>>>nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) wrote:


    >>>>Actually, this chick needed very little training in saying "I'm not sure
    >>>>of that." It's a shame when the client has a better working knowledge of
    >>>>the technology than those assigned to "advise" the customer.


    >>>Because ... ?


    >>>Sales people aren't there to "'advise' the customer" -- they're there to
    >>>generate sales!


    >>They should know their products.


    >Why?


    Oh, I was assuming that having a job required a certain level of
    competence. Silly me. All they need to know is which phone and which
    plan give them the greatest commission.
  8. Larry W4CSC

    Larry W4CSC Guest

    On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 18:51:23 GMT, "Trey" <treydog90spam@hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    >If you don't mind me asking, just how much did the whole setup cost for your
    >friend's house?
    >I have no coverage in my house, and patchy coverage outside. I'm sure a high
    >gain directional going to a BDA can light up my house. but I'm still looking
    >for the pricing for all the required parts.
    >BTW, do you have the BDA on a battery backup so he still has signal in a
    >blackout?
    >

    The beam antennas are under $100 at www.cellantenna.com. Look at:

    http://www.cellantenna.com/Antennas/yagi.htm

    Bigger is better.....Be sure to buy for the band your phone operates
    on in your system (see all the crossposting of this thread).

    The inside antenna is just a dipole. But they have nicer looking
    ones:

    http://www.cellantenna.com/Antennas/internal.htm

    Then all you need is some low-loss coax cable to connect the beam
    outside to the panel antenna inside.....$200 total.

    If you've an old magmount for your 800 Mhz bagphone, stick it to the
    top of your file cabinet for the inside antenna.



    Larry W4CSC

    NNNN
  9. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 08:32:43 GMT, John Navas
    <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

    >>And the "spokesperson" was? A secretary? A receptionist?


    >A wee bit more than an anonymous Usenet poster. ;-)


    Not really. I've been working with FCC regs since 1957.
    Receptionists don't have anything to do with the regs, nor do most of
    them even know any.
  10. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 08:34:09 GMT, John Navas
    <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

    >[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >In <3jv4tvgsogkv3bkj8utcmf2pvib52p0phb@Pern.rk> on Sun, 07 Dec 2003 01:15:29
    >GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote:
    >>On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 22:49:27 GMT, John Navas
    >><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:


    >>>I respectfully disagree -- companies that knowingly aid and abet violations of
    >>>FCC regulations can get in serious trouble.


    >>Like all those companies that sold linears that covered 27 MHz?


    >>Like all those stores that sell ham gear without asking to see a
    >>license (all of them)?


    >>Like all the stores in NYC that sell high-powered (illegally so)
    >>cordless phones, but only if you're going to use them in countries
    >>that allow them to be used? But don't ask you where you intend to use
    >>them?


    >>Yeah, the FCC really comes down heavily on people against whom no
    >>complaints have been made. They usually don't come down heavily (or
    >>at all) on people against whom complaints HAVE been made.


    >So you now agree that the FCC doesn't care? ;)


    You really like arguing both sides of a situation, don't you?

    "The FCC", a governmental body, has no feelings. Many of the
    employees would like to be able to do more than they can, but they
    only work 40 hour weeks, so they go after the most blatant violators.
    That's less than 1%, but it's the best they can do with what they
    have.
  11. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 08:45:52 GMT, John Navas
    <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

    >[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >In <hvv4tvsvaoc2gc7p6rb5k4cq096q7llk2f@Pern.rk> on Sun, 07 Dec 2003 02:49:55
    >GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote:


    >>No one ever said that you had to know what you're talking about in
    >>order to have an opinion, and this post clearly proves the point.


    >Rubbish.


    Crushing argument, there.

    >>BDAs DO change the contour of the cell, it's NOT very easy to find a
    >>transmitter that only transmits irregularly and running RF equipment
    >>one knows nothing about DOES usually cause harm.


    >No and no.


    See above. HOW many years did you say you have in the business?
  12. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 08:47:16 GMT, John Navas
    <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

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


    >In <obt4tv4q022d0nu7dttr7u35tm43if70tv@Pern.rk> on Sun, 07 Dec 2003 00:34:24
    >GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote:


    >>Yeah, but passive repeaters don't work, right? :)


    >Right.


    As I said in another post in this thread, one doesn't have to know
    what one is talking about to post to usenet, and you keep proving it.
    What's your degree in? English?
  13. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 08:48:34 GMT, John Navas
    <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

    >[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >In <oft4tv8cdb11op5uatuj02q2gajlkk1v88@Pern.rk> on Sun, 07 Dec 2003 00:36:50
    >GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote:
    >>On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 22:53:12 GMT, John Navas
    >><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:
    >>>[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >>>In <q5o2tvghibfr29o7hqr13fktc738ilcg2p@Pern.rk> on Sat, 06 Dec 2003 04:53:29
    >>>GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote:
    >>>>On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:40:20 GMT, John Navas
    >>>><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:


    >>>>>So-called "passive repeaters" do not work.


    >>>>How many have you personally field tested?


    >>>Perhaps half a dozen.


    >>Do you want to put in the effort to find out what you've been doing
    >>wrong?


    >I haven't been doing anything wrong.


    Then you live in a universe in which the laws of physics are different
    than they are in this one.

    >And you?


    I've been using passive repeaters that DO work.

    >>(They DO work - as Larry, and many others, can testify.)


    >They can be made to work in certain circumstances, but they aren't a
    >general-purpose solution.


    Of course not. They only work where there's plenty of outside signal
    (and there's almost always plenty, if you make the antenna large
    enough), and there's not enough inside signal.

    Why would anyone use a repeater, passive or active, if there's enough
    signal inside?

    (Your troll-like posting is noted.)
  14. Trey

    Trey Guest

    you might be able to see Orange County form the airplane on your way in to
    LAX.

    GSM 1900 is fair in Southern CA, I guess I could always get a 850/1900 phone
    so I am ready if they ever do put in 850 towers here.

    "Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.org> wrote in message
    news:s087tvk17e3hf6trkkomteqm48rp6vp54c@Pern.rk...
    > On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 05:41:41 GMT, "Trey" <treydog90spam@hotmail.com>
    > posted in alt.cellular.verizon:
    >
    > >hm... that would be worth trying. Its ether that, or trying a new phone
    > >that has 850/1900gsm. but I cant find out if there is and GSM 850 in my
    > >area. I have tried news groups and google searches, and nothing has come

    up
    > >for Orange county.

    >
    > Can't help you there, if you mean California. I've never even been in
    > Orange County, unless it's part of the holding pattern for LAX.
  15. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 03:06:29 -0500, "Chris Taylor Jr"
    <nospam@nerys.com> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

    >Have to disagree here. Most of the time it does NOT do harm or enforcement
    >would be higher.


    >do my illegal 35 40 and 45 mhz micro RC cars I bought tonight cause any harm
    >?


    >Considering very little here runs on thos frequencies and they have a range
    >of maybe 20 feet if your REALLY Lucky I would have to say no they do not do
    >any harm.


    BDA cellular amps don't run on frequencies that aren't used.

    >Most are quite harmless. NOW once you start amping up the power/range OK bad
    >things can happen.


    And the consumer, knowing absolutely nothing about RF, makes sure that
    he installs the BDA in a way that it doesn't exceed the range it
    should have - how? One bad connection and you have intermod all over
    the spectrum.
  16. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On 07 Dec 2003 16:18:08 GMT, advanspec@aol.com.ze (ADVANSPEC) posted
    in alt.cellular.verizon:

    > In this day & age, people understand that Reception indoors will vary on
    >Radios, cellphones ect...


    They accept it in Radio Shack when the FlavorRadio doesn't work well,
    but most people expect a cell phone to work like a wired phone - where
    and when you want to make a call. That won't happen until there's a
    cell on almost every corner, and the people yelling the loudest for
    service are the ones not allowing "those ugly towers" in their
    neighborhoods.
  17. gopi

    gopi Guest

    John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<CPBAb.1195$XF6.32385@typhoon.sonic.net>...
    > >>>On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:40:20 GMT, John Navas
    > >>><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:
    > >>>>So-called "passive repeaters" do not work.

    <snip>
    > They can be made to work in certain circumstances, but they aren't a
    > general-purpose solution.


    Stop being such an obtuse moron. Just admit that you've been proven
    wrong and move on.

    Your initially claimed that they didn't work. Not that they rarely
    worked, not that they were unreliable, or difficult to make work; you
    made the absolute claim that they didn't work. It seems like you've
    backed down significantly and admit that they _can_ work.

    You're really going to shoot your credibility to hell if you can't
    distinguish between "impossible" and "improbable."
  18. Todd Allcock

    Todd Allcock Guest

    Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote in message news:<h387tv4bj9bpmcbcdl3sfg079nchp62qt5@Pern.rk>...

    > >>They should know their products.

    >
    > >Why?

    >
    > Oh, I was assuming that having a job required a certain level of
    > competence. Silly me. All they need to know is which phone and which
    > plan give them the greatest commission.


    They neea base level competency, but be reasonable. I expect a
    cellphone salesperson to know rate plans, phone prices and maybe the
    "bullet points" of each phone.

    If you expect them to know what chipsets phones use, or if it's able
    to send SMS to carrier so-and-so in Pago-Pago, then I'm afraid you
    won't be satisfied with their training. "I don't know" and "I'll be
    happy to find out for you, sir" are perfectly acceptable answers to
    questions, IMHO. I'd much rather have that than a line of BS from a
    salesperson afraid to appear unknowledgeable.
  19. Peter Pan

    Peter Pan Guest

    "ADVANSPEC" <advanspec@aol.com.ze> wrote in message
    news:20031207111808.26239.00000386@mb-m06.aol.com...
    > x-no-archive:yes
    > >From: Tim Harrick Tim233@hotmail.com:

    >
    > "Only problem is that's it's usually not in the entire mall to service
    > shoppers, it's ONLY in the cellular store (and right outside the doors).

    Since
    > it doesn't help ANYONE unless they are in the store, what could it be

    besides a
    > sales trick?..."
    > .."A deceptive sales practice is the legal term...."
    >
    > Gee, If a Store selling stereos Puts a roof antenna on the outside of

    the
    > store so they can demo their equipment, or if a TV store puts an outside
    > antenna to demo their screens ......
    > Seems no different to me, & this has been going on for decades.
    > In this day & age, people understand that Reception indoors will vary

    on
    > Radios, cellphones ect...


    Yes, and every one of those examples you cited where items that have wired
    antenna connections.
    Can you cite any examples of anything WIRELESS?
  20. David S

    David S Guest

    On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 17:20:04 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com>
    chose to add this to the great equation of life, the universe, and
    everything:

    >In article <lfo2tvs5co465lkbcfnlvpcjocdf19f89s@Pern.rk>
    >Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote:
    >
    >The whole FCC has been screwed up for years. Of course, adding the
    >nepotism-driven appointment of Colin Powell's son didn't help matters any.


    I believe it's his brother, not son.

    --
    David Streeter, "an internet god" -- Dave Barry
    http://home.att.net/~dwstreeter
    Expect a train on ANY track at ANY time.
    "They're running away from communism toward our way of life because of
    television and basketball. You play basketball in this country for a month,
    you go back, you're never going to be happy waiting in line for a potato."
    - Mario Cuomo on the dissolution of the Soviet Union

Welcome to VerizonForums!

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


Forgot your password?