Article View: alt.cellular.attws
Article #341Re: Consumer Reports: iPhone 4 - Not recommended
From: JC Dill
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:38
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:38
63 lines
4443 bytes
4443 bytes
Jeff Liebermann wrote: > On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 10:31:05 -0700, JC Dill <jcdill.lists@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Jeff Liebermann wrote: >> >>>> You recall wrong. Circa 1992-1994 you could buy a 3 watt bag phone. >>>> I'm told that circa 1990 you could buy a 5 watt bag phone. >>> My memory isn't perfect, but I don't recall any 5 watt bag phones. >>> There would have been considerable advertising value to offering the >>> most "powerful" phone. >> My recollection of the conversation I had at the time, was that when >> car/bag phones were first offered in the late 1980s/early 1990s, some >> were 3 watt, some were 5 watt. The 5 watt ones ate batteries and >> weren't as popular with most users for that reason, then the industry >> (or the government) decided that the phones should be capped at 3 watts >> and the 5 watt models were discontinued. I was told that there were >> long-haul truckers who used the 5 watt phones to get coverage in rural >> areas where 3 watt phones couldn't reach the distant towers. By the >> time I was shopping (circa 1992), I was told the 5 watt phones had been >> discontinued for some time (more than 1 year) and if I wanted one I >> would have to try to find it on the second-hand market (pre-craigslist). >> >> jc > > I think you might be mixing technologies. During the 1980's, long > haul truckers were using IMTS phones (and CB). In the early 1990s, some were starting to use cell phones. That's because the > range of an IMTS base station was 20-50 miles or more and located to > cover the highways. Also cellular had huge gaps in rural coverage. > The down side was that the channels were few and crowded. There may > have been some small 5 watt radios, but most were 25 watts. > > The Motorola Pulsar III IMTS control head looked exactly like the > later bag phone handset. See photo near the bottom of: > <http://www.wb6nvh.com/Carphone.htm> > Pac Hell stopped providing IMTS service in 1995, but smaller rural > RCC's (radio common carriers) continues to operate through about 2005. > > Checking the FCC rules at: > <http://www.hallikainen.com/FccRules/2010/22/913/> > it proclaims: > The ERP of mobile transmitters and auxiliary test transmitters > must not exceed 7 Watts. > ERP (or EIRP) is "effective radiated power" which includes the gain of > the antenna. The traditional AMPS mobile antenna has about 4dBi gain > or 2.5 times the xmitter power output equals the EIRP. > 7 watts / 2.5 = 2.8 watts > which is where the 3 watt limit came from. It might have been > possible to legally sell a 5 watt mobile phone, but could only be > supplied with a small 1/4 wave vertical monopole antenna. > > Going back as far as possible to 1997: > <http://louise.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/1997/22/913/> > This rule has not changed. I was told the rule changed "a few years" prior to my buying my first cell phone, the 3 watt bag phone I bought circa 1992 from Cellular One. jc
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<i1vhnb$6os$2@speranza.aioe.org>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!not-for-mailReferences:
<Xns9DB610031F9CCnoonehomecom@74.209.131.13> <i1m8iq$q7u$1@news.eternal-september.org> <2gd246h1dm904pbp9mm4a6hse2hk6hqfmp@4ax.com> <Xns9DB8EB62D8FF7noonehomecom@74.209.131.13> <180720100001450673%nospam@nospam.invalid> <dbw0o.19896$lS1.7928@newsfe12.iad> <180720100149520637%nospam@nospam.invalid> <i1u8ij$7h1$3@speranza.aioe.org> <a99646p2u3qfbi9jgtq45qk65a4ucnihpl@4ax.com> <i1vdom$uqf$1@speranza.aioe.org> <43f646hn1o0ufvkkjrorc3112qjmu6atfd@4ax.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: 110038,d8a6e883f28322e7 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Thread: fa874,d8a6e883f28322e7 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gidd668eef4dc,gidaa617e85ca,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!not-for-mail From: JC Dill <jcdill.lists@gmail.com> Newsgroups: alt.cellular.attws,ba.internet Subject: Re: Consumer Reports: iPhone 4 - Not recommended Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:38:39 -0700 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 64 Message-ID: <i1vhnb$6os$2@speranza.aioe.org> References: <Xns9DB610031F9CCnoonehomecom@74.209.131.13> <i1m8iq$q7u$1@news.eternal-september.org> <2gd246h1dm904pbp9mm4a6hse2hk6hqfmp@4ax.com> <Xns9DB8EB62D8FF7noonehomecom@74.209.131.13> <180720100001450673%nospam@nospam.invalid> <dbw0o.19896$lS1.7928@newsfe12.iad> <180720100149520637%nospam@nospam.invalid> <i1u8ij$7h1$3@speranza.aioe.org> <a99646p2u3qfbi9jgtq45qk65a4ucnihpl@4ax.com> <i1vdom$uqf$1@speranza.aioe.org> <43f646hn1o0ufvkkjrorc3112qjmu6atfd@4ax.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: OMIq7WZIH71VZQpBoAm01Q.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Macintosh/20100228)