New Soft-Radio Platform with /\/\otorola

[/\/\y 2 cents]

Hi Folks,

I have just rounded out our soft-radio platform known as Virtual Handie/HandHeld. Upon loading it on you Desktop, Laptop, PDA, SmartPhone, UMPC it will allow you to talk like a two-way radio to anywhere in the world and old school/antiquated type 2 way radios and also other soft radio users. It will let you communicate seamlessly back to your simplex, repeaterized, or trunked legacy two way radio systems. Now you can communicate back to your home coverage area and speak/ listen to your traffic from your Treo, MotoQ, HTC, MDA, etc. effortlessly loud and clear. It also has MDC1200 decode built right in for everybody still hanging on to those junky/limited radios from the last century we all love to collect. Working on encode. Also this runs on your notebook or desktop. It also allows and unlimited amount of repeaters (trunked or conventional) and simplex bases to be linked together worldwide. Anyone wanting to try it on their PDA/SmartPhone or traditional CPU give me a shout. You can talk me here on the PassPORT LTR and also to some conventional VHF systems linked together in Brasil. To patch your radio own old school/fossil type radio system in, all you will need is a PC of 120Mhz or greater and an inexpensive interface box. Now you know how to transition your radio system from analog to digital packet without buying overpriced Moto handhelds that sound like garbage! Now you can have digital that sounds like analog. Just use WiFi, MAX, GPRS, EDGE, EVDO, 1xRTT as your digital radio system for worldwide coverage! Want a rugged style unit like an XTS? Check these out: http://www.scanplanet.com/WindowsCEComputers.asp

Maybe this is why Motorola bought Symbol? Their tradional two way is history, the convergence is well underway and everything will be packet. I would not waste my time learning all about their LMR because it is being phased out as I type this.

Steve

[mr.syntrx]

Phased out? No offence dude, but you appear to be writing about vapourware here.

[d119]

So all these new XTS series handhelds coming out are being phased out and are "old junky Moto portables"?

So every cop on the beat is going to trash their portable in favor of a cell phone running an app that looks like a radio?

So I won't have any more infrastructure to maintain, the cellular companies will do all of it for me?

GREAT!

I think you succeeded in making yourself look like a fool with that post... Those of us who actually know what we're talking about know that no decent agency is going to outsource their infrastructure to some cellular company for voice communications and ditch their portables as a result...

Get real. I've read some ridiculous stuff on this board, but that ranks pretty high on my BS-o-meter.

I think I'll continue my LMR education, thank you very much.

[/\/\y 2 cents]

I dont think you realize that this does not work just on consumer devices but on the rugged models already proliferating PD's and FD's from Intermec, Symbol, Grid, etc. These are built just as rugged as a XTS and have blueprints for firefighters, NCIC, Biometric fingerprint input/comparisons, Fire wind speed chart, meter reading etc. and oh yeah a soft-radio that sounds analog and resolves to any iP adress for seamless handoff if you roam to another municipal packet base station. You are only thinking about what you know and see right now. When they introduce it to you as a product then you will like it. Just because the police have them doesn't mean it is something to be proud of or a good financial decision was made. Don't be led by a product line or what a dying brand wants you to think is the best. Learn theory and the rules of electricity and electromagnetics and you will soon realize what I am saying. Everything points this direction.

I may look like an idiot to you today, but in 10 years when things are this way you will be the idiot for chastizing others. You will also sing the praises of what it can do. Forces at work (computer companies, network companies, etc.) are already converting departments today to this very platform. Many are lager than Motorola. Motorola knows this and this is the very reason Motorola bought symbol, to get the business that they will eventually lose. Now when the convergence happens they can compete too. The convergence is taking place and radios that I even love will be swallowed whole. They are still good/cool and occupy a place in my heart and in history. I hate it too, but it is true.

[kc7gr]

With respect ... Your original post, honestly, sounds a lot like the promises and spin that any marketer will throw up to gain business. It's only after the sucke... uhh, 'customers' buy into the spin, and start pouring money into the hole, that they discover what kind of mediocrity they've bought into.

If you know of organizations that have gone this route, name names! Tell us who they are so we can, if desired, ask the in-the-trench techies how well (or poorly) such "convergence" really works. Please don't limit your posting to vague "it's happening all over" sorts of things.

For my part: I saw an example (experimental, yes, but still an example) of the type of "convergence" you're describing back in 2004, at the State Governors Conference here in the Seattle area. In this case, M-A/Com portables were set up to work with both WSP's analog system and on a P25 digital system that was set up specifically for the conference.

The "convergence" part happened with folks who had Nextel handsets being able to directly chat with those on the VHF M-A/Com portables. It worked, after a fashion... Personally, I thought the audio quality was pretty awful on both sides.

If that's an example of how "convergence" is going to work, then I'm not going to hold my breath in terms of watching public-safety organizations rushing into it just because it's offered. Oh, progress will always be made, yes, but I question any blanket statement about conventional 2-ways being "old, junky," or dead in the water.

In other words: Slow down. Watch what happens. I'd bet there's going to be plenty of fireworks, flubs, and faux pas along the path. Probably lots of nice surplus for the hamateur and hobbyist arena as well.

I just hope no one gets hurt or killed in the transition process...

Keep the peace(es).

[/\/\y 2 cents]

They arent going to outsource their service to cellular they will use the municipal packet data network (private, public) that is owned by the city and covers the city and is used by every other department in the city. It will also be used for MDT's, meter reading, all city serivces, just like a trunk system is used for circuit switchd voice and paltry data, these municipal high-speed radio modem networks will be voice (and all other uses) over high speed packet.

Here is a link to one such company that already has installations:

http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2004/jul/1057542.htm

Cops arent going to trade in thier radios, they get told what they are going to carry and are issued it. Big companies as big as motorola and bigger all have the leverage to get cities to try ne pilot programs. No cops by their own radios except if they are very rural, they get new ones when they are given them. Very rural will still use traditional 2 way for the next 25 years. Covers much more area with less sites.


As for vaporware, obviously you did not make it to our booth at IWCE last month. This is where debuted and showed it off between *GASP* the motorola Enterprise mobility booth/group, the iCOM booth on 6.25Khz digital F70 portables and our booth on VHF simplex. Believe it or not Motorola is involved in the project with their PDT/HDT computers now getting an update from all of the symbol knowhow they bought. The year before we had a booth at IWCE too and debuted it on the Bendix King DPH (IMBE) stuff..Wavetar was there the year before, I hooked him up with a free interface box for helping me get started a few years back.

I can promise you this is no Cowtheif and it is not vaporware.

Land mobile know how is good so keep learning it. It is what was the beginning of this evolution. All of the antenna theory and RF side is the same so hang onto that - it is still very useful. Just dont get hung up in manufact.'s and their specific models - this stuff will go quicker than it comes and will a bunch of useless information.

Steve

[Elroy Jetson]

One thing is certain: As the technology develops, "soft", adaptive products will become the norm rather than the exception.,

We have now entered the new era of DIGITAL RF technology. It will be advances in THIS technology that will define all future major advances in
wireless communication. The hardware will become increasingly
generic, non-specific, and its functionality will become more and more
defined by software rather than hardware.

The "soft radio" is inevitable, as are many other software defined gadgets that are sure to come.

Elroy

[cbus]

The "soft radio" is inevitable, as are many other software defined gadgets that are sure to come.

Elroy

totally agree, motorola and its buddies will try and push the traditional two way as far as it can go. but, things will hit a wall at some stage where soft phones and the like will become used by ps agencys.

Imagine you told the nypd/fbi back when they were using sabers that within 15 years they will have flip style two way radios (aka XTS4000).

I give it 15-20 years where two way radios won't be used by all the biggest and medium PS agencies

but, this is my opinion anyway, i still think its crazy that law enforcement have to carry a xts3/5000 plus speaker mic on their belt where they also have a mobile phone with a battery that lasts 4 times longer, is 1/3 of the size, is 10 times lighter and you can plug it in to charge via a simple cigarette lighter charger.

give every officer a smart phone. use it as a "soft" two way radio they can scan a drivers licence on the spot, do a finger print/warrant search on the street, take a picture of an offender or vehicle on the spot, built in GPS locater for officer safety, issue on the spot fines etc etc.

[misawatech]

Very rural will still use traditional 2 way for the next 25 years. Covers much more area with less sites.

I'm fairly new in this business but I see a few things that will not make this very palatable to the LMR users of today. First is the comment I quoted above. You talked about the ease of relocating when moving from town to town or county to county. It is those "rural" areas that we need to be concerned about. To make interoperability, if that's the correct word, work all the users have to be using equipment that will work together.

Yes the software can communicate to the equipment in use today but will these rural locations be able to afford the interface equipment?

In my area we continue to have problems when entering buildings and in some areas of the base. This is due to the limited frequency band we operate on, 138-142Mhz, and the lack of proper spectrum management. I at least have a better chance of getting a signal or hitting a repeater with the brick than I do getting a signal on my cell phone or PDA.

I also know that I can depend on my old radio. It will not lock up or fail to work because the software, more than likely running on a microsoft base, has locked up. When, and if, that happens that fireman or policeman is going to reach for his dependable radio.

[Elroy Jetson]

Convergence is happening. And everything is converging toward a digital master technology. The scary part is that that master technology is
almost certainly to become both deeply entrenched as the technological
basis for our future society, and also will be woefully inadequate to meet
future needs as new developments will inevitably challenge and then break
the limitations of even the most carefully thought out, forward-thinking standards.


It has been barely 30 years since the very first computers were made available in the home. And yet, the fundamental basis of this thing we call the internet is older than that. It dates back into the 60s and the experimental projects associated with DARPA. (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) DARPAnet was the internet, version 0.01 alpha.

The time is coming when the current core of all internet communications
will be so outdated that something entirely new will take its place, and
to be honest about it, we'll be incredibly lucky if a new standard arises
and is good enough to last for the NEXT forty years.

We've NEVER been able to predict with any great degree of accuracy
what computers will be doing just five years into the future, let alone ten
or twenty. Five years ago the concept of "digital RF" barely even existed,
and today, it's COMMONPLACE. Use wifi? There it is! Bluetooth? You got it!

The future of public safety communications will be a different set of
applications used in conjunction with an evolved, "smart" bluetooth-type
technology, I'll wager. And rather than having trunked or conventional
repeater systems, it'll all be handled via some form of wireless
networking, maybe something that's an evolution of a cross between
iDen and cellular technologies. And the hardware for the officer on
the street will be the same type of thing that the typical civilian will use
for instantaneous communication as well. Only the software-defined
applications will be different.

And even that will be reconfigurable "on the fly" to suit current needs.
A civilian that finds him or herself in a situation that is drastically in need
of response by public safety officials may find that his personal digital
communications device has been remotely turned into a camera and
listening device that responding police or fire/rescue personnel can use
to enhance their situational awareness before the reach the scene.

With biometric technology starting to become an available feature on
currently available tech gadgets, it's just a matter of time before your
wireless communicator will also be able to monitor your vital signs and
send them to your doctor or emergency personnel, on command by
you or remotely, and even be able to summon help and transmit medical
data to medical personnel if it detects that something has gone very wrong
with you and you require medical attention.

Your "phone" (which it will only be a distant descendant of) will become
your highly capable personal assistant, with enormous and flexible
capabilities. And it'll all be software defined.


We'll have all this within 20 years. Maybe much less.


Elroy

[escomm]

There are so many buzzwords in this thread that I call bull hooey.

Digital radio ops is inferior to analog, bottom line. Data integration is nice, but not at the expense of affordability and ease of use.

A vast majority of two-way users need reliable two-way comms. Those that don't have long since gone to nextel.

P25 is a farce and does nothing but bloat the cost of radios and infrastructure.

A whole lot of agencies are going to have their manhood in their hand 10 years down the road when they need to replace their $4000 portable radios and $6000 mobile radios and there are no more "homeland security" dollars flowing like water.

[/\/\y 2 cents]

"The hardware will become increasingly
generic, non-specific, and its functionality will become more and more
defined by software rather than hardware. "-Jetson


YES! Exactly.

"but, this is my opinion anyway, i still think its crazy that law enforcement have to carry a xts3/5000 plus speaker mic on their belt where they also have a mobile phone with a battery that lasts 4 times longer, is 1/3 of the size, is 10 times lighter and you can plug it in to charge via a simple cigarette lighter charger."-cbus

Now imagine all the mobile phone benefits but rugged and loud. This is because the transceiver section is low power(=small) alot less current drain because TX power in agile and comes from the S to N ratio constantly being sampled and sent back and forth between server and client soft which has embeeded serial control of micro PA. Oh not to mention the base station/repeater equipment is denser pattern due to being cheap and fairly largely produced (iP) because it is COTS and can be put everywhere because inexpensive but capable.

"convergence is happening. And everything is converging toward a digital master technology." Elroy

True. This scheme will most certainly be packet based (digital) and TCP/iP internet suite. This is what makes generic off the shelf.

"Five years ago the concept of "digital RF" barely even existed"- Elroy

Well, this is really about 17-20 years now, in LMR/SMR it may be 5 where things seem to take a little longer to sink in. Mobile radio may have discovered the underpinnings of VoiP with securenet and other digital waveform modulators. I suppose they have their eqivalent though on which their based in wireline. I had an iBook in '98 w/ 10Mbp/s digital radio modem audio sounded great when using it as a packet radio over the radio modem. At the time it was fairly then unheard of 802.11. A full fledged XTS or other high tier digital voice radio is really a radio modem with at best 9600bps or maybe 19.2. packet data speeds. mobile radio operators and the codecs chosen to do the voice sound crummy. Much better ones exist and are free/TRULY open, unlike IMBE which is POPULAR but not OPEN (not popular though in the grand scheme of things, only amongst LMR fossils). They would have been better choosing MP3! The only thing you pay for is the housing, and as computers work their way towards more places the physical package and ability to become untethered become reality and then you have a collision in function between two different instruments. The one that is used for other purposes wins because it does the job *almost as well* 95% as good or better and combines the function of the others reducing cost and complexity (this is really what convergence is all about)

"see a few things that will not make this very palatable to the LMR users of today"

Forget today. These users wil be steered into next devices by forces greater than LMR of today. They dont care either way, they want what is they think better or get the perception of being better. Smaller, lighter, sounding better with right codec, battery life, and price are all better. These are all things that will be gained. Not all applications are right for it though. Traditional transceivers will still be - just like propeller aircraft - they have their pecific uses and are still incredibly useful in certian situations. Thats why we have created SiteCAST, Vitrual Base Station and Virtual HT. To allow systems of mixed type in the organization to co-exist in the turbulent convergence.

[img][/img]

[Pj]

So every cop on the beat is going to trash their portable in favor of a cell phone running an app that looks like a radio?

[Elroy Jetson]

Please understand that "digital RF" is not quite the same technology as traditional radios as you know them.

Take an Astro portable, for example: You have a digitally controlled radio with a lot of analog functions replaced by digital functions, but there ARE still analog circuits in them, albeit under digital control.


Digital RF is a different concept...in any practical sense, there IS no analog circuitry. The transmitter, for example, has a digital synthesized frequency source, the modulator is purely digital, the output amp is digital, and even the transmitter filter is digital. The RF and digital applications are fused together at the chip level.

Anything that CAN be digital, IS, in digital RF. So the receiver starts with a high sensitivity amplifier but its output is sent to A/D conversion immediately, and all subsequent processing is digital.


Traditional RF design rules are being rewritten entirely by digital RF. Some things will never change, but the way to get them done is now very, very different. You're telling a computer to accomplish those tasks. The discriminator may be a software application in a flexible piece of digital hardware.


Elroy

[/\/\y 2 cents]

Close but that is a photoshop. you can tell by the where the speaker meets the flip, on one it is raised and on one it sinks in and is flush. that thing is setup for full duplex primary mode, not anything what a device in the convergence will look like since a dialtone and resolving to A 10 digit # will be gone.


This is more like what they look like in todays day and age right now. This is what motorola bought access to the intellectual property.

--->http://www.pocketpcfaq.com/reviews/ces2 ... l-mc70.htm

[d119]

PJ,

Fine, but again, you show me an agency that's going to issue those things to patrol officers.... Not gonna happen.

That's not designed to be a cellular phone (I don't believe it's even duplex-capable), it's just designed to LOOK like one for covert ops.. I don't bite.

[gatekeep]

--->http://www.pocketpcfaq.com/reviews/ces2 ... l-mc70.htm

Umm, no offense, but if I were on the beat, and carried that for my communications tool to reach dispatch or another officer..I'd be plenty scared. That thing looks like you could destroy it just by dropping it on the ground and stomping on it... I can see that more as a tool for warehouse communications, I don't care HOW ruggedized you make that thing.

[misawatech]

I'm stepping out of this conersation for now. I'm not to knowledgable on digital versus analog among other things but will keep monitoring to learn.

I will leave everyone with this thought. I can safely say that these products, no matter how much better they are in the realm of audibility and battery life, will be used by our fire department personnel or by any one associated with the military.

I say that because I have a hard time controlling my cell phone with it's small buttons. On an incident the fire guys want to be able to adjust their radio without seeing the controls. This goes for volume and channels. At least with the fairly large knobs on the radios they have the ability to make adjustments with gloves and mask on.

In the military world we have to train with our chem suits, masks, and, gloves. I don't see where this type of device, smaller and more compact, is going to do anything but make it more impossible to operate. Let alone it getting misplaced when the user has to carry it along with all the other equipment.

I do think it is also safe to say that the military is a big part of Mother M's income. I wish we had the opportunity to choose but the cost of replacing the infrastructure imits us to only motorola equipment.

Anyway please continue so I can learn.

[mr.syntrx]

I dont think you realize that this does not work just on consumer devices but on the rugged models already proliferating PD's and FD's from Intermec, Symbol, Grid, etc.

Having a LOT of developmental experience with those devices (owning over fourteen Symbol models personally), they also have NOWHERE near the battery life of an XTS radio, and they're physically just plain ungainly for use as a radio. Completely useless for the task.

Internally, such devices are consumer devices inside, except with barcode readers, larger batteries, higher powered 802.11 radios and LESS CPU POWER.

Only a really stupid agency would rely on a cellular network for critical communications, anyway. (Notice I said critial, MDTs are handy, but they can generally be done without in a real emergency.)

Don't be led by a product line or what a dying brand wants you to think is the best.

I am led by what's AVAILABLE. I don't see this ever coming into fruition from you, and it would be of very marginal usefulness compared to a traditional radio system if it ever did. Frankly, I'm very skeptical that your current products even really exist.

Motorola knows this and this is the very reason Motorola bought symbol, to get the business that they will eventually lose.

No, Motorola bought Symbol to gain strong a strong brand, product line and expertise in mobile computing, which has nothing at all to do with what you're rambling about, Cowthief.

Software radio is already here in the test and measurement and defence (both CNR and EW) markets. Soft radios will follow the same form and function as traditional radios, with a few neat features like high speed data. Radios are not going anyway, and only the ignorant say radio is going away for those who need reliable comms. Motorola is certainly no stranger to software defined radio.

I give it 15-20 years where two way radios won't be used by all the biggest and medium PS agencies

Nonsense.

Take away New South Wales Police Rescue's XTS3000Rs, and give them mobile phones. See how well they cope during urban confined space rescue, or land searches, or any number of jobs. Answer: They will not function at all.

Give a phone to a cop at a small rural one man station, and take away his lowband radio. No comms for him!

Give phones to cops for use in Sydney during New Years Eve, and take away their ASTRO equipment: No comms at all. beepbeepbeepbeep "NETWORK BUSY"

but, this is my opinion anyway, i still think its crazy that law enforcement have to carry a xts3/5000 plus speaker mic on their belt where they also have a mobile phone with a battery that lasts 4 times longer, is 1/3 of the size, is 10 times lighter and you can plug it in to charge via a simple cigarette lighter charger.

Which is highly dependent on very expensive infrastructure that is prone to congestion and failure during a major incident, has no means of direct communication, has very poor performance in remote areas, is far from what anyone can call rugged.

give every officer a smart phone. use it as a "soft" two way radio they can scan a drivers licence on the spot, do a finger print/warrant search on the street, take a picture of an offender or vehicle on the spot, built in GPS locater for officer safety, issue on the spot fines etc etc.

Ever seen a modern TETRA terminal? Does all that, and it's a radio, built for public safety, with all the advantages and safety a traditional radio brings, with the core advantage that it DOES NOT RELY ON PUBLIC NETWORKS.

I will leave everyone with this thought. I can safely say that these products, no matter how much better they are in the realm of audibility and battery life, will be used by our fire department personnel or by any one associated with the military.

The military isn't ever going to abandon their own communications networks in favour of any public network. Neither will any sensible public safety agencies.

Now imagine all the mobile phone benefits but rugged and loud.

I already do. It's called a digital trunked radio system.



(EDITS: Damn "You cannot answer your own message so a short time later to have posted it, please rather edit your previous message" )

[Elroy Jetson]

The radio IS changing and is going to continue to change. I think it will become simpler to use and capable of delivering more information in both directions, with an intuitive user interface (particularly for "digital native" people who were born with a PDA in their hand) but the form that radio
takes is subject to a good deal of guessing.

If you're going to stay with a radio in the modern sense, for public safety activities, the function dictates the form. Large, easy to operate controls will be a requirement in addition to being rugged and reliable and readable in an adverse environment. The unit may be software defined just like a regular citizen's personal cell phone (as it evolves) but the mechanical packaging will be dictated by the needs of the public safety market.

I'm thinking that wireless headsets and single eye projected displays, which are VERY "sci-fi", are actually a likely prospect for the future.

CJ

[cbus]

Nonsense.

Take away New South Wales Police Rescue's XTS3000Rs, and give them mobile phones. See how well they cope during urban confined space rescue, or land searches, or any number of jobs. Answer: They will not function at all.

Give a phone to a cop at a small rural one man station, and take away his lowband radio. No comms for him!

Give phones to cops for use in Sydney during New Years Eve, and take away their ASTRO equipment: No comms at all. beepbeepbeepbeep "NETWORK BUSY"

Porkies, Phone networks can easily create priority numbers. All law enforcement gear would simply be given the highest priority on the network.

You bring me your xts3000r, and i'll give you my nokia 5140i. Both can be in covers if you wish. we will go and do simple drop test of 10m. lets see how the 3kr turns out.

You know as well as I do that within the next few years, Australia will be getting a massive high speed broadband rollout in particular rural communities will have access and this fibre will make it a LOT cheaper to put mobile phone coverage in these areas. no need for wasting MORE tax payer money on "low band" communications that don't work at times anyway.

Confined spaces and land searches ? lol, my mobile is much much lighter and convenient to carry into a mine! what would YOU prefer to carry in a 15 hour land search ? a mobile or a xts3k weighing you down.

Which is highly dependent on very expensive infrastructure that is prone to congestion and failure during a major incident, has no means of direct communication, has very poor performance in remote areas, is far from what anyone can call rugged.

Kidding here ?. Lets talk about EVERY major incident in NSW over the past few years, Cronulla and lakemba mosque after that and then Macquarie Fields riots. Both times the NSWP APCO25 system turned :o. totally useless

I do agree with some of the other points about military etc. but both they and fed govt use cryptophones on the regular phone networks

[/\/\y 2 cents]

First off...Radios and their derivatives are used by many orders more people than just the police. We are talking about the ENTIRE INDUSTRY - not just law enforcement (very small - but lucrative) part of entire market. Every example/reason you have given and why it isn't going to go this way is police based (very narrow). Do you like radios because of the police using them or are you genuinely interested in the theory behind it? I swear there are more cop wannabe's and crap like that on this board than engineers.

All I can tell you is one of us is right and one of us is wrong.

Oh, and Motorola did buy symbol because they lost the UPS contract for the new GPRS diads to symbol. This is known amongst many, probably not here though because the Motorola kool-aid is ice cold and abundant.

Here read the 15th paragraph of this and it talks about Motorola's loss of the UPS account:

http://www.techworld.com/mobility/featu ... tureid=690

Many more if you just google.

You also mentioned you use what is available. I think no truer statement could be made. And one day your two-way will be like what I am talking about and you will use it because it is what will be available to you then at the time in the future.

[mr.syntrx]

First off...Radios and their derivatives are used by many orders more people than just the police. We are talking about the ENTIRE INDUSTRY - not just law enforcement (very small - but lucrative) part of entire market.

It's Motorola's largest market in Australia, which is why I mentioned it.

Every example/reason you have given and why it isn't going to go this way is police based (very narrow).

They were only the first couple of examples that came to me within fifteen seconds or so. I can think of examples related to military, fire, emergency medical, rescue, national security services, aviation, natural resources, mining, forestry, maritime communications, construction, petrochemical industries and a heap of others.

Do you like radios because of the police using them or are you genuinely interested in the theory behind it?

I'm interested in the theory, and I work in an area related to communications security.

I swear there are more cop wannabe's and crap like that on this board than engineers.

There are engineers, and there are dreamers. You are the latter, as far as I can see from this thread.

All I can tell you is one of us is right and one of us is wrong.

Oh, and Motorola did buy symbol because they lost the UPS contract for the new GPRS diads to symbol.

Which was a mobile data contract, and has nothing to do with software defined radio, replacing radio networks with commercial phone networks, ad nauseum.

You also mentioned you use what is available. I think no truer statement could be made. And one day your two-way will be like what I am talking about and you will use it because it is what will be available to you then at the time in the future.

No it won't. A radio's form fits its function, as can be seen in a number of current software defined transceivers, such as the Thales MBITR, Motorola SPEAKeasy, and the various other products from Harris, Rockwell-Collins, General Dynamics et al. A PDA form fits its function as a PDA or data terminal, and a radio's form meets its function as a radio. A PDA is not a replacement for a radio. (It's a poor replacement for a cellphone in most cases, too, hence the lagging sales of PDA-focused smartphones compared to traditional phones, despite similar pricing and more features.)

[wavetar]

Ok, I've enjoyed this 'lounge type' thread as much as the next guy, but it's gone about 15 posts past it's usefulness. If you're interested, contact Steve about his products. If not, don't.

Todd