A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominating

The General forum is where users can discuss any topic regarding Motorola communications equipment - hardware, software, etc. There are also several focused forums on this board, so please take the time to ensure that your questions doesn't fall into one of those categories before posting here!

Moderator: Queue Moderator

Post Reply
User avatar
Wowbagger
Aeroflex
Posts: 1287
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2002 10:46 am

A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominating

Post by Wowbagger »

This is my opinion, not Aeroflex's.

I WILL NOT give you proprietary information. I make too much money to jeopardize my job.

I AM NOT the Service department: You want official info, manuals, service info, parts, calibration, etc., contact Aeroflex directly, please.
User avatar
Bill_G
Posts: 3087
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 5:00 am

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by Bill_G »

We recognized this in the mid 90's which is why we've broadened our portfolio of products. Some have been good choices like Zetron, Tait, Kenwood, Icom, JPS Raytheon, Telex, Harris (broadcast), and Avtec, and others not so good like Dalman, Redline, and GE MDS. We built relationships with almost every vendor out there. From a technician / engineering / system integrator point of view, it's been challenging. We still sell a lot of Moto product, but we also sell systems with little or no Motorola content, and often at a significant price advantage.
User avatar
escomm
Queue Moderator
Posts: 5170
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:24 pm

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by escomm »

Bill_G wrote:We recognized this in the mid 90's which is why we've broadened our portfolio of products. Some have been good choices like Zetron, Tait, Kenwood, Icom, JPS Raytheon, Telex, Harris (broadcast), and Avtec, and others not so good like Dalman, Redline, and GE MDS. We built relationships with almost every vendor out there. From a technician / engineering / system integrator point of view, it's been challenging. We still sell a lot of Moto product, but we also sell systems with little or no Motorola content, and often at a significant price advantage.
Did you offer the competitive product because Motorola plays dirty or did you offer it because it was cheap? Your post reads more like the latter is the reason why.

For all their uh, interesting ways of elbowing themselves in, I don't think there's any real doubt that Motorola still sells the superior product. They don't really have much competition in the PS space and in the business space the competition generally wins on price and price alone. Kenwood is making inroads in LA with NXDN but that's more a function of spectrum hoggers and not because NXDN is better than TRBO. Which it might be. It sure is cheaper though.

Not dissimilar to why BMW and Lexus costs three times as much as Hyundai and Kia
User avatar
escomm
Queue Moderator
Posts: 5170
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:24 pm

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by escomm »

And I'll submit that Motorola is the master of taking some defined open standard and closing it off. They have been doing it for decades. It's nothing new and they'll continue to do it as long as they have people with purchasing authority and influence drinking their kool aid
User avatar
Bill_G
Posts: 3087
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 5:00 am

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by Bill_G »

escomm wrote:
Bill_G wrote:We recognized this in the mid 90's which is why we've broadened our portfolio of products. Some have been good choices like Zetron, Tait, Kenwood, Icom, JPS Raytheon, Telex, Harris (broadcast), and Avtec, and others not so good like Dalman, Redline, and GE MDS. We built relationships with almost every vendor out there. From a technician / engineering / system integrator point of view, it's been challenging. We still sell a lot of Moto product, but we also sell systems with little or no Motorola content, and often at a significant price advantage.
Did you offer the competitive product because Motorola plays dirty or did you offer it because it was cheap? Your post reads more like the latter is the reason why.

For all their uh, interesting ways of elbowing themselves in, I don't think there's any real doubt that Motorola still sells the superior product. They don't really have much competition in the PS space and in the business space the competition generally wins on price and price alone. Kenwood is making inroads in LA with NXDN but that's more a function of spectrum hoggers and not because NXDN is better than TRBO. Which it might be. It sure is cheaper though.

Not dissimilar to why BMW and Lexus costs three times as much as Hyundai and Kia
Yep.
RadioSouth
Batboard $upporter
Posts: 2884
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by RadioSouth »

Decades back they were second to none and employed brilliant people. Now ?
User avatar
MTS2000des
Posts: 3347
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 4:59 pm
What radios do you own?: XTS2500, XTS5000, and MTS2000

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by MTS2000des »

JVC Kenwood's acquisition of EF Johnson is a direct response to Motorola's dominance. The Japanese see all the magic money that flows into and out of Ma M from these sole source contracts for P25 networks and want a piece of the pie.

But they have much work cut out for them. Motorola is the equivalent of the 800lb gorilla in the room, and they are the mouse.

Everything in the article is dead on, we all know it. Motorola does build a great product, but IMO they are no longer the king of the hill and they act like they are the only ones with a viable product on the market, whether it be P25, DMR, or what have you, they are the most unresponsive company. They sell it, and you'll buy it.

The lack of QCII decoding on the APX line, or their refusal to offer DMR on the APX are prime examples of this. Customers WANT these features and will PAY for them.

Kenwood, OTOH, is listening. Anyone see the dual mode NXDN/P25 phase 2 radios at IWCE?

But again, the gorilla is in the room stomping his big feet.
The views here are my own and do not represent those of anyone else or the company, the boss, his wife, his dog or distant relatives.
User avatar
alex
Administrator
Posts: 5761
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by alex »

MTS2000des wrote:their refusal to offer DMR on the APX are prime examples of this. Customers WANT these features and will PAY for them.
Then you need to round up all the customers and get them to put their wallets where their mouth is. The only way you see features like QCII and MPL added to current model lines is because places like LA, USFS, and other departments go "we will buy X units, but ONLY IF x feature is in the radio."

None of these people have done that with Mototrbo. I bet if you asked most of them they would look at you funny and go Motowhat?

Just like other people are eluding to in this thread - people drink the M Cool Aid whenever it is offered.
The Radio Information Board: http://www.radioinfoboard.com
Your source for information on: Harris/Ma-Comm/EFJ/RELM/Kenwood/ICOM/Thales, equipment.
User avatar
escomm
Queue Moderator
Posts: 5170
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:24 pm

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by escomm »

MTS2000des wrote:The lack of QCII decoding on the APX line, or their refusal to offer DMR on the APX are prime examples of this. Customers WANT these features and will PAY for them.
Motorola does not care what the hobbyist wants. What public safety customer running phase 2 wants TRBO in their dual band radio? And who are they going to talk to if they do get it? Name some names.

Individuals such as yourself that buy no infrastructure, buy no maintenance agreements, and barely buy any new radios... why would Motorola listen to the voice of that customer? They have PS agencies buying hundreds and thousands of radios to listen to first. They run more than $8,000,000,000 a year in revenues and focus more on the customers that spend millions of dollars and not the ones that spend thousands. It's not reasonable to expect otherwise
User avatar
MTS2000des
Posts: 3347
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 4:59 pm
What radios do you own?: XTS2500, XTS5000, and MTS2000

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by MTS2000des »

there are plenty of public safety agencies that would like P25 and DMR in the same radio, especially around here with the proliferation of DMR in many counties who cannot afford to implement P25 networks.

I guess Kenwood and EF Johnson will suit their needs just fine. EF Johnson's VP900 is every bit a radio an APX, made in the USA, and half the price. And it comes with standard with real hardware encryption not some half-ass proprietary ADP.

You both said a mouthful, it's because the customers don't shop around, just like the McClatchy article says.

Motorola is the equivalent of the US Automakers, and consumers will buy whatever they are sold. $30,000 Camrys and Accords, $50,000 pickups that barely get 20mpg when technology exists to double that. But why should they demand more, just like those public safety agencies in ImaWastinYourMoney County, they have no incentive to do anything else.

I totally get it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wzy7K8mQd1I
The views here are my own and do not represent those of anyone else or the company, the boss, his wife, his dog or distant relatives.
User avatar
escomm
Queue Moderator
Posts: 5170
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:24 pm

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by escomm »

EF Johnson radios are garbage, ask the State of California. Johnson recalled 19000 chargers and is in the process of recalling 12000 RF boards. And that was only because of an off the wall conversation between a tech and a warehouse guy, Johnson wouldn't even admit their radios couldn't be field tuned. They caught holy hell. Had the state pursued the statewide contract 3 years later they would be buying APX4000s. Hell, even as it stands CHP is now buying some XTS2000s because the Johnson radios are such gobshite.

Kenwood, well, their distribution channel is a joke. They rely on "professional" manufacturer's reps and don't even have their own direct sales team. Motorola is really good with the powerpoint presentations. It takes a lot more than a cheap but good product to sell into the government. Sales and support channels are almost as important.

And I'm still waiting on names that want DMR in their APX radios. Not that it matters. It ain't happening anyway. Confirmed with a former volunteer paramedic that is now a product manager that got his driver training from someone posting itt at CPE ;D
User avatar
Bill_G
Posts: 3087
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 5:00 am

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by Bill_G »

If you follow Daryl Jones, you figure out he is a faithful critic of Motorola. I don't know what his bona fides are, what his background is, why he likes to point out these failings, or if he has ever designed / sold / built / maintained systems on this scale. But, I can promise you this - no one has ever built a perfect radio system, and no matter how good you think you have a system dialed in, there will be users who will tell you just how broken it is, what a piece of crap it is, and how stupid management was to put it in. I guarantee it.

Why do you think all the cell phone providers are putting in microcells? After all the millions they have invested to give service in urban areas, they still have to up their game because a phone call doesn't sound like someone whispering in your ear, and Johnny cannot download his favorite web page in 12 nanoseconds.

The next criticism coming down the road references Public Safety LTE - "why are cop radios so clunky compared to my cellphone?" Great question. The better question is how much is the public willing to pay for such a system so that cops and firefighters can get email on their touchscreen portable with the bluetooth headset? And can someone guarantee that That new system will never fail, never sound distorted, satisfy every user, and come in at a price point that doesn't embarrass a public official or cause a scandal?
desperado
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:29 pm
What radios do you own?: Motorola

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by desperado »

Yeah, It's Motorola's barbeque and it does taste good as long as your not funding the purchase or trying to put brand X radios on their system.
From the point of an integrator the whole Kenwood P-25 thing is a thorn in your side. You have the customer awe struck at the cost of the system. You have teh Kenwood dealer in there talking about his last system he did that was 750K and he's proud. Of course you as the integrator know each of the systems sites you are working on was that much and the total bill was like 13 million, which makes you fight to keep from laughing. Of course the Kenwood / Harris / Thales guy makes some sales to a group or two of the regional system users and you, after telling them 10 times here are your ID's, we do not sell or support Brand X radios finally get task with figuring out why the :o don't work on the system. When you finally have an answer, it requires a change to the system that disables half of the Motorola only functionality that caught the attention of the system purchaser to begin with. So what do you end up with? Pissed off customers that can't understand why they can't have their 13 million dollar system do everything and support radios that cost half as much. Pissed off non-customers that hate you to begin with that deal with some fool that works out of his basement and drop in tool box in his 1984 Ford pickup that has no overhead and charges half what you do per hour and think he's the :o with a screwdriver. Pissed off Motorola sales rep (always fun) because you didn't work hard enough, so HE could make more commission that you see little to none of, getting some volunteer fire department that has a total operating budjet for the year of $80000 to buy $100000 in radios for their volunteer firefighters.
Keith
CET USMSS
Field Tech
What more can I say
User avatar
Bill_G
Posts: 3087
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 5:00 am

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by Bill_G »

I'm always happy to lose bids like that, and then come in to play janitor a year or two later. Because that's what we do ...
desperado
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:29 pm
What radios do you own?: Motorola

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by desperado »

Well, it might not be quite that bad. But the little fish really want to play in the big pond. There is a reason that the development at Schaumburg goes on in a faraday cage. There are pictures of the vans that would sit out across Algonquin listening to any little bit of RF that would leak out of the big M skunk works. And there is certainly a reason that a car radio manufacture set standard after standard in the two way communications business. Look at the stuff they did, and how everyone else, including huge electronics firms like RCA and General Electric are no longer even in the business. MDC, MoDAT, PL, DPL, Single and two tone paging are a few of the innovations that Motorola had full and complete rights to for a very long time. And are still standards that everyone else uses but didn't create. What did they bring to the table? Trunking? Digital RF? Digital trunking? TDMA? Na.... those are all Motorola too. And while the others are trying to figure out the last thing Motorola did and how to duplicate it, they are bringing to market something better. they never really catch up, they are always a step or three behind. Is it expensive, yes. Current cutting edge tech always is. The other guys are cheaper, but they are always bringing to market something that is based on technology that Motorola Solutions did 2 to 5 years ago. And while I cussed the addition of Solutions to the Motorola name, in truth is fits. I say this coming off the install of a Zetron Max radio and 911 phone integrated console system. We have coined a term with it,,, Not Yet. Will it directly connect to an Astro IP system as it was advertized to do, not yet. Is it compatible with any of the IP based audio logging systems on the market,, Not Yet. They reverse engineered the 9600 bus on the XTL 5000 to support full radio control. Of course those radios are no longer available, so does it interface to the APX mobiles,,, Not Yet. There are other issues with the 911 side of things, the interfacing to CAD and other minor operability issues that get answered the same way, it's in the next release. Of course it was suppose to be in the last release so we wait. But the bottom line answer is Not Yet. When you deal with Motorola, you call a meeting, discuss price, hand the salesman a set of keys to the building and say I want this and it needs to do X, Y and Z. They say OK and it seamlessly works, everything functions together, it meets all the requirements for fail over and is a full SOLUTION. You can walk into a computer store and buy some computers for your business. Drag them back to the office and load some software and configure your network. It will typically do about 75% of what you expected to do, supporting it sucks and when you call for help the fool on the other end of the line will blame the hardware if it's software you called about and the software is to blame if you call about the hardware. When you buy Motorola, you get their SOLUTION. From the Mouse and Microphone on the dispatchers desk to the lapel mike on the cop's walkie, it's ALL supported by one phone number. There are factory trained techs at the local MSS that can come fix your :o but rarely need to because it just works. What does that look like from Zetron? They got no radios. Kenwood, no console systems... ICOM, well we ain't even going there. Buying the best costs money. I don't care if it's cars, guns or cop radios. If you buy a Hi-Point, don't think it's gonna run like a Wilson Combat or Kimber. The Chevy Malibu with a light bar will not run with a Dodge Charger with the interceptor package. And would you even consider issuing officers Hi-Points as side arm?

Yes, I bleed Motorola. We are a Motorola Platinum Partner and are factory trained. I talk to people that sell Motorola and hear them complain about support not being helpful, or wanting paid for support on the or that product. Being Platinum level has advantages that I can call about whatever, and get straight answers about anything they sell or have sold in the last 25 years. Our depot pricing is good to the point we rarely bother to fix anything in house. It takes up too much time and costs too much to have a group of bench techs. If it ain't a basic fix, it goes to the depot, it comes back working and we always know what it will cost to repair ahead of time. Our customers are great, they don't question cost. They don't bother with can you do it cheaper. They want it fixed and it gets fixed. They know when we show up there is gonna be a bill and they are ok with that, mostly because when we leave it works.
Keith
CET USMSS
Field Tech
What more can I say
NickH
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 9:19 am

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by NickH »

MTS2000des wrote: EF Johnson's VP900 is every bit a radio an APX, made in the USA, and half the price.
Oh man, it's not even April Fool's day yet... The only other major Mfg making a real mission-critical P25 radio these days is Harris, and they still have a long way to go to catch APX...
desperado
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:29 pm
What radios do you own?: Motorola

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by desperado »

Now, about the DMR in the APX radios. That was the original plan, but DMR and it's range and issues with interference changed all that.
If you go grab an Ohio map, I will tell you a story of DMR. Find Fayette county on the map. Now find Licking County on that same map. Far apart, different area's of the state but they shared one thing in common. The output frequency of their Sheriffs repeater at 155.415. The transmitter in Fayette County was TRBO. Built as an IP Site connect multisite, multi frequency system the channel in question resided on a 4 story building on a roof mount connected to an XPR8300 running 40 watts into the duplexer and being radiated from a Station Master antenna. They were causing minor issues with licking county radios. Nothing major, but they were being heard in the squelch tails of the repeater as it would drop. Questions got ask, and it got looked at. The bigger issue was Licking county License for 5 sites, simulcast analog with 150 foot antenna's and 100 watt's of power. That system would talk. And with 5 sites legally licensed by the FCC it had a full county coverage footprint. It tore the hell out of Fayette on channel 1. DMR is GREAT when you have a wide coverage are channel and the next licensed user is FAR away. DMR will talk for miles but any carrier or interference will kill a radios ability to hear. You don't get hetrodyne, clicking or noise, it works or it's dead silent. We ended up buying back the Fayette county system, all the repeaters, the subscribers, the bank chargers....ALL OF IT. There were a number of those systems bought back by Motorola and other MSS shops. The FCC from what I understand will not issue a 100 watt license on DMR any more, the max power out is 10 watts on PS DMR now. Motorola really didn't market DMR to Public Safety to begin with. But they saw the small departments would need inneroperability with the large state systems and be cost effective for small departments that were not willing to jump on regional systems with per user fee's. They made the APX compatible with DMR and then when the FCC stepped in and started saying no to high power DMR for Public Safety systems combined withthe fact the systems that were out there were failing due to interference they dropped the development of DMR on the APX line.
Keith
CET USMSS
Field Tech
What more can I say
desperado
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:29 pm
What radios do you own?: Motorola

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by desperado »

Bill_G wrote:I'm always happy to lose bids like that, and then come in to play janitor a year or two later. Because that's what we do ...
That's great Bill but how do you clean that up?
Ultimately the Kenwoods will go in a box or on Gov-Deals and radios that are 100% compatible (Motorola gear) will be purchased.
The golden screwdriver is a whole different animal. If he's at 65 an hour and we are at 105 (we actually need to raise our price) it's not worth the effort to try competing with him. It's not worth our time to take 65 an hour ( what we charge for install labor on vehicles and have more business that we can keep up with) for high tier techs to even go work on the stuff. And although we are technically a Kenwood dealer, we don't actively market the product line except to private businesses that refuse to pay Motorola's price.
Keith
CET USMSS
Field Tech
What more can I say
RFguy
Posts: 1357
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 6:17 am

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by RFguy »

They say that Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. That's the story of EFJ, Kenwood, Icom. Just look at the "New" EFJ Viking VP900. It's a copy of an old model Motorola. An imitation.

You can make the radio look the same on the outside, but it misses the mark of the innovation that went into it on the inside. As desperado said, current cutting edge tech is expensive, but it's what has brought us so many of the innovations the the other companies try to copy today (and generally fail at it).
User avatar
Bill_G
Posts: 3087
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 5:00 am

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by Bill_G »

desperado wrote:
Bill_G wrote:I'm always happy to lose bids like that, and then come in to play janitor a year or two later. Because that's what we do ...
That's great Bill but how do you clean that up?
Ultimately the Kenwoods will go in a box or on Gov-Deals and radios that are 100% compatible (Motorola gear) will be purchased.
The golden screwdriver is a whole different animal. If he's at 65 an hour and we are at 105 (we actually need to raise our price) it's not worth the effort to try competing with him. It's not worth our time to take 65 an hour ( what we charge for install labor on vehicles and have more business that we can keep up with) for high tier techs to even go work on the stuff. And although we are technically a Kenwood dealer, we don't actively market the product line except to private businesses that refuse to pay Motorola's price.
Each case is unique, but I play the long game. When the customer is finally frustrated with the other vendor enough to call us in, we do two things - we don't throw anybody under the bus, and we come up with a migration plan. I spend as much time being a diplomat as I do being a tech. Make relationships, build trust, work together, seek answers, implement solutions, and demonstrate progress even if it is only incrementally. We make a sincere, and good faith effort to make their investment deliver even if it means helping our competition get through acceptance. Quite often, once the new system passes, and it goes into the warranty period, the original vendor is uninvited to the party, and we take take over. They got the experience, and maybe they learned from it. Now they don't have to support it. They can focus on upping their game so their next client benefits. When we meet again on a competitive bid, they can say they sold and installed such-n-such, and we can say we made it work. After all, it's not like we've never made a mistake.
User avatar
Bill_G
Posts: 3087
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 5:00 am

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by Bill_G »

desperado wrote:Now, about the DMR in the APX radios. That was the original plan, but DMR and it's range and issues with interference changed all that.
If you go grab an Ohio map, I will tell you a story of DMR. Find Fayette county on the map. Now find Licking County on that same map. Far apart, different area's of the state but they shared one thing in common. The output frequency of their Sheriffs repeater at 155.415. The transmitter in Fayette County was TRBO. Built as an IP Site connect multisite, multi frequency system the channel in question resided on a 4 story building on a roof mount connected to an XPR8300 running 40 watts into the duplexer and being radiated from a Station Master antenna. They were causing minor issues with licking county radios. Nothing major, but they were being heard in the squelch tails of the repeater as it would drop. Questions got ask, and it got looked at. The bigger issue was Licking county License for 5 sites, simulcast analog with 150 foot antenna's and 100 watt's of power. That system would talk. And with 5 sites legally licensed by the FCC it had a full county coverage footprint. It tore the hell out of Fayette on channel 1. DMR is GREAT when you have a wide coverage are channel and the next licensed user is FAR away. DMR will talk for miles but any carrier or interference will kill a radios ability to hear. You don't get hetrodyne, clicking or noise, it works or it's dead silent. We ended up buying back the Fayette county system, all the repeaters, the subscribers, the bank chargers....ALL OF IT. There were a number of those systems bought back by Motorola and other MSS shops. The FCC from what I understand will not issue a 100 watt license on DMR any more, the max power out is 10 watts on PS DMR now. Motorola really didn't market DMR to Public Safety to begin with. But they saw the small departments would need inneroperability with the large state systems and be cost effective for small departments that were not willing to jump on regional systems with per user fee's. They made the APX compatible with DMR and then when the FCC stepped in and started saying no to high power DMR for Public Safety systems combined withthe fact the systems that were out there were failing due to interference they dropped the development of DMR on the APX line.
So, why didn't Fayette just change freqs? The logistics of touching every radio in the county aside, another channel may (emphasis on may since high band can be crowded) have worked better. We've run into similar problems with Trbo systems that get "interference" from co-channel users. How the coordinators could miss some of the other licensees within range of a system we're planning is beyond me, but it happens. I've noticed it does not take a lot of "interference" to make DMR fail. If it gets into the -100db range at a repeater input, a system can be seriously impaired.
User avatar
escomm
Queue Moderator
Posts: 5170
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:24 pm

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by escomm »

Here is a nice load of bullhooey for everyone's reading pleasure: http://hawaii.gov/spo2/solesource/attac ... m01975.pdf

"ADP encrypted"

"700/800MHz SmartNet"

"Sole Source"
Jim1348
Posts: 542
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 7:52 am

A Couple Of Interesting Articles About Motorola Dominating

Post by Jim1348 »

Thank you for posting those articles.
User avatar
jayres
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by jayres »

escomm wrote:
MTS2000des wrote:The lack of QCII decoding on the APX line, or their refusal to offer DMR on the APX are prime examples of this. Customers WANT these features and will PAY for them.
Motorola does not care what the hobbyist wants. What public safety customer running phase 2 wants TRBO in their dual band radio? And who are they going to talk to if they do get it? Name some names.

Individuals such as yourself that buy no infrastructure, buy no maintenance agreements, and barely buy any new radios... why would Motorola listen to the voice of that customer? They have PS agencies buying hundreds and thousands of radios to listen to first. They run more than $8,000,000,000 a year in revenues and focus more on the customers that spend millions of dollars and not the ones that spend thousands. It's not reasonable to expect otherwise
I know my county would for one. We are 800 Type II, have a neighboring County that's went VHF TRBO, and have a Statewide P25 VHF / 7-800 Trunked System. Add into that, I've got another County (two over) that's going VHF NXDN. Talk about a headache.

I would love to not have to carry multiple radios on a day to day basis; it would make life much easier. And I know we aren't the only location that's got these issues. A lot of public safety is drinking the TRBO kool-aid, making interoperability an even harder challenge then it was before.
User avatar
escomm
Queue Moderator
Posts: 5170
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:24 pm

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by escomm »

jayres wrote:
escomm wrote:
MTS2000des wrote:The lack of QCII decoding on the APX line, or their refusal to offer DMR on the APX are prime examples of this. Customers WANT these features and will PAY for them.
Motorola does not care what the hobbyist wants. What public safety customer running phase 2 wants TRBO in their dual band radio? And who are they going to talk to if they do get it? Name some names.

Individuals such as yourself that buy no infrastructure, buy no maintenance agreements, and barely buy any new radios... why would Motorola listen to the voice of that customer? They have PS agencies buying hundreds and thousands of radios to listen to first. They run more than $8,000,000,000 a year in revenues and focus more on the customers that spend millions of dollars and not the ones that spend thousands. It's not reasonable to expect otherwise
I know my county would for one. We are 800 Type II, have a neighboring County that's went VHF TRBO, and have a Statewide P25 VHF / 7-800 Trunked System. Add into that, I've got another County (two over) that's going VHF NXDN. Talk about a headache.

I would love to not have to carry multiple radios on a day to day basis; it would make life much easier. And I know we aren't the only location that's got these issues. A lot of public safety is drinking the TRBO kool-aid, making interoperability an even harder challenge then it was before.
Funny how all those radios all support analog
User avatar
jayres
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by jayres »

escomm wrote:
jayres wrote:
escomm wrote: Motorola does not care what the hobbyist wants. What public safety customer running phase 2 wants TRBO in their dual band radio? And who are they going to talk to if they do get it? Name some names.

Individuals such as yourself that buy no infrastructure, buy no maintenance agreements, and barely buy any new radios... why would Motorola listen to the voice of that customer? They have PS agencies buying hundreds and thousands of radios to listen to first. They run more than $8,000,000,000 a year in revenues and focus more on the customers that spend millions of dollars and not the ones that spend thousands. It's not reasonable to expect otherwise
I know my county would for one. We are 800 Type II, have a neighboring County that's went VHF TRBO, and have a Statewide P25 VHF / 7-800 Trunked System. Add into that, I've got another County (two over) that's going VHF NXDN. Talk about a headache.

I would love to not have to carry multiple radios on a day to day basis; it would make life much easier. And I know we aren't the only location that's got these issues. A lot of public safety is drinking the TRBO kool-aid, making interoperability an even harder challenge then it was before.
Funny how all those radios all support analog
Don't disagree... But there are times when there is a need / desire to be able to communicate on the other agencies systems... (ie: move ups, truck replacements, etc.). We have some ambulances that have 2-3 radios installed just so they can communicate with local agencies and dispatch centers; which is a pain.

The other challenge is ensuring that those radios are all programmed with the analog interoperability frequencies. Ran into an issue with a major metro fire agency that just got nice new shiny APX portables. They came down for an exercise; and turns out they only had 3 zones of 16 channels; and none of them were conventional IO's (they were all system talkgroups). So while radios MAY be CAPABLE of analog conventional, they certainly all aren't programmed that way...
User avatar
escomm
Queue Moderator
Posts: 5170
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:24 pm

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by escomm »

And that is the radio's fault?? 19 firefighters paid with their lives by not having radios programmed properly. The only challenge for interoperability is buying a rope to pull someone's head out of their ass.

Piss Poor Planning Precedes Poor Performance
User avatar
jayres
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by jayres »

Again, don't disagree... However there are some things that are out of control (such as other jurisdictions) of those that are in the know... You can only "recommend" and "suggest" so much... There becomes a point where hopefully they begin to understand...

Running into a similar situation in a neighboring state with an air medical helicopter group that I do radio's for... All the fire departments in the area wanted their "private" channels in the aircraft, instead of simply using UHF Interops. The fire departments had UHF Interops programmed in their radio the entire time and had no clue that they existed. Eyes opened, problem fixed. Sometimes / someplaces it's easier than others...
desperado
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:29 pm
What radios do you own?: Motorola

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by desperado »

Bill_G
So, why didn't Fayette just change freqs? The logistics of touching every radio in the county aside, another channel may (emphasis on may since high band can be crowded) have worked better. We've run into similar problems with Trbo systems that get "interference" from co-channel users. How the coordinators could miss some of the other licensees within range of a system we're planning is beyond me, but it happens. I've noticed it does not take a lot of "interference" to make DMR fail. If it gets into the -100db range at a repeater input, a system can be seriously impaired.
Well that's a good question. It wasn't just that frequency that was being beaten on. 3 of the 5 channels were bad, and in Ohio VHF public safety frequencies are very hard to come by, as in when we ask Washington Radio they laugh at us and tell us we should know better than to ask.
As far as the coordinators (the ones that laugh at us) I can't really blame them. Reason being is the system went in as pretty much the first one in Ohio on public safety freqs and was very early in the TRBO technology all together. At that point They were still allowing public safety to simply amend their emission designators on their licenses without recoordnating or refiling with the FCC. The county got together with several other county agencies and they all contributed licensed frequencies to the system so it would have 5 channels. Our south shop fought and fought with it and Motorola even sent their Shaumburg TRBO guru's out to try to make it work to no avail. As the issues with the system got more discussion time at the customer level and the customer grew more frustrated their perception was the issues got worse. After the customer calling Motorola directly a number of times we basically got directed to pull the plug on the whole thing and take the whole thing back. When it showed up at the Columbus shop, they had directed us to take it all, so we bought back everything from the lapel mikes to the hardline, all the microwave linking equipment, everything. I believe that Moto gave them special pricing on Astro 800 radios and they went on the Ohio MARCS system. That was about the same time that in this area at minimum the frequency coordinators said that any public safety TRBO system would need to be coordinated no matter what and that the maximum rated ERP on any public safety frequency would be 10 watts. That of course effectively killed any more TRBO PS systems as telling a customer that they were trading in their V-8 cruisers for 4 bangers. The fact it would still talk just as far with less power didn't matter.
Keith
CET USMSS
Field Tech
What more can I say
motorola_otaku
Posts: 1854
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 7:03 am

Re: A couple of interesting articles about Motorola dominati

Post by motorola_otaku »

I'm a fan of using the right tool for the job. Sometimes it's Motorola. Sometimes it's Harris MA/COM. Sometimes, God help us and save us, it's Kenwood.

Motorola is great at systems integration, but bad about missing small details and that's where the other vendors can really shine. Case in point: RSSI/dBm display in subscribers. Damn handy tech tool to have. Or on a larger scale, dual radio/one head. Harris and Kenwood have been doing it for years with off-the-shelf equipment, firmware, and programming software (and yes, I am aware of the recent release of dual-radio APX.)

Working with a systems integrator also carries the caveat of them sometimes thinking they can run roughshod over you. Just because the overwhelming majority of your customers have no clue does not give you license to dictate to all of your customers how things are going to be.
Post Reply

Return to “General Motorola Solutions & Legacy Radio Discussion”