Bluetooth and CDMA don't work well together? Any truth?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.bluetooth,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.motorola,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Hi Everyone,

I have been hearing a lot of this lately and was wondering if there
was any truth to the statement. I know Verizon has claimed that
Bluetooth doesn't pass their quality standards, but I have always
dismissed this as Verizon's excuse to keep making "Teen Rave" phones.
But I notice with my Sony Ericsson T608 (800/1900 Mhz CDMA & 800Mhz
Analog) that my Bluetooth connections using Express Network are not very
fast. It seems to top out at 56-60 kps. I have also heard rumors that
Verizon intends to remove the bluetooth functionality in the Motorola
V710 before they release it. Could this be because CDMA and bluetooth
really don't play well together, at least as well as GSM does? What do
you all think?

- NM

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.bluetooth,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.motorola,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

A bit OT, but:

There are many tech savvy people that think Bluetooth is
a dead or dying technology. Never gained 'critical mass' and
is in decline already. Maybe Verizon also subscribes to this
notion and that is why they don't and won't support Bluetooth.


"NewsMonkey" <please_post_reply@to_the_group.net> wrote in message news:MPG.1af3079f85cb4f9698968b@news.speakeasy.net...
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I have been hearing a lot of this lately and was wondering if there
> was any truth to the statement. I know Verizon has claimed that
> Bluetooth doesn't pass their quality standards, but I have always
> dismissed this as Verizon's excuse to keep making "Teen Rave" phones.
> But I notice with my Sony Ericsson T608 (800/1900 Mhz CDMA & 800Mhz
> Analog) that my Bluetooth connections using Express Network are not very
> fast. It seems to top out at 56-60 kps. I have also heard rumors that
> Verizon intends to remove the bluetooth functionality in the Motorola
> V710 before they release it. Could this be because CDMA and bluetooth
> really don't play well together, at least as well as GSM does? What do
> you all think?
>
> - NM

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.bluetooth,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.motorola,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Richard Ness wrote:
> A bit OT, but:
>
> There are many tech savvy people that think Bluetooth is
> a dead or dying technology. Never gained 'critical mass' and
> is in decline already. Maybe Verizon also subscribes to this
> notion and that is why they don't and won't support Bluetooth.

Don't forget that VZW supports the phones. There is significant
overhead in doing this.

....they sold me a bluetooth phone. I can't get my laptop to talk
to it. I go to my VZW store and tell them "it doesn't work, fix
it"...

Then there is the related testing, etc. It's much more likely that
the demand relative to the cost doesn't justify it.

-Quick

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.bluetooth,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.motorola,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

That's silly. I have one of those neat/nifty Jabra Freespeak's, and have to
tell you that little blue flashing light when it is on or being charged is
REALLY cool. If it wasn't for flashing Blue Lights, why would anyone shop at
Kmart?

I would think that it's pretty obvious that they have sold a bunch of units
to the old farts, and now they need some snazzy flashing lights, removable
faceplates, fancy rings, downloadable games etc to spark peoples interest in
spending more money with them, or at least appeal to the younger people who
can get their parents to pay for it..

If in actuality they wanted phones that work, why did they drop the power?
Older ones used to be 3 or at least .6 watts, instead of that wimpy .2 they
have now. Didn't they cut the power so more people could be on their system
at once? To suggest that they are doing an about face, and are trying to
provide service instead of flash, flies in the face of what they have been
doing for years.

<G>

"Richard Ness" <richardno@damnspam.nessnet.com> wrote in message
news:69edndp7urlk_hTdRVn-sA@comcast.com
> A bit OT, but:
>
> There are many tech savvy people that think Bluetooth is
> a dead or dying technology. Never gained 'critical mass' and
> is in decline already. Maybe Verizon also subscribes to this
> notion and that is why they don't and won't support Bluetooth.
>
>
> "NewsMonkey" <please_post_reply@to_the_group.net> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1af3079f85cb4f9698968b@news.speakeasy.net...
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> I have been hearing a lot of this lately and was wondering if there
>> was any truth to the statement. I know Verizon has claimed that
>> Bluetooth doesn't pass their quality standards, but I have always
>> dismissed this as Verizon's excuse to keep making "Teen Rave" phones.
>> But I notice with my Sony Ericsson T608 (800/1900 Mhz CDMA & 800Mhz
>> Analog) that my Bluetooth connections using Express Network are not
>> very fast. It seems to top out at 56-60 kps. I have also heard
>> rumors that Verizon intends to remove the bluetooth functionality in
>> the Motorola V710 before they release it. Could this be because CDMA
>> and bluetooth really don't play well together, at least as well as
>> GSM does? What do you all think?
>>
>> - NM

 

[Mike]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.bluetooth,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.motorola,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 12:01:06 -0400, NewsMonkey
<please_post_reply@to_the_group.net> wrote:

>But I notice with my Sony Ericsson T608 (800/1900 Mhz CDMA & 800Mhz
>Analog) that my Bluetooth connections using Express Network are not very
>fast. It seems to top out at 56-60 kps.

That's probably the rough average speed of 1XRTT data. The 144 kbps
figure is "bursting" speeds.

Mike

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Dan Albrich wrote:
> I think Verizon is being stupid.

I know several Verizon customers who only stay with Verizon because
of the coverage. They want to move to other carriers because of
phones, pricing, functionality, international compatibility,
international interoperability (SMS) etc.

As the other carriers networks continually improve, these people
are going to jump ship permanently.

Roger

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Dan Albrich wrote:
> I think Verizon is being stupid. For a company so concerned with quality in
> the handset, take a look at the Moto 720 or the LG 4400. Take any LG 4400
> and put it near an EM field like a monitor, and the phone will autotically
> reboot or turn itself off.

Nonsense. I have an LG 4400, and I put it near my monitor and speakers
all the time with no problems. I didn't have any problems with my
previous 4400 either.

Maybe the VZW reps were giving you defective phones just to piss you off. 😉

Jesse

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

> Well I just set my 4400 on the monitor 20 minutes-----No problem.
> I also put it inside my computer ( have easy access door) for 20 min,
> took it out and BEHOLD it si still working. I have ver 10 firmware.

We can consistently reproduce this problem by setting any 4400 on top of a
CRT, or setting it on top of a UPS. The phone will reboot within 2 minutes
in all cases. The other Verizon phones at work do not behave this way.

It's unclear to me why our folks have so much trouble with this particular
phone. We all work in a brick building with 802.11 wireless, and tend to
have PC's with the cases off, and typically one or more large CRT/flat
panels. The in-building cellular coverage is also poor, but usable. Our
folks that have non-LG 4400 phones do not ever experience problems (of
rebooting or turning off).
All of the 4400's we have are the non-B version, but they do have latest
firmware.

Anyway, YMMV,

-Dan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message news:c6g9tv$bn11k$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
>
> .... I have mine in a charger on the top of my
> microwave, and have been cooking in it for over a year, and have no
> problems. I even recall messing up once and putting it IN the microwave
> while I was cooking, not only was the phone fine, but the popcorn was good
> too.
>

Yeah, same here.
But when I mistakenly put my popcorn in the charger, nothing happened at all.
---JRC---

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.bluetooth,alt.cellular.cdma,alt.cellular.motorola,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 11:43:47 -0700, "Richard Ness"
<richardno@damnspam.nessnet.com>,wrote:

>A bit OT, but:
>
>There are many tech savvy people that think Bluetooth is
>a dead or dying technology. Never gained 'critical mass' and
>is in decline already. Maybe Verizon also subscribes to this
>notion and that is why they don't and won't support Bluetooth.

BT is ok for PAN. I use it all the time to sync my Palm T3 to my notebook. But
it's slow. BT seems to have been dumped for WiFi.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"David S" <dwstreeter@spamisnaughty.att.net> wrote in message

>
> I discovered within days of getting mine that if I lay it flat on its
> back on my metal desk at work (where the signal is just strong enough
> to use) and then call it, instead of ringing it will die and reboot.
> It can sit there for any length of time, until the call comes in;
> then it dies. If I stand it up, but still on the desk, it works fine.
> I was about to take it back when I discovered that others have had
> the same problem. Someone also said putting it on a CD makes it crash.

Sounds like a bizzare skit on saturday night live of the verizon (Can you
hear me now ?) guy.