Re: cordless cell phone?
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Joel Koltner on January 7, 2008, 1:37 pm
Please log in for more thread options A couple reasons: 1) Cell phones are heavilg cost- and performance-optimized. The whole idea that, "oh, it's a software-defined radio, so it'll work on any band with any bandwidth!" is largely a myth propagated by people who either don't understand the relationships between noise, bandwidth and dynamic range... or those who are looking for funding to build 24-bit 1GHz ADCs. :-) DECT operates at 1920-1930MHz whereas GSM is 1850-1910MHz (uplink) and 1930-1990MHz (downlink). Notice where DECT is... inbetween the two, where a cell phone is often trying very hard to have significant attenuation so that the uplilnk and downlink don't interfere with each other! The point here is that there's a good chance it's not *just* software that would have to be changed in a cell phone to make it DECT compatible, but hardware as well -- and this could have a negative impact on component count (size) or cost. (I realize many DECT phones are the same at the *digital* level as GSM cell phones, I'm talking about the RF front end here.) 2) There's not a big enough monetary incentive to the guy making the cell phone to do it. > I'd like to have just one telephone handset. It's a cell phone when
> I'm away from home, and it connects to my DECT base set when I'm at > home so I can use VOIP. I'd suggest that a software-only approach to make this happen would be to link to a VOIP box via Bluetooth, although I realize that Bluetooth's range is only ~30 feet and hence probably not a good solution. > Why does my Canon camera not present
> myself as a USB mass storage device? Because the typical user doesn't want to see "just a drive letter" when they plug in their camera, hence there's a separate device class for cameras. There's no reason a camera couldn't present itself as *both" a "camera" and a mass storage device, but again, this requires significantly more work on the manufacturer's part for what's probably felt to be little if any extra income. ---Joel | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Joerg on January 7, 2008, 5:50 pm
Please log in for more thread options > ... or those who are looking for funding to build 24-bit 1GHz ADCs. :-)
ROFL! I almost spilled my water bottle. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Michael A. Terrell on January 7, 2008, 6:32 pm
Please log in for more thread options Joerg wrote:
>
> Joel Koltner wrote: > > > ... or those who are looking for funding to build 24-bit 1GHz ADCs. :-)
>
> ROFL! I almost spilled my water bottle. Yeah, but you'd want to built it completely out of discretes! ;-) -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Joerg on January 7, 2008, 8:32 pm
Please log in for more thread options Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> Joerg wrote:
>> Joel Koltner wrote:
>> >>> ... or those who are looking for funding to build 24-bit 1GHz ADCs. :-)
>> ROFL! I almost spilled my water bottle.
>
> > Yeah, but you'd want to built it completely out of discretes! ;-) > Guilty. Not ADCs but I've reduced lots of circuits from the fancy digital domain to analog. Comment from an engineer after peeking at a new design last summer: "You mean, that's it?" -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Joel Koltner on January 8, 2008, 2:43 am
Please log in for more thread options > Guilty. Not ADCs but I've reduced lots of circuits from the fancy digital
> domain to analog. Comment from an engineer after peeking at a new design > last summer: "You mean, that's it?" Do you ever worry that, on the off-chance you had to go out looking for a regular job again some day, you'd be hard-pressed to find one given that you just don't think widgets need to be as bloody complicated as the attending engineering manage has been led to believe... and they figure the problem is that you must be a little slow in comprehending the problem? :-) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| Re: cordless cell phone? | January 7, 2008, 1:37 pm |
| Re: cordless cell phone? | January 8, 2008, 2:38 am |
| OT: How do you turn a cell phone into a "cell" phone? (humour?) | September 15, 2006, 8:44 pm |
| How to do cordless phone paging? | February 5, 2007, 4:31 pm |
| super cordless phone | January 9, 2008, 7:11 pm |
| Panasonic Cordless Phone | March 28, 2008, 4:41 am |
| Why can't I find my cordless phone with my scanner ? | June 3, 2005, 4:17 am |
| Cell phone ccd ID | August 18, 2006, 3:00 am |
| Cell phone | January 9, 2008, 10:40 pm |
| cell phone jammer | June 9, 2005, 9:23 pm |
| Cell phone jammer | June 27, 2005, 2:39 pm |
| Can a cell phone set off a car alarm? | May 22, 2006, 8:50 am |
| Have you ever had your cell phone go dead on you when you really need to use it? Everyone Has!! | July 3, 2006, 11:35 pm |
| cell phone charger | July 10, 2006, 7:40 am |
| Cell Phone Interference | May 11, 2007, 8:27 am |
> that works around 1.9GHz can't talk to my DECT 6.0 base which also
> works around 1.9GHz...