[telecom] Analog cell-phone network going off air

NEW YORK (AP) -- When Adele Rothman bought her 16-year-old son a car in

2003, she made sure to pick one that had OnStar, the onboard communications and safety system.

What the Scarsdale, New York, resident didn't know was that the OnStar system in the car was already doomed to die. The federal government decided in 2002 to let cellular carriers shut down analog cell phone networks, used by Rothman's Saab and about 500,000 other OnStar-equipped cars, after February 18, 2008.

It's the end of the nationwide network that launched the U.S. wireless industry 24 years ago, and it leaves a surprising number of users like Adele Rothman in the lurch.

OnStar told Rothman in March its service would stop at the end of this year, in anticipation of the network shutdown in February. "I was really upset," she said, "because that was my tieline" to her son.

Perhaps a million cell phones will lose service, but those are cheap and easy to replace. The effects will be felt the most by people who have things that aren't phones but have built-in wireless capabilities, like OnStar cars and home alarm systems.

The shutdown date has been known years in advance, but some industries appear to have a had a problem updating their technologies and informing their customers in advance, which raises the question of whether the effects will be even more widespread the next time a network is turned off, given the proliferation of wireless technology.

General Motors Corp., which owns OnStar, started modifying its cars after the 2002 decision by the Federal Communications Commission to let the network die, but some cars made as late as 2005 can't use digital networks for OnStar, nor can they be upgraded. For some cars made in the intervening years, GM provides digital upgrades for $15.

In 2006, OnStar said it had let customers know of the shutdown with a posting on its Web site. This year, it said it had notified all affected customers. Spokeswoman Cristi Chojnacki said she was unable to comment beyond those statements. General Motors and other car manufacturers with similar systems, including Daimler AG's Mercedes-Benz, are facing a potential class-action lawsuit over the analog shutdown.

When Rothman complained, GM sent a $500 coupon toward the purchase of a new car. To compensate for the lack of OnStar, she outfitted her son's car with a handsfree system and a Global Positioning System.

A week before the end-of-year shutdown, the analog coverage map is still the first one presented on OnStar's Web site. The digital coverage map, showing large areas of "limited" service in out-of-the-way places, is available on another page.

On the home alarm side, about 400,000 systems still use analog service, according to Lou Fiore, chairman of the Alarm Industry Communications Committee. In most of those systems, the wireless link to the alarm center is a backup to the landline. But some homes lack a landline, so the wireless link is the only connection to the outside world.

Fiore doesn't know the current number of systems that only use analog wireless connections and no landline, but a survey by the AICC a few years ago put the number at 138,000.

"The larger (alarm) companies are in pretty good shape," Fiore said. "There are so many smaller companies out there that are probably, I'd say, in denial. They just don't know about it."

To complicate things, some alarm systems advertised as "digital" actually use a digital subchannel of the analog network. True digital alarm system modems did not become available until 2006, according to the AICC.

According to the FCC, many analog alarms that have not been replaced by the time the network is shut down will start beeping to warn that they've lost the connection to the alarm center.

The Central Station Alarm Association, an alarm industry group and the parent of the AICC, tried to get the FCC to delay the analog sunset.

The FCC turned away that request this year, saying digital networks are a much better use of the airwaves. The same spectrum can carry about 16 times more traffic using digital technology compared to analog.

Verizon Wireless, AT&T Inc. and Alltel Corp. are the largest carriers that still have analog networks. Alltel will take more time than Verizon and AT&T to close its network, shutting down in three stages ending in September. Each carrier will keep its portion of the newly available spectrum, and will use it to boost their digital services.

A few rural cellular providers may keep their networks up. Plateau Wireless, which provides service in eastern New Mexico and western Texas, will maintain its analog network alongside a digital one "for the foreseeable future," according to Chief Executive Tom Phelps.

Many of the company's 75,000 customers are farmers and ranchers, and the network's superior range helps them because it fills gaps in the digital network. The larger carriers say their digital buildout will cover any gaps left by the demise of analog service.

formatting link
formatting link

____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.

formatting link

Reply to
Mr Joseph Singer
Loading thread data ...

What happened to the original wireless mobile phone networks? How did they transition from their car phones to cellular phones? Who got to use the original frequencies?

We forget that the earliest cellular phones were car phones that had to be installed in the car. Eventually the bag and brick/flip phones replaced them along with cheaper service contracts.

I must say Verizon was good to me about the switch. A full year in advance they sent me a letter along with offers to switch to digital; the offers were pretty good and offered more variety of plans than if I just went retail. They were also very easy to reach and nice about answering questions. (My only disappointment was that it was all done over the telephone, the kisoks and Vz stores were of no help at all.)

I don't normally travel to rural areas, but I do wonder how my cell phone will work in such cases. My CDMA (Verizon) phone has analog capability if need be, but if there's no analog service, I'm out of luck. (Also, the battery may run down even faster in analog mode).

What is the real (not theorectical) range of a digital cell phone in reasonably good (ie flat land) conditions?

As an aside, my bill lists the towns I make/receive calls from, but not the specific tower within the town of which there are obviously very many. Will the carriers provide to a customer what specific tower actually handled the call or is that secured information?

Reply to
hancock4

snipped-for-privacy@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

Are you talking about the MTS phones? If so they just shut down for the most part when the Cellular networks went up. As to the early cellular phones, my first one was a bag phone with a battery and a way to hook up to the cars lighter and put an outside ant on the roof of the car, sure liked the 3 watts, then I went to a hand held, still analog, later Airtouch switched me over to a digital phone, I kept that until they merged with GTE MobleNet to form Verizon Wireless, at that point I dropped them because of the problems I had when I first got a Cell phone with Moblenet, and I was an employee of GTE at the time, there customer service was like dealing with a chimp. I had so many problems that I called their HQ in Texas and asked to speak to the company president. I talked to someone in his office, then told the person who I spoke to that I was a GTE employee and I wanted to drop my service and wold him I had a lot of fellow employees who felt the same way. I called PacificBell Wireless (pre AirTouch and asked for service, gave them the information and after a bit of a pain to get MobleNet to release the phone had a tech come right out to a GTE office and got my phone working. Don't know if Verizon Wireless is any good and really don't care. A lot of people complain about Sprint, but I have never had a problem with them in service, my only complaint with them is that the customer service at night is handled from India, I try to call back during the day, or ask for a superviser.

Reply to
Steven Lichter

Would anyone know what kind of transition was offered? The earliest cell phones were mounted in cars, undoubtedly the MTS users wanted the old phones removed and continuation of service.

I'm curious about this since the MTS service was pure Bell System while the new cell phones was offered by very new and very different subsidaries.

What is now "Verizon Wireless" is a combination of a number of companies. I don't know about the GTE side, but on the "Bell" side, Bell Atlantic and Nynex previously combined to offer cellular service (before combining overall to create Verizon).

Every January Consumers Reports publishes a major cell phone article. Cell phone service quality varies by region of the country, so one can't simply make a blanket statement "Verizon bad, Sprint good". Generally, however, Verizon has pretty good service grades.

When the January issue comes out I asked that readers check it out and comment on the findings.

All cellular companies need to improve their customer service and restrictive terms on products, such as demanding a two year extension on the contract every time the subscriber sneezes.

Reply to
hancock4

Not quite. In many areas (including NYC) there were other alternative radio telephone carriers.

Reply to
danny burstein

You mean there were other carriers in which the mobile user could make and receive calls directly into the Bell System?

Did they have their own assigned frequencies or share those with Bell?

Reply to
hancock4

*snicker*

In the territory I grew up in, one private operator had 3 times the MTS channels that "Ma Bell" did. Between their mobilephone, paging, and telephone answering service functions, they had an entire exchange of numbers. Did I mention that they were also (pre 911 days) the answering service _and_ emergency dispatch for somewhere around 20 area volunteer fire departments?

Reply to
Robert Bonomi

GTE had IMTS service, I workd in West LA at the time and a number of company vehicles had them, old clunky GE or Motorola radios in the trunk and multi buttons phones in the car. Many years later while i was working in the Hemet are in Southern Calif, they put the IMTS units back on line because there were major dead spots in the mountain ares, these were company trucks and cars, I don't know how long that lasted since I retired 11 years ago and they still had them, but with all the cell sites in the mountains I'm sure the service is ok. I have a place up in Idyllwild and have pretty good service going up there and once in town perfect

[Moderator snip]
Reply to
Steven Lichter

My employer had a GTE IMTS phone in his car in 1960 in Covina, CA, which as you know was GTE territory, pre 1967 CWT merger. It worked fine and interfaced with Pacific Telephone (Bell) in a manner similar to how GTE (nea General Telephone of California) interfaced with Pac Tel for toll.

Reply to
Sam Spade

Ok, so why *can't* they be upgraded? The hooks into the car from the OnStar unit changed, and the digital units won't deal with the old interface?

I am fairly certain that an "upgrade" can be accomplished by removing the license plate, replacing everything else, re-installing the license plate. But that tends to be too expensive.

***** Moderaotor's Note *****

Many years ago, I met an automotive engineer who asked me what is the most expensive piece of metal on a car. After I exhausted the usual possibilities, he told me that it's the little piece of tin on which is stamped the Vehicle Identification Number.

Bill Horne Temporary Moderator

Reply to
Gordon Burditt

Some units, those for the most part made from 2005 on can be updated for $15.00 according to GM. My neighbors Tahoe is one of those and last week he had it done, another neighbor has a GMC, almost the same as a Tahoo, but 2004, no way could it be done, he was told that it would require a complete change out of the unit as well as the trucks computer. It seems that the ones that can be upgraded are the ones that OnStar can check the vehicles operating system and give an e-mail update. I have a TOMTOM Nave unit and LoJac II.

Reply to
Steven Lichter

"Steven Lichter" wrote

So, hiding in those statements is the real reason.

It is not that they CAN'T be upgraded, it is that GM has decided it is not economically advantageous to them and they WON'T spend the money.................... either to do the work at a loss or to develop the change, ending with such a high customer cost that few people would buy it and they lose money just on the development.

People build whole cars from scratch. If you search long enough, you probably could find someone who could take the hardware from a wrecked newer model and adapt it to your older vehicle...........if you have a few thousand dollars to give them to do the work. Good luck in your search. Don't bother to report back with the results. ;-)

***** Moderator's Note *****

The pity is that GM doesn't see it that way. After all, the vehicle still moves, the steering still works, and the minor matter of Onstar being useless, well, it _was_ just a sales gimick.

Of course, this is a return to the "warranty expires after last payment" policy of the 50's and 60's, when GM and other U.S. car manufacturers designed their vehicles to rust out after three years. That policy changed after Japanese car-makers showed U.S. buyers how easy it is to make cars that last fifteen years or more, but the bureaucrats who run GM have failed to learn the lesson that DeLorean and other wise men tried to teach: that customers don't care nearly as much about money as they do about being treated fairly.

Bill Horne Temporary Moderator

P.S. For further insight, I suggest "On a Clear Day You Can See General Motors: John Z. DeLorean's Look Inside the Automotive Giant", by John Z. DeLorean & J. Patrick Wright

Reply to
Ken Abrams

No it can be done, but as he was told it would require an whole new unit, plus an updated computer, since that would be required to make it work. One problem I can see is that the newer computer might not work with the older car. I had to have the computer replaced on my 1995 Explorer, they put the wrong one in and nothing would work. Once the correct unit was placed in the car all the problems went away, by the way it was replaced by Ford under a recall they had that involved less then 100 of that year. I just sold that one with over 200,000 miles on it with very little trouble over the years and bought a 2006 Mercury Mountaineer, which has tons more electronics on it and that scares me.

[Moderator snip]
Reply to
Steven Lichter

I have had several GM cars with OnStar. It is useless in any state of operation. And, expensive, once the first year is up.

I finally bought my first foreign car, a 2008 Accord. GM doesn't refuses to acknowledge that a car can be built with such quality and first-rate engineering.

Plus, I can now interface my own wireless phone into the car's system and have a system much better than OnStar, with my own number for incoming calls and no additional monthly fees.

With the money I save I can have the built-in XM radio, and money to spare.

It is apparent why GM is dying.

Their dealers and sales staff have sunk to the point where all they can do is call former customers like me "un-American." Yet, my last two GM vehicles were made in Mexico and my new Accord was made in Ohio.

Go figure.

Oh, and with my cellphone integrated into my Accord I can do post-origination DTMF dialing. Try that with OnStar...ha ha.

Reply to
Sam Spade

Heh, Ford got the curse when they bought Jaguar. Lucas wasn't known as the Prince of Darkness for nothing. The electrical systems in Jaguars pre-Ford were all designed and manufactured by Lucas Electric in Britain.

One humor page:

formatting link
A tribute to Sir Lucas:
formatting link
Ask any pre-1995 Jaguar owner about Lucas electrics.

T.

***** Moderator's Note *****

This thread has drifted off telecom, but I give followups more lattitude than original posts. However, I'll ask that we stick to the AMPS shutdown issue.

TIA.

Bill Horne Temporary Moderator

Reply to
kd1s.nospam

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.