Build Your Own Cell tower

BlakeCaldwell writes "If you're the type who dreads being dragged kicking and screaming into the use of a cell phone, Samsung sells their Long Range Cordless Phone. With an incredible (for landlines) 30-mile range, the set includes a caller ID-capable LCD and is able to communicate with the base-station, acting as an intercom."

Comments

Sweet!

[IO ERROR]

This is just exactly what I've been looking for. I just have to wonder if the sort of power output this thing needs is entirely legal. Oh well, who cares until the FCC shows up. According to this page though, the range is 130km (80 miles) at sea level! Who needs a cell phone anymore unless you're going waaaay out of town. I suspect that's a typo though.

It's not so much that I don't want a cell phone, it's more that I don't see any use paying $40-50 a month for something I don't use more than 100 minutes a month. Even if I only got five miles of range out of it, it would easily cover 99% of my needs.

Re:Sweet!

[garcia]

Please note the "Update:" under the blurb that is linked to from Slashdot...

The phone might not adhere to FCC regulations. If you can't use a FRS radio for more than a couple miles w/o a license why would you be able to use this cordless phone?

Re:Sweet!

[Shakrai]

I've joked about building something like this with friends before (probably using 2.4ghz cordless phones and external antennas meant for Wi-Fi) but they actually released a product?

If the security is up to par (I'm thinking FHSS and maybe encryption) screw the cell phone! Why should I pay for both the cell phone and the landline? Ditching the landline isn't an option anymore because I need it for ADSL.

With Verizon's freedom packages the landline is cheaper anyway (at least with the way I use the phone). And think of the possibilities if you attached it to a VoIP box....

Re:Sweet!

[Dr Reducto]

...And pair it with VOIP, and you should be able to save the cost of the phone over time, assuming the phone works as advertised. A cell phone that you can call all over the world for "free".

Re:Sweet!

[poptix_work]

These have been available for years from various companies including Senao (Yes, the popular wifi card maker), they're illegal in the USA, but they're rather popular in Australia.

Low speed WiFi

[nharmon]

Could these be adapted for slow (modem speed) wifi?

High-power RF interference

[powdered toast dude]

In a neighboorhood where I once lived, someone had a very high-powered (and likely illegal) phone of which this reminds me. It was so powerful, and perhaps poorly designed, that I'd hear his conversations inducted into my own landline as he drove by. Weird but kind of cool.

$0.02,
ptd

Re:High-power RF interference

[garcia]

There was some hype where I lived during the mid to late 80s where kids would drive up and down the streets with cordless phones to pick up on your conversations.

I frequently had issues in the dorms in college with interference from nearby cordless phones. I usually had to change "channels" on the base station several times in order to get out of the range of the people around me.

Pretty typical of cordless phones.

Re:High-power RF interference

[krgallagher]

"It was so powerful, and perhaps poorly designed, that I'd hear his conversations inducted into my own landline as he drove by. "

In my neighboorhood I have three ham radio operators within about ten blocks of me. I am convinced one of them is running an illegal amplifier. When it is transmitting, I get sine waves on the screen of every television in the house. When he keys the microphone, he broadcasts through my computer speakers even with my computer turned off. I finally got fed up with it and complained to the FCC. They sent me some nice brochures on how to shield my home entertainment equipment from RF interferance.

Re:High-power RF interference

[shaitand]

Yup, the HAM is licensed your not. In fact, if your TV interferes with his transmission he can contact the FCC to have YOU shut down.

Re:High-power RF interference

[lukewarmfusion]

If nothing else, shouldn't the FCC be responsible for managing the spectrum in such a way that these kinds of problems do not happen?

A licensed operator running an illegal amplifier obviously should be given lower priority than the owner of an FCC-approved consumer device. The other guy has no right to remove your use of the spectrum, while his use is probably considered beyond reasonable.

I'm just arguing for the sake of arguing. This is Slashdot, after all.

Re:High-power RF interference

[leighklotz]

>If nothing else, shouldn't the FCC be responsible for managing the spectrum in such a way that these kinds of problems do not happen?

They do manage the spectrum. What they don't manage is the receiving devices...

There is a curious problem here caused by the "free market" philosophy taken so to heart by the public at large, the government, and the FCC recently.

The problem is that the TV probably doesn't meet the consumer's needs for keeping out unwanted (and off frequency) RF. The FCC would argue that the manufacturer has sold a TV that doesn't meet the consumer's needs, and the consumer ought not buy it, just like they wouldn't buy one without a remote control or with a volume control button that's in the back and has to be set with a screwdriver. In other words, the TV is not of good engineering design, and the FCC doesn't care -- they think you should care.

So, take the FCC's lead and call the manufacturer of your TV, the person who installed your stereo speakers, etc. and complain to them.

The dual of this is that if you own a device that makes RF noise and someone else complains, your only recourse is to turn your device off. Although you can sometimes hope for FCC intervention, if you want the manufacturer to fix it, you have to go back to them as a consumer. It's only rarely that the FCC goes back to the manufacturer for you, and when they do, it is usually only in an egregious case and with lots of legwork by someone else, and it makes headlines.

The sad thing is that it's much easier to get the FCC involved to tell your hapless neighbors to turn off their broken device than it is to get them to make the manufacturer fix it.

If you buy a washing machine (like mine) that generates noise, you may be stuck with a lot of work to try to get it fixed.

Or, you can write your congressperson and ask that the US adopt stricter EMC (electro-magnetic compitability) requirements such as the European EC requirements.

Wonderful..

[ackthpt]

So it's basically a long range phone, not an actual cell phone. Fine if you live on a ranch, but with all the structures and interference in town, I wonder how effective it really is.

FWIW I avoid cell phones because the cost is just too damn high for what little I need one for. I'd consider pay-as-you-go without some stupid limit placed upon how soon I need to use up my time or artificial wallet robbing schemes

Holy Crap

[BlkSprk]

All I have to say is that I want it, imagine, you own a bussiness where you really dont go much more than 10 miles from your office, this makes it so you never miss a call... I want it.

More hassle than it's worth?

[Nexboy]

According to TFA, this is just a cordless phone, which means you would have to carry around both this handset as well as your regular cellphone unless you know you won't be out of range on a given day. You still have to pay for your landline. More appealing to me would be if somebody made a high performance tabletop cellphone (with external antenna) so I could ditch the landline altogether.

Countermeasures

[WormholeFiend]

And just in time, as well.

Some guy invented magnetic paint.

Although not an intended purpose, I assume it will work just like anti-cellular wood panels.

And it might even free you from having to wear a tinfoil hat indoors.

Ha! I used to do that!

[LanMan04]

I had a long-term girlfriend in High School that lived DIRECTLY across the street from me. Once in a while, we'd both pretend to be sick to stay home from school, and then proceed to basically have sex all day while both our sets of parents were at work...

Now, the POINT is that I would take our crappy early-90s portable phone across the street with me to her house, and with the basestation properly set up in my house, when my Mom called to check up on me (because I was 'untrustworthy'...ha!), I'd be there...good times.

The more I think about it, this will be outlawed

[John Seminal]

There is no way, even if this works for 30 miles, and they fix interference problems, and it is declared safe for use; there is no way the cell phone companies will alow people to own them. They will use thier lobbys to outlaw cordless phones with a long range. If my phone worked 30 miles from the home, I would not need my cell phone. Cell phone companies will do the same thing telcom companies do, when they lobby to make it illegal for small towns to provide free internet access. Life is all about money, and the big corporations will not allow for anyone to take away from their profits.

Looking at this from a different angle

[cprincipe]

Yes, I know the phone as currenly configured violates FCC regulations and a bunch of Ham Radio enthusiasts would hunt me down and kill me if I used one.

However, if one was configured to work within FCC standards, paired with VOIP and a PBX this would be a godsend for a lot of companies and universities that have employees that are far-flung and travel a lot.

My company has a campus with 5,000 employees served by a large number of desktop support technicians weilding pagers and cell phones. With devices like this, the technicians could call each other or anyone in the company over the radio waves for free instead of using cell phones.

I imagine such an application would face strong resistance from the cellular providers, who would resist in the form of dollars into the campaign accounts of politicians responsible for oversight of the FCC.