Slashdot Mirror


Analog Cell Phone Network Shuts Down Monday

I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "AT&T and Verizon will be shutting down their old, analog AMPS networks next Monday, and AT&T will also turn off its old TDMA network, with smaller providers expected to follow thanks to a sunset date set by the FCC. After these old networks are shut down, the networks will be all digital. Of course, if you have one of those old fashioned 'just a phone' cellphones and it happens to be analog, you'd best enjoy the last few days before it becomes useless."

205 comments

  1. Analog has its place by ClaraBow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think that there are still areas that benefit from having analog signal, especially rural area. So isn't there any benefits of keep a least one analog network alive? I'm jut curious.

    1. Re:Analog has its place by DMCBOSTON · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I can take mine into jury duty because it's old. No camera, no need to leave it in an unsecure location (like the car). So I guess I'm screwed.

    2. Re:Analog has its place by KublaiKhan · · Score: 3, Funny

      Going to be lots of complaints from the rural areas next week...assuming they can make it into town and find a phone, anyway.

      --
      In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
      A stately pleasure dome decree
    3. Re:Analog has its place by ACMENEWSLLC · · Score: 1

      Several of my relatives live out in BFE. The only signal they get in places is Analog, or first generation digital. They have ancient phones which they've never upgraded, or newer (not new) phones with support for both.

      If you look on several of the carriers maps which show full state coverage, then look at what they mean by that, much of the rural coverage is 1st generation only.

      If I'm readying this information correctly, I'm going to have some unhappy relatives. I'm on quad band GSM only, so it doesn't affect my end of the call.

    4. Re:Analog has its place by fm6 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Possibly. But I doubt the bills of those few remaining analog users wouldn't be enough to cover the cost of keeping the network up. And all those frequencies are valuable; if they're not being heavily used, it makes not sense to not repurpose them.

    5. Re:Analog has its place by HartDev · · Score: 1

      As long as someone can still use the analog, I mean it is not like it gets outdated, it works and will always work unless the laws of physics or something change.

      --
      To see a few of my Android apps goto: www.hartwired.com
    6. Re:Analog has its place by mea37 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not every digital phone has a camera. Not even every new phone has a camera.

      If your old phone meets your needs and you're happy with it, then that's great. It's about to stop meeting your needs, though, so you might as well get over the assumption that nothing new will be able to meet your needs. If you shop around a bit (and it probably won't even take much of that), you'll find that assumption to be false.

    7. Re:Analog has its place by KublaiKhan · · Score: 1

      It's kind of annoying how it's nearly impossible to get any sort of a decent phone without a camera built in. I mean, sure, it's convenient for some, and a nifty feature, but is it really -necessary-?

      --
      In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
      A stately pleasure dome decree
    8. Re:Analog has its place by greed · · Score: 1

      I found, here in Canada anyway, that when they put CDMA digital on the frequency band used by AMPS, that worked just fine. The lower frequencies give you larger cell sites per tower, but with all the goodies of digital. It was much easier to get a usable phone call with my Yagi antenna, as the digital protocols were able to compensate for the weak signal.

      So dual-band digital is what I like now.

    9. Re:Analog has its place by xaxa · · Score: 1

      Most of the features, except making and receiving calls, aren't "necessary". Camera, text messages, contacts, voice dialling, GPS, web browser, ringtones, games, java, bluetooth, video calls, video camera, sound recorder, voicemail, ...

      But I think it won't be long until there are "business" phones without cameras, for security/privicy etc.

    10. Re:Analog has its place by vux984 · · Score: 5, Funny

      So I guess I'm screwed.

      I mean, aside of course from a Samsung M210, LG LX-160, Nokia 2610, Kyocera MARBL, Motorola C168i, Sanyo SCP-7050 or maybe your into NextTel iDen Push-To-Talk in which case the Motorola i570 or i690 would fit the bill or maybe you need a PDA... the new RIM BlackBerry 8800's including the 8800, 8820, 8830 all don't come with a camera either.

      So lets see ... you've got options on multiple networks, all major manufacturers, with devices from 'entry level budget' to 'work horse phone' to 'executive PDA' are available to you.

      Oh wait... all the Apple iPhones come with a camera.

      Yeah, I guess your screwed.

    11. Re:Analog has its place by POTSandPANS · · Score: 1
      I guess the network will still exist for a while in Canada? For my job, we are often working way out of range of cell coverage, We use a set of trunked analog two way radios. They're heavy, but indestructible. One survived falling off my belt when I was up on a 68 foot tower, another was totally submerged in water and worked fine.

      The most important thing is, they work nearly anywhere. I could have a conversation in places where you couldn't even get a partial signal on a cell phone.

      I guess they'll try to sell us satellite phones once they turn off analog in Canada..?

    12. Re:Analog has its place by ari_j · · Score: 1

      I can take mine into jury duty because it's old. No camera, no need to leave it in an unsecure location (like the car). So I guess I'm screwed.

      Honestly, how much of your time do you spend in jury duty? Is that really your biggest concern over losing the analog cell phone network?

    13. Re:Analog has its place by police+inkblotter · · Score: 1

      911 prank calls? I've heard that they can't be traced to analog phones, but I personally have no idea whether that's true or not.

    14. Re:Analog has its place by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      Nokia T.Mobile pre-paid phone works awesome. Ultra long battery life, cheap, no frills.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    15. Re:Analog has its place by compro01 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      It's kind of annoying how it's nearly impossible to get any sort of a decent phone without a camera built in. I mean, sure, it's convenient for some, and a nifty feature, but is it really -necessary-? depends on what you mean by "decent" but there're a good many camera-less phones still made. my cell provider offers no less than 3 (4 if you count the bag phone).
      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    16. Re:Analog has its place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      depends on whether the network is using a base-station location system, or a handset-based location system. in most places, they can't trace an analog call. if your analog mobile is invalid, it can still make 911 calls, and is even less traceable.

    17. Re:Analog has its place by slazzy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Blackberry already makes "business" versions of their camera phones without cameras just for that reason.

      --
      Website Just Down For Me? Find out
    18. Re:Analog has its place by urbanriot · · Score: 1

      Yea... what's going on in Canada? I know in many areas northern ontario I have zero digital signal, but analog is decently coveraged.

    19. Re:Analog has its place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It uses too much bandwidth. Switching to all digital frees up some frequencies. When those frequencies start being used, your analog phone WILL NO LONGER WORK.

    20. Re:Analog has its place by jhobbs · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What about the 500,000+ first generation OnStar equipped GM vehicles with analog cellular radios? Is GM going to offer a free retrofit? How about ADT and Brinks, are they going to retrofit home security systems for free? Sounds like a possible boon to companies with customers still using legacy equipment.

    21. Re:Analog has its place by badboy_tw2002 · · Score: 1

      Someone below mentioned blackberrys. HTC phones also have this (AT&T offers the Tilt and 8200 without a camera, for instance).

    22. Re:Analog has its place by kpainter · · Score: 1

      Heck, I know folks that scoff at those new fangled cell phones. They still have a box on the wall that they have to turn a crank and talk to an operator, by cracky.

    23. Re:Analog has its place by the_fat_kid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      unless you live in the 608 are code.
      no T-mobile for those of us in a third a Wisconsin.

      --
      -- Sig under construction...
    24. Re:Analog has its place by zermous · · Score: 1

      Clearly you have never been on the receiving end of this. You will never be as pissed off again in your life as when they kick you out at the door and make you walk back to your car to drop off your phone and then come all the way back.,

    25. Re:Analog has its place by rubycodez · · Score: 2, Funny

      those lazy gits with the crank phones should use the time-honored town criers and carrier pigeons.

    26. Re:Analog has its place by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Well, you're obviously happy with your current provider, having stayed with them for so long. Just commit that satisfaction to writing for two years and they'll give you a phone with no camera for "free." You can probably even get it for actually free if you just bitch at them a bit. Explain you've been a customer for ten years, and if they won't replace your phone with one that works, without forcing you into a contract or changing your plan in any way, you'll be happy to change carriers.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    27. Re:Analog has its place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AMPS is better than no service at all. Even though it kills your phones battery life, sounds like crap and is trivial to intercept. I don't really care as long as theres a digitial replacement avaliable with the same coverage area.

      Come to think of it.. EVRC and 13k sound like crap and GSM is trivially cracked. All of the real improvements nowadays seem to be technologies to maximize carrier profit rather than improve the quality of basic services.

    28. Re:Analog has its place by ari_j · · Score: 1

      I actually had that experience two weeks ago when I went to drop off some papers at the federal courthouse on my lunch break. I walked 5 blocks from my office in temperatures hovering around -10 F, got inside the courthouse entrance and realized that I had my cell phone with me and would not be allowed inside to do what I'd come to do. I guess my face was too numb from the cold by the time I got back to my office for me to worry about being pissed off at people for having a policy that makes sense.

      But the question stands - how much time does a person spend in jury duty out of a given lifetime? Is that really a reason to keep analog cell phone networks alive, especially when non-camera digital phones are widely available, as has been pointed out elsewhere in this thread?

    29. Re:Analog has its place by a_nonamiss · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe he's a bailiff...

      --
      -Arthur
      Cave ne ante ullas catapultas ambules
    30. Re:Analog has its place by damiangerous · · Score: 3, Informative
      What about the 500,000+ first generation OnStar equipped GM vehicles with analog cellular radios? Is GM going to offer a free retrofit?

      No.

      How about ADT and Brinks, are they going to retrofit home security systems for free?

      ADT is subsidized. Brinks does not sell systems, they only lease them so they've already switched over.

    31. Re:Analog has its place by Smokeshow · · Score: 1

      As far as I know, up here in Canada, Telus is shutting down their Analog network in September of this year.

    32. Re:Analog has its place by zermous · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Alright, you win. But heres a reason: analog works reliably out in the country where my parents live, and digital doesnt. When my father's truck breaks down way back in the woods and his cell phone doesnt work until he treks 5 miles to the highway, I am a little irritated.

    33. Re:Analog has its place by BitZtream · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Uhm, so ... You can take your phone into jury duty because doesn't have a camera ... great So, rather than worrying about doing your job as a jurior, you're worried about getting calls on your cell phone? And what do you do when the judge gets extremely pissed off at you cause it rang in the middle of the trial? Cell phone with no camera: Free with 2 year contract. Jury duty at some trial you obviously don't care about: + $12/day Price of living somewhere so bad that you're worried about someone breaking into your car to steal your free cell phone: $0, even the homeless people left that area Paying for the criminal that went to jail because of your carelessness as a jurior: $2 million per year, for 25 to life. Going to jail for contempt because your so self absorbed your brought your phone to a trial and had it ring 8 times during the process: priceless (Especially when we see it on the front page of ./) You aren't so important that you need to be that connected to the rest of the world, really, let it go. You will survive without having a phone on you all the time. It may be hard to believe, but just a few short years ago, people didn't have cell phones ... and ... the human race still survived without being accessable no matter where they were! Its a shocking concept, but I saw it in a cave drawing once. The fact that you have to get a new phone isn't the problem, you are.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    34. Re:Analog has its place by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      Honestly, how much of your time do you spend in jury duty? Is that really your biggest concern over losing the analog cell phone network?

      I didn't realise the United States was so stone age with technology.

      I haven't seen an analogue phone since the 90s

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    35. Re:Analog has its place by ari_j · · Score: 1

      My parents live in a rural area and I actually found that digital is more reliable than analog was at their house. Of course, if you have no reception with digital it's OFF whereas with analog it's just obnoxious with static. I do think that we are giving up analog a bit prematurely, but not for the camera phone reason. I am very sensitive to the cell phone reception of rural areas ... I actually still have buyer's remorse over my Blackberry Pearl because it does not have an external antenna port, and I had become very attached to my SmoothTalker-brand signal booster. I wish that the powers that be would consider such things before taking drastic action.

    36. Re:Analog has its place by cb_is_cool · · Score: 1

      Well, in the rurals, digital actually seems to be more useful since even though the transmit power might be a little lower, error correction and other tech makes it much easier to keep a useful signal. Believe me, I live in rural Virginia and the difference between our old analog and new digital is night and day.

      --
      cb_is_cool knows where his towel is.
    37. Re:Analog has its place by khellendros1984 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The US is a very large country, and almost all inhabited areas have cell phone coverage. If a company spends billions on deploying a network, and sections of that network won't generate more money if they upgrade from analog to digital, then that section's staying analog as long as possible. It's not a matter of not having the technology to set up the upgrade. The problem is that it's frickin' expensive.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    38. Re:Analog has its place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IAACT (I am a cellular technician) in Oz. We had the same debate 9 years ago. It was the same problem - large are with little population density. We had AMPS in all areas GSM in the city and some country areas. GSM in the country isn't any good. Despite the advertising the standard range is 35 km. Our solution was to go CDMA. We went through the same arguments. Now everyone remembers the bad old days of analog.
      Now we are in the process of getting rid of CDMA and replacing it with 3G in the CDMA band.
      The same arguments as the anlaog shutdown are happening again. We had a federal election last year so the shutdown became an election issue. The government regulator did a national drive survey of the two networks and found 3G was marginally better. It was the handsets which were the issue. Forget GSM/ CDMA etc.. go 3G850. Oh yeah - I love my 3G phone.

    39. Re:Analog has its place by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 1

      True that. My analog (TriMode, running in analog mode) phone got a horse dispatched into Yosemite backcountry to cart out a teen with a seriously broken leg. All the digital phones that people had brought failed to connect. Talking to dispatch sounded more like a two-way radio than a typical phone call, but it worked.

    40. Re:Analog has its place by jamar0303 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, get yourself a StarTAC III. That's a fairly nice non-cameraphone.

      --
      OSx86 FTW
    41. Re:Analog has its place by Blkdeath · · Score: 1

      I guess the network will still exist for a while in Canada? For my job, we are often working way out of range of cell coverage, We use a set of trunked analog two way radios. They're heavy, but indestructible. One survived falling off my belt when I was up on a 68 foot tower, another was totally submerged in water and worked fine.

      Pssst; you don't need a carrier network for 2-way radios to function.

      The cell phone networks aren't "turning off analog"; they're simply ceasing to offer service for their analog cell phone customers.

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

    42. Re:Analog has its place by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      Its not expensive at all
      its called progress and it requires investment.

      We got rid of AMPS in Australia long ago and our biggest carrier (95% population coverage) is now getting rid of its CDMA network in favor of a newer system.

      I've been to third world countries that have excellent GSM coverage.

      ~Dan

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    43. Re:Analog has its place by thogard · · Score: 1

      Telstra handed out lots of sat phones because even their extended range GSM couldn't cover the range of the old AMPS system.

      Australia is mix between places with no people and very high density where the US has much more area with very few people.

    44. Re:Analog has its place by Pathwalker · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's kind of annoying how it's nearly impossible to get any sort of a decent phone without a camera built in.
      A few years ago, I was working the night shift in the datacenter underneath the VEC (formally midlux) at the GM Tech Center. Cameras were very strictly forbidden, due to prototype parts lying all over the place, and I needed a new cellphone.

      I had a simple list of requirements:
      • Had to have bluetooth
        • And act as a modem to get a computer online via at least GPRS
      • Had to be somewhat open, and allow me to install my own applications
      • decent speakerphone
      • NO CAMERA


      I found two phones which matched what I was looking for.

      One was an "Executive Model" where they removed the camera, added a shiny metal case, and added $600 to the price.

      The other was a N-Gage.

      And that's how I ended up with a phone that looks like a taco.
    45. Re:Analog has its place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is GM going to offer a free retrofit?

      No and it seems they were still putting in analog OnStar equipment after analog's EOL was announced. The upgrade is about $200 plus installation.

      Once upon a time GM built some great machines. Those days are long, long gone. I'll stick to my Honda.

    46. Re:Analog has its place by jhobbs · · Score: 3, Informative

      ADT maybe subsidized, however after my post I called my Mom, an ADT customer. She was required to upgrade last October. Her equipment was subsidized (so they tell her). Her personal cost for the upgrade was US$200.

    47. Re:Analog has its place by Aladrin · · Score: 1

      Christ, how often do you go to jury duty?

      Actually, I'm surprised the let you bring a phone in -at all-. Sure, the old one can't take pictures, but both of them can CALL someone. Call someone that knows to not make any noise, put it on speakerphone and they can hear -everything- that's said in the jury room.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    48. Re:Analog has its place by DMCBOSTON · · Score: 1

      Nope, it's off. I just don't want it stolen from the car, that's all.

    49. Re:Analog has its place by ptbarnett · · Score: 1

      But I think it won't be long until there are "business" phones without cameras, for security/privicy etc.

      Several others have been mentioned, but I'll add that the Palm Treo phones are available without a camera:

      http://www.palm.com/us/products/smartphones/treo680/multimedia.html

      See footnote 3. However, they are somewhat difficult to get: cell service providers don't stock them (at least AT&T doesn't), and it requires a special order. The only ones I have seen were obtained through a corporate contract.

    50. Re:Analog has its place by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      True. T-Mobile doesn't serve those areas natively, but when I'm up there from Chicago (brothers used to go to military academy in Delafield, I fly into and out of the Janesville airport, etc) I roam without a problem (and by room, I mean piggyback on a network T-Mobile as a deal with. No extra charges involved).

    51. Re:Analog has its place by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Your problem isn't digital then. The problem is you need more carriers in the area with taller towers and bigger cells to cover more area.

    52. Re:Analog has its place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So hide it in the trunk. Car thieves break a window and steal the stereo and anything you left on the seats or in the footwells.

    53. Re:Analog has its place by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      This is a very often ignored point by people pushing all this digital tech, TV included. With analog you very very often can get at least something. It might be very sub optimal but if you repeat yourself enough you probably can get your message through. With digital when its weak its gone. Now sure you have a much wider range of reception + noise conditions where there is no preceptiable degredation but I am not sure that is a good trade.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    54. Re:Analog has its place by Hucko · · Score: 1

      In Queensland, Analog is better than CDMA is better than 3g. No doubts. Telstra's 3g maps lie. If I could get an serviceable analog phone I would in a heart beat. Not that the gadgets aren't good, but service is better. I can imagine WA, NT SA and perhaps western NSW are in a similar situation.

      --
      Semi-automatic amateur armchair Australian philosopher; conjecture ready at any moment...
    55. Re:Analog has its place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your dilemma sounds delicious.

    56. Re:Analog has its place by oliderid · · Score: 1

      I had a simple list of requirements: ...
      NO CAMERA


      Why don't you simply break the lens? Or paint it in black or something? Problem solved IMHO (?)

    57. Re:Analog has its place by Pathwalker · · Score: 1

      Not good enough - A non functioning camera is still a camera.

      As far as security was concerned, it may have been working earlier that day, and it was disabled before leaving the building, If they found that in one of the random searches, it would likely have been treated the same as a functional camera.

    58. Re:Analog has its place by jamar0303 · · Score: 1

      I have a felling that people are confused. That was not meant to be funny.

      --
      OSx86 FTW
    59. Re:Analog has its place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I find ironic is a number of places stress "NO CAMERA PHONES" but don't actually say "NO CAMERAS" or ask if you have cameras. From now on I'm going to bring a camera with me and just play stupid out of spite.

    60. Re:Analog has its place by zermous · · Score: 1

      I only need more carriers with taller towers and bigger cells because theyre all digital. The problem is digital. The solution is analog.

    61. Re:Analog has its place by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      The problem is that you're expecting an outdated technology to stick around to serve your needs. Carriers, on the other hand, have every incentive to use digital instead.

    62. Re:Analog has its place by sglewis100 · · Score: 0
      I can take mine into jury duty because it's old. No camera, no need to leave it in an unsecure location (like the car). So I guess I'm screwed.

      How often do you serve on a jury? My area (Florida) won't call you for 12 months minimum after you serve. I can't imagine the cell carriers want to run an analog network so you can bring your old crappy phone to jury duty once every year or so.

    63. Re:Analog has its place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And unfortunately, even those with digital radios won't function in many of the formerly analog areas. OnStar uses CDMA only, while many of the rural providers went GSM from analog.

      Suggest they add GSM in future versions of the OnStar hardware (and provide a free or cheap upgrade) here:
      https://ideas.jdmconsulting.com/osideas/ideas?action=NewIdea

  2. And good riddance. by postbigbang · · Score: 1

    Poorly maintained, bad coverage, iffy signal, rotten roaming (and occasional charges), it's ready to go.

    --
    ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    1. Re:And good riddance. by Qzukk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Poorly maintained, bad coverage, iffy signal, rotten roaming (and occasional charges)

      Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    2. Re:And good riddance. by funkyloki · · Score: 1

      Actually, as far as coverage went, the old AMPS and TDMA networks beat the crap out of GSM (not necessarily beating CDMA though). The reason as far as I can tell is the radial throw of the signal from the analog was much farther than digital networks. That is why people in the rural areas still have these old phones, it is the only that works where they are.

      --
      Scientists now say the future will be far more futuristic than originally believed
    3. Re:And good riddance. by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      While there's something to that, a lot of the quality issue had with who had how many cells on what topology. The radial difference also had other difficulties, like multipath tower switch offs to dead air, broadband RF interference and noise cancellation, as well as cell switch-back/hand-off problems from hell. Higher freqs diminish weather cut-through, have an affect on antenna gain, and yet EV-DO (and predecessor 1xRTT) could do data so much faster than any analog system that there is just no comparison (except where 1xRTT behaves like an ISDN line). Stationery connections could be good for voice on analog, but mobility issues are simply not the same.

      I feel for anyone that gets left behind (think HD in about a year and two days), but even with analogies like what NTSC vs HD TV is, dropping analog is a wise move. For those left behind, I feel for you. Call your carrier and scream--- like you should've done three years ago when the termination date was proposed.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    4. Re:And good riddance. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you. Cell phones are a plague on humanity. It's not just rudeness at issue, but the ringtones and the general douchebaggery that goes along with a toy that is designed to attract attention. In fairness, part of it is because they're still novel to some people (judging by the excitement over individual products like the iPhone). I'm sure in another 10, maybe 20 years, they will be as exciting as a desk phone. But one thing that unfortunately can never be taken away is the expectation for others to be able to contact you at any time of day, and the repercussions when you choose not to answer. This is something that society will regret. It's the kind of thing that turns post-apocalyptic scenarios into attractive prospects.

    5. Re:And good riddance. by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Lots of rude people on Slashdot too but sure looks like a lot of us aren't going to get a chance to breed.

      Oh well... :)

      --
    6. Re:And good riddance. by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      I was thinking more along the lines of people talking on the phone *all* the damed time. Getting in the way, slowing things down, causing accidents. ( just for a couple of examples ). There is a place to make a call, and standing in line while you are paying for your groceries is NOT one of them.

      I can avoid getting calls all the time, by turning it off.

      Oh, and ya ring-tones are annoying.

      Seems i got modded down, again. I guess the truth hurts.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    7. Re:And good riddance. by KingKurly · · Score: 1

      The 17 Feb 2009 transition has ***NOTHING*** to do with HD. I know you probably just didn't know any better, but please stop spreading the falsehood that it does. All the transition requires that all full-power over-the-air television stations turn off their NTSC transmitters and use ATSC transmitters instead. That is all. It has nothing to do with cable, satellite, HD, or anything else. In most markets, the transition effectively only applies to CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX, PBS, and CW. And it only requires digital transmission -- it is absolutely silent on the issue of HD.

      --
      It was recently discovered that research causes cancer in rats.
    8. Re:And good riddance. by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      Let's see. How many US consumers still have NTSC tuners, even those going back to the old rotary tuners? 15M you say? Nothing to worry about. Yes, you can go and buy a down-verter ATSC->NTSC analog box with your coupon. No worries. The other 120M sets can just get good old NTSC from cable, right?

      And I know that most of the broadcast stations use HD signals, some 480, some 720, some 1080. Some even use nifty multiplexed data on them right now.

      HD? Silent? Puhhleeeze. The transition has been known about for years and years. Nonetheless, digital transmission will be here soon, and there will be a stupid stink because 1) the networks and broadcasters loafed around for years arguing various transmission standards and 2) Washington Inc doesn't want to take blame, so it's been vewwy vewwy quiet up on Capitol Hill, rather than a broad-based, serious media campaign to prepare consumers.

      Fie on your sense of falsehood.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    9. Re:And good riddance. by KingKurly · · Score: 1

      Please read https://dtv2009.gov/FAQ.aspx for more information.

      I am trying to inform you, not mislead you. I didn't intend to come off as rude with the "falsehood" comment, I was talking about the statement, not the person making it. No need to 'fie'...

      Neither 480i nor 480p is HD. 480i is allowed under ATSC just as it was under NTSC, but ATSC also adds 720p and 1080i, which are the only HD resolutions available over-the-air via ATSC. The transition does not remove support for 480i. The 2009 transition does not mandate HD, only digital (ATSC).

      --
      It was recently discovered that research causes cancer in rats.
    10. Re:And good riddance. by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      D has some how become HD. Whether interlaced or progressive, the actual broadcast spec is mostly matter of the age of the content, as most content isn't 'remixed' to make it sexier in a nicer format. Indeed, some actors/actresses look just a bit too detailed in 1080p/i. You should see them in Japanese HighDef; something will force change as the detail is perhaps unrealistic.

      HD is now synonymous with digital broadcast. HighDef just presumes a raster that exceeds NTSC's 525x400/30fps. Most of what is now broadcast in D-HD does this. The two-dozen+ formats supported by ATSC tuners will get exercised, in terms of stream identification/field size change. I think PBS exercises them the most in the US with format changes.

      I worry also that there will be interlaced data (already done in some locales) that has no standard of protection/integrity. With huge data rates, and the temptations to multiplex data into rasters, various schemes will/have evolved to get that data. But there's no security for it, no mandate to use various headers to identify the data, just the same madness we have now. And closed captioning needs to be worked out, too.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
  3. Careful with the cheering by Besna · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Digital is not the end-all solution. Notice how your digital broadcasts take longer to change channels--deltas must be accumulated in the compressed stream. Notice how long your cellphone takes to connect. I like binary as much as the next geek, but I think the elegance of the bit can be slightly overrated.

    1. Re:Careful with the cheering by postbigbang · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've had analog, I've had digital. The difference is stark, and in the favor of digital. Digital has better overall sound characteristics, better cell hand-offs, digital data at better than 9600 baud (!!), and has the added benefit of consistent connection, be they good or bad ones (mostly good in my experience).

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    2. Re:Careful with the cheering by adminstring · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Digital is more energy-efficient, too... I always know when I've strayed into an analog-only area when my phone heats up and my battery starts draining at an alarming rate.

      Hopefully the death of analog will inspire the carriers to finally put digital towers up in rural areas so everyone can enjoy the benefits of digital (rather than merely enjoying the benefits of not being able to call or be called!)

      --
      My truck is like a series of tubes.
    3. Re:Careful with the cheering by webmaster404 · · Score: 1

      Doubt it will do more then increase already sky-high costs because of the carrier monopoly.

      --
      There is no "disagree" moderation, and troll, flamebait and overrated are not valid substitutes
    4. Re:Careful with the cheering by fingusernames · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm sorry, but better sound? AMPS with a clear signal is the best you are going to get. AMPS, a form of FDMA, was designed back in the days of just an A carrier and B carrier per market, when cell service was expensive. AMPS, and even N-AMPS, wasn't designed to maximize calls per antenna, it was designed to match the voice bandwidth used by analog telephone lines, essentially a wireless equivalent. Everything since then has been designed to maximize capacity at the expense of voice quality. PCS, TDMA, GSM (which is TDMA BTW -- TDMA is not analog), CDMA, all have as a major design criteria increasing the call capacity of limited frequency bandwidth. The result is greater competition, reduced cost, wider availability of cell phones, everybody and their pet carrying one, etc., all good things perhaps -- but "better" sound quality? I don't think so.

      Larry

    5. Re:Careful with the cheering by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      I had a nice Uniden 3W carry-around with a rubber duckie antenna. I got out when no one else got out and used a magmount antenna on the roof of my vehicle to get the best possible reception on the road. I thought that AMPS quality was pretty darn good.

      But the theory doesn't follow the facts. A Sprint guy came in with his PCS phone. Two calls, and I was convinced. I dropped Sprint later because of their fraudlent-like business practices. We disagree on the actual quality, but I also lose anonymity by explaining how I come to this observation. CDMA is fine; for voice distinction, it's superior even to GSM. I have both phones right now; Verizon RAZR for US, and SonyEricsson T610 for Euro use. Both of them beat that Uniden phone, which goes dead next week, as does its account, thankfully.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    6. Re:Careful with the cheering by rubah · · Score: 1

      yeah; they'll look real nice right next to that ivory billed woodpecker nest and pristine waterfall out in the middle of practically national forest8) (at least I hope they won't be able to get in national forests)

      they just put a new cell tower in my home town (we'll say less than two miles from the one that's been there for years already) and it's :( worthy.

      Eventually we'll be at the point tesla was invisioning with his electricity poles (except they aren't as high, thankfully!)

    7. Re:Careful with the cheering by fingusernames · · Score: 1

      Your anecdotal experience is one thing, but facts are facts. Having said that, this is much like a LP vs CD vs MP3 discussion.

      I worked for Motorola in the Cellular Infrastructure Group back in the mid 90s, the period when PCS license blocks were being auctioned off by the FCC and we began the transition from a dual-carrier marketplace to our modern multi-carrier marketplace in the US -- I later went to work at one of those PCS license-holders for a bit. I'm a bit dated on some things in the industry, but the fundamentals at the transmission level haven't changed all that much. AMPS exclusively dedicates a fixed amount of bandwidth from frequency A to B to your voice, an amount derived from the channelization of POTS lines. That was FDMA -- the total allocated bandwidth was split into two full dedicated audio channels per conversation, with no overlap, chosen primarily to match POTS voice bandwidth and quality. N-AMPS came later and sacrificed some bandwidth, but still provided plenty for the voice. TDMA is digital sampling and packetization of the voice, sorta like VOIP these days. The primary design criteria for TDMA was to increase bandwidth utilization with an acceptable loss of voice quality, along with providing additional features. When I was at Motorola there were guys working in a lab nearby with Qualcomm on the early CDMA technology -- it was in theory capable of providing voice quality on par with AMPS, but like TDMA one of its primary goals is utilization with acceptable quality degradation. It didn't work so great in those early days, but is now a superior technology for voice quality I believe. In fact next generation GSM is an amalgam with CDMA mixed in.

      That's just the raw technology though. Implementation is key. All things being equal, we are not likely to get better pure voice quality on a consumer cellular network than was had back in the days of AMPS with analog engineers pursuing voice quality as job one, not capacity. There are too many cell phones now for that to be the goal.

      Larry

    8. Re:Careful with the cheering by Deltaspectre · · Score: 1

      I've noticed that if I switch my phone to Analog only mode it will extend the battery life GREATLY in those analogy only areas... mostly because it doesn't keep trying to find a digital tower to connect to.

      --
      My UID is prime... is yours?
    9. Re:Careful with the cheering by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      I appreciate your explanations, but your facts obscure other difficulties with analog RF transmission.

      Look at root-hertz noise, aperiodic broadband burst noise, pure signal/noise accuracy, slewing distortion (including various phase delay distortions). The ear can hear these things.

      None of these exist in a CDMA conversation-- and all of them have an effect on AMPS and TDMA.

      It's nice to have dedicated, POTS-like bandwidth-- a channelization of the available spectra that doesn't exist in CDMA in a meaningful way. As for GSM, it's not quite as nice. And trust me, I have no Qualcomm stock. And I'm about to ditch my last Motorola phone-- the RAZR software was written by a monkey.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    10. Re:Careful with the cheering by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      Lots of old people around here... I mean, they haven't sold analog phones in this country for.. um... 15 years? I can't see the US being that far behind - call it 10 years.

      So any analog phones in use are going to be nearly useless bricks anyway. What's the point of keeping them around?

    11. Re:Careful with the cheering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only fact here is that the *allocated* bandwidth is greater in AMPS than in CDMA or GSM (56kb/s vs 14.4). But what metters is the *effective* bandwidth.

      Facts you're missing include:
      - in the AMPS case, that bandwidth doesn't include modulation and demodulation, while in the digital case it does. So you're ignoring the noise added by this process in AMPS, which is not trivial.
      - you're ignoring the transmission aspects. Both CDMA and GSm have a better, more resilient modulation.
      - both digital systems have error correction and are designed to degrade gracefully. AMPS doesn't.

      But yeah, if you're 10 meters from the tower on a clear day, or better, if you run copper between the base station and your phone, AMPS is better.

  4. What about the "forbidden" bands? by mangu · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I have a radio that scans from 30 MHz to 1.3 GHz, except for the analog cell phone frequencies. I suppose there will be no objection for selling radios that scan all the frequencies now, right?


    Not that there would be anything interesting in those frequencies now, but it always bothered me in a way that my radio had holes in its coverage.

    1. Re:What about the "forbidden" bands? by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Have you not learned, young one? Once laws are passed, they do not easily un-pass.

      The frequency ban will stay in effect. It even affects us ham operators, unless we buy receivers from out of the country.

      --
    2. Re:What about the "forbidden" bands? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      ... or make/modify it yourself? ... and your sig is annoying - plus it doesn't even work under the defaults.

    3. Re:What about the "forbidden" bands? by nsaspook · · Score: 2, Funny

      The only thing I hear on the analog cell bands are pimps telling their hookers to get back to work or dope deals going down.

      --
      In GOD we trust, all others we monitor.
    4. Re:What about the "forbidden" bands? by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      Scanner dealers used to stock books that listed the modifications necessary to enable those frequencies, and the modification usually consisted of clipping a jumper. On Radio Shack products, the jumper was often raised an eighth inch above the board for easy clipping...

      rj

    5. Re:What about the "forbidden" bands? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Not that there would be anything interesting in those frequencies now, but it always bothered me in a way that my radio had holes in its coverage.

      My Radio Shack had a 'magic resistor' you could move from point a to point b. I never got around to it - I guess there's no point now...

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    6. Re:What about the "forbidden" bands? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      haven't you heard? CDMA has been cracked. People can listen to your digital calls.

  5. Refurbished Junk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In a way, I find it sad that all those millions of handsets and related "back end" equipment will be going to the dump. On the surface, it would be great to have these devices land in some place that could actually use them for good - you know, as telephones for poor lonely grandmas in the 3rd world or something.

    But I think I understand that if we don't want this stuff, then the people who "need a phone" likely won't be able to afford them - it's likely more economical, and therefore more efficient and less wasteful to buy and install new equipment - instead of testing and refurbishing old stuff.

    But that still seems counter-intuitive to me.

    So off to the nasty smelter, you old analog phone, where hopefully some good can come out of you. And hopefully, your resulting irreclaimable pollutants won't be too deadly.

    1. Re:Refurbished Junk by Skater · · Score: 4, Interesting

      3rd world Grandmas are probably using digital networks. The odd thing is that a lot of 3rd world countries that didn't have phone service at all got digital wireless phone service because it's relatively cheap to build out, while the US (for example) was slower to adopt wireless service because we had landlines.

      But analog phones - ugh. I remember the three hours of standby battery life, and 30 minutes of talk time, or having a phone the size of a brick. My first two cell phones were dual-mode or tri-mode; they'd work on analog networks as well as digital, and I remember that if it had to use the analog network, the battery life would drop from a day or two to hours.

    2. Re:Refurbished Junk by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      The electronics for those frequencies DOES age. The batteries die, too, and replacements aren't readily available.

      When new stuff becomes cheap enough it's actually cheaper to replace older stuff than try to keep it alive.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    3. Re:Refurbished Junk by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      You realize thats mostly because its trying to operate on 2 or 3 different recievers rather than the 1 it uses in when it can connect on its prefered digital frequency right? Its bullshit to claim digital is that much better than analog for battery life as I've had normal pocket analog phones that lasted a couple of days on standby with a few hours of talk time.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    4. Re:Refurbished Junk by Carrion+Creeper · · Score: 1

      Analog sounds about like 3G reception at my house. I had to turn off 3G seeking on my phone for the battery to last for more than a day (it lasts about 5 without 3G), and this is Verizon in a major city. I suspect there are people in the same boat who have to turn off digital these days because the signal is weak and they get more phone time from analog. Then we will eventually switch to 3G and coverage will be even worse than regular digital.

      This is a good example of low population density in the rural US making the implementation of some technology more expensive. I wouldn't be surprised if people in rural areas get screwed over in a few more ways to save big companies money.

    5. Re:Refurbished Junk by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      OTOH I can run an N95 (which is no star in the battery front) for 5 days on 3G, and switching to 2G makes no noticable dfference.

      I'm in a well covered area in the UK though - I believe if you use a 3G phone in an area with limited 3G coverage like the US it ends up preferring distant 3G towers over local 2G ones and uses more power.

      The same will be true for analog.. although it truly surprises me that the US still has an analog phone network.. when I saw the headline I thought it was a bit of a joke and there would be a lot of 'who cares' posts but it seems not.

  6. Re:Don't toss them in the trash - send to 20500 by youthoftoday · · Score: 1

    will it?

    --
    -1 not first post
  7. Okay, I don't believe in imaginary submitters by MrPerfekt · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Honestly, 1-3 times a day there's a story approved from I Don't Believe In Imaginary Property. Thankfully, unlike Beatles Beatles Beatles, he's not using his URL to boost his search engine results but it does beg a question, how does that happen? Or are other submitters just submitting crap lately?

    No reasoning behind this, just curious.

    --
    I just wasted your mod points! HA!
    1. Re:Okay, I don't believe in imaginary submitters by fm6 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Possibly a sock puppet for Zonk.

    2. Re:Okay, I don't believe in imaginary submitters by KublaiKhan · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      You can change which stories you can see in your preferences. If you don't want to see one of the common submitters, you can block any stories from 'em.

      (I personally don't care about who submits the article; I'm just interested in the content.)

      --
      In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
      A stately pleasure dome decree
    3. Re:Okay, I don't believe in imaginary submitters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sigh... see http://begthequestion.info/ . I know there's a current trend towards incorrect usage, but it still makes the writer look unschooled in logic. Just letting you know.

    4. Re:Okay, I don't believe in imaginary submitters by ddrichardson · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      You're not alone in noticing this - I've also noticed recently that these submissions invariably appear around 10 to 15 minutes after the same story on Ars or Wired. Not saying right or wrong - just saying is all.

      --
      A thistle is a fat salad for an ass's mouth...
    5. Re:Okay, I don't believe in imaginary submitters by stormguard2099 · · Score: 1

      No reasoning behind this well he did say there was no reasoning behind it.
      --
      http://greenobyl.com/ please.... think of the children!!
    6. Re:Okay, I don't believe in imaginary submitters by jay-be-em · · Score: 1

      I've always just figured it was something people were using as their submited name, to make a statement. Not that it is one distinct person. I could be wrong.

      --
      "Orthodoxy means not thinking--not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness." --Eric Blair
    7. Re:Okay, I don't believe in imaginary submitters by jay-be-em · · Score: 1

      And I am!

      --
      "Orthodoxy means not thinking--not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness." --Eric Blair
  8. Excellent. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now ham fests will be full of the discarded AMPS equipment.

  9. In Canada? by Overkill+Nbuta · · Score: 0

    I know that the FCC doesnt have a hold over Canada, but usually it seems any trend that happens in tech slowly makes its way up here, Is there any notice to Canadian consumers to expect the analog network to be going out.

    1. Re:In Canada? by compro01 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      AFAIK, Rogers already got rid of their AMPS system early last year and both Bell and Telus are planning on following the FCC's lead. Here in saskatchewan, i dunno what sasktel is planning, though i'm pretty sure they already have CDMA2000 1X everywhere they have analog service (and in some places they don't), so i wouldn't be real suprised if they followed everyone else and axed the analog in the near future.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    2. Re:In Canada? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AFAIK, Rogers already got rid of their AMPS system early last year and both Bell and Telus are planning on following the FCC's lead. Here in saskatchewan, i dunno what sasktel is planning, though i'm pretty sure they already have CDMA2000 1X everywhere they have analog service (and in some places they don't), so i wouldn't be real suprised if they followed everyone else and axed the analog in the near future.

      Funny that you mention you live in Saskatchewan - digital coverage is appalling in your province! Look at the coverage maps from Sasktel, Rogers, Bell & Telus. If you turn off analog you cut off most of the territory.

  10. NOOOO! What will I do? by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    I haven't owned a cell phone since I gave away my analog cell phone to a women's shelter way back when!

    How will I make urgent phone calls in bathrooms in a loud voice?

    How else can I convince people I'm not crazy when I'm sitting on a bus talking so loudly everyone knows what color my undies are as I describe them in detail!

    What will I do in movie theaters?

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:NOOOO! What will I do? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet you're also proud of not owning a TV.

    2. Re:NOOOO! What will I do? by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      No, but my TV is analog too!

      AAAAAH!

      I hear they're sending capons in the mail for that, but if I cook them, how will a TV dinner help me get HDTV on my 12 inch Sony black and white tube?

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    3. Re:NOOOO! What will I do? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Interesting how times change. My father stopped owning a TV a couple of years before that article, and whenever he mentioned this people (myself included) would look at him like he was crazy or deprived in some way. I got rid of my TV a little under a year ago, and now it's not even particularly unusual.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  11. Bloody hell by Walzmyn · · Score: 1

    I've got one of those "just a phones" that is tri-mode and I can talk where no one else can around here with their all-digital phones. I specifically asked the company to get me a tri-mode when my old one died for this reason. All my co-workers are jelious that I can talk when we're out on our routes.

    1. Re:Bloody hell by postbigbang · · Score: 2, Funny

      Until Tuesday.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
  12. AMPS has FAR more coverage than GSM. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Poorly maintained, bad coverage, iffy signal, rotten roaming (and occasional charges), it's ready to go.

    You may have a point on most of those issues. But AMPS has FAR more coverage than the digital alternatives.

    AMPS was deployed back when the phone companies thought the point of a cellular phone system was to be able to use the phone virtually anywhere. It covers nearly all of the continental US except for some very remote locations.

    The digital alternatives were deployed late in the game, installed initially in large population centers and with the rural cells installed or converted largely after the telecom crash, when the tellcos were having trouble getting capital and were cutting costs wherever possible to keep their competitors from eating their lunch. The result is that cells that exist to fill in rural holes but don't generate enough calls to pay for themselves directly didn't get converted - and even some of the more suburban cells didn't get upgraded until the last few months.

    If AMPS really goes dark now, much of rural America (at least the part not adjacent to an interstate highway) would have no cell service at all. That would mean that, even if you paid for a digital upgrade for your OnStar it would not work.

    AT&T FINALLY converted the cell that covers my retirement home, just a couple months ago. So I just converted my cellphones to GSM. But I do a lot of traveling and vacationing in AMPS-only country - nearby that site and otherwise. In those areas the new handset is just a paperweight, while a car breakdown can be a death sentence if help can't be called. So I'm hanging on to my old AMPS-capable handset in the hope that at least some of the AMPS-only towers will stay alive.

    I'm betting on the little carriers to keep theirs going and maybe even buy up some the big carriers are abandoning. But I wouldn't put it past the bean-counters at the big carriers to shut down their own low-traffic AMPS-only or AMPS-TDMA cells rather than spending the bux to convert them. (IMHO if they were really interested in keeping the coverage up they'd have ALREADY converted them (rather than just running ads about what great coverage they have), and their coverage maps show they haven't.)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:AMPS has FAR more coverage than GSM. by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      CDMA vs AMPS? No contest.

      I've tried T-Mobile's GSM, and simply put, in the US in the urban areas I travel, it stank, uniformly. I have friends with new iPhones that bemoan the day they plunked down lots of $$$ on them specifically because of AT&T's coverage problems, and the fact that AT&T is only now starting to roll out sufficient digital coverage to catch the larger moaners.

      Certainly there's an immense geography that isn't sufficiently covered by digital/CDMA or GSM. I wonder if fiber will get there first; you can never tell with those crazy carriers.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    2. Re:AMPS has FAR more coverage than GSM. by MCZapf · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ...while a car breakdown can be a death sentence if help can't be called.

      AMPS or not, I'd keep a CB radio in the car too.

    3. Re:AMPS has FAR more coverage than GSM. by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      I'm betting on the little carriers to keep theirs going and maybe even buy up some the big carriers are abandoning. But I wouldn't put it past the bean-counters at the big carriers to shut down their own low-traffic AMPS-only or AMPS-TDMA cells rather than spending the bux to convert them. (IMHO if they were really interested in keeping the coverage up they'd have ALREADY converted them (rather than just running ads about what great coverage they have), and their coverage maps show they haven't.)

      Well, if a carrier buys them to send out a signal to analog phones ... they deserve to go out of business anyway.
      You know, since the reason the major networks are turning it off is because the FCC said 'Turn it off by this date: XX/XX/XXXX'. It makes total sense that the little guys would want to buy towers they won't be able to use very shortly. I totally see your line of thought, good thing I didn't read the article or understand the point either.
      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    4. Re:AMPS has FAR more coverage than GSM. by mikelieman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "In those areas the new handset is just a paperweight, while a car breakdown can be a death sentence if help can't be called"

      DUDE!, Check It!

      http://www.acrelectronics.com/microfix/microfix.htm

      And Remember Kids: "The MicrOFix(TM) is a satellite signaling device of last resort, for use when all other means of self rescue have been exhausted, where the situation is grave and imminent loss of life, limb, eyesight, or valuable property will occur without assistance."

      --
      Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
    5. Re:AMPS has FAR more coverage than GSM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's just AT&T. They are CHEAP AND SLOW AS HELL on installing upgrades. Pre-merger AT&T Wireless was a bit slow to upgrade; pre-merger Cingular was VERY slow to roll out upgrades; post-merger Cingular was very slow to finish upgrading, and changing the name to AT&T didn't change that. Like you say, they still had TDMA cell sites as of a few months ago. In a few cases they simply shut sites off, reducing coverage. Verizon Wireless were 100% 1X CDMA by 2003, and US Cellular had all CDMA by 2004. Alltel was mostly CDMA by 2004 and finished up the rest several years ago. Dobson finished GSM upgrades years ago, Rural Cellular finished upgrades years ago (to CDMA in some markets, GSM in others -- VZW bought them.)

                AMPS does have far more coverage tham GSM, but not a lot more than CDMA. I live in Iowa.. I've driven out to eastern Pennsylvania, I think there were 2 1 mile stretches in eastern Indiana (on I74) without digital service (the analog wasn't strong enough to be usable either though). It looks like these have been filled in maybe. Driving down to Texas, I had a CDMA-only phone and was concerned I'd hit analog areas -- I didn't lose service once the whole way. There's mainly little pockets without CDMA but with analog rather than huge swaths -- a few areas have AMPS+TDMA+GSM only due to "the only" or "both" providers for the area being GSM. (Or in the case of eastern kentucky, one provider was AMPS+TDMA only -- they didn't even have plans for a CDMA *OR* GSM upgrade until VZW bought them about 6 months ago.) VZW has been agressively buying up providers that cover these gaps so they can further fill out CDMA coverage.

    6. Re:AMPS has FAR more coverage than GSM. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2, Informative

      The FCC didn't say "turn it off by ...". They said "You don't have to keep it on after ..."

      The advantage of the digital alternatives is that they can get many more calls into a given swath of spectrum. That's a really big deal in a city (especially one where carving the cells up finer is no longer an option due to regulatory resistance to installing more cell sites). Thus the urban service providers want to make the switch.

      In the deep-boonies having more calls on a cell is not an issue - while having a single cell cover a wider service area due to the higher power limit on AMPS transmission is a benefit.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    7. Re:AMPS has FAR more coverage than GSM. by lostguru · · Score: 1

      ewwwwwww

      get a license and go with ham radio, best coverage of anything, and if you have an autopatch setup you can even make phone calls

      --
      Jayne: "These are stone killers, little man. They ain't cuddly like me."
      98% of America's teens drink alcohol, smok
    8. Re:AMPS has FAR more coverage than GSM. by Jimithing+DMB · · Score: 1

      Dude, that's just an EPIRB. It doesn't seem to say marine anywhere so I guess it's like half the price.

    9. Re:AMPS has FAR more coverage than GSM. by Dan100 · · Score: 1

      But I do a lot of traveling and vacationing in AMPS-only country - nearby that site and otherwise. In those areas the new handset is just a paperweight, while a car breakdown can be a death sentence if help can't be called.

      If you are travelling in areas where reduced mobility could have serious consequences, you should be carrying a 406 MHz SARSAT-COSPAS Personal Locator Beacon, not a cell. These devices, when activated, send a distress signal with your GPS location digitally encoded to a fleet of LEO satellites. These then relay your signal to a Local User Terminal at the appropriate emergency services who can affect rescue. Even if the signal is too weak for the GPS data to be read, the satellites can perform Doppler ranging on you signal to get a rough (few kilometers) position fix.

      Relying on a cell, on any type of network, is likely to be a death sentence. Phones have small batteries and weak transmitters -- if you can't get a signal, or your battery dies, you're toast. The batteries in PLBs can be stored for months (though of course they should be tested regularly!) and can transmit for weeks.

    10. Re:AMPS has FAR more coverage than GSM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I would still get a actual marinized EPIRB, there is nothing illegal about using an EPIRB on land (though the dispatching might go a bit odd, via the coastguard). The main benefit is that it would also be useful when hiking/kayaking, where this one might not survive.

    11. Re:AMPS has FAR more coverage than GSM. by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      How long ago was this? I just went to T-mob in August, and have been fairly impressed with the coverage I get. It's certainly better than my wife's Sprint coverage, at least in the rural areas we've traveled through. (We have different carriers because I barely use the phone, so I bought a prepaid.)

    12. Re:AMPS has FAR more coverage than GSM. by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      I'm a huge fan of T-Mobile (have had them since when they were Voicestream and were bought up). My favorite part is that my calls in Puerto Rico are free, as well as from the US Virgin Islands (I visit there frequently for work). I hope you dig them, they've been excellent to me and the little woman.

    13. Re:AMPS has FAR more coverage than GSM. by demonlapin · · Score: 1
      Sprint does the same in PR and USVI; I suspect all the major carriers do. Sprint and VZW actually have a small advantage, in that you can't accidentally pick up GSM signals from the BVI's and get stuck with roaming charges.

      And having maneuvered this far off topic, what do you recommend doing in the VI? Wife and I spent a week at Pavilions and Pools on the east end of St Thomas, buying groceries at Red Hook and spending the evenings with each other. We weren't really looking for night life, but I'm always open to good ideas.

    14. Re:AMPS has FAR more coverage than GSM. by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      I'm not a big nightlife guy, so I spend most of my time either snorkeling/scuba diving around the underwater preserves. Try to get out and hike a bit if you have time. Most of the islands are wildlife preserves, so it's all pristine. If you need more info, you can email me at geoconflux at yahoo dot com.

  13. Great! by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

    Finally Americans will be able to get away from brick-sized analogue mobiles with a talk time of 20 minutes.

    In all seriousness, has any mobile manufacturer made an analogue phone in the last ten years?

    1. Re:Great! by AaronW · · Score: 1

      Three years ago I got a LG VX6100 tri-mode phone. I have had places where the only signal I can get is analog and it came in handy. Due to the lack of bluetooth and the fact that analog is going away I finally upgraded to a new phone, but there were times where I could make calls whereas nobody else could.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    2. Re:Great! by pergamon · · Score: 1

      Yes, indeed they have. I purposely chose my previous phone because it (a) was on VZW, (b) had Bluetooth, (c) had analog in addition to digital. The V710 was made in the 2004-2005 range.

    3. Re:Great! by RoboRay · · Score: 1

      There are many places (not just out in the boonies but also inside large buildings, for example) where my year-old tri-mode phone drops to analog because the digital signal is just too weak.

      Shutting down the analog network without actually replacing it first with an equally-capable digital system is insane.

  14. hmmmm by FireBreath · · Score: 1

    About time... Rogers up in Canada shut down it's TDMA network about half a year ago.

  15. Ahh the memories! by teddaman · · Score: 1

    I remember the old GRE PRO-2006's from Radio Shack. All you had to do was clip a diode to enable those forbidden frequencies. Many a night I sat up after the bars closed (2AM here in Tallahassee) and swept 871-896 MHz. You never knew what you would come across. People screwing around on their spouses, lawmakers swapping votes for sex or ordering hookers, or the owner of a popular bar with a very recognizable voice due to his radio ads buying coke. Those were the days!

    1. Re:Ahh the memories! by oil · · Score: 1

      I remember those days man. That was pure-d qualita entertainment.

  16. I submit a lot, that's how. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Those 1-3 submissions come from 5-6 submissions per day as you can see in the Firehose. Sometimes, you'll have some I submitted yesterday mixed with those submitted today as you can see right now. I submitted the earlier story about printers yesterday, but this one was submitted this afternoon. Again, you can see all this on the Firehose, which date stamps them when I submit them.

    Although someone replied to you that I was Zonk's sock puppet, I have no link to any of the Slashdot editors as far as I know. Heck, I'm not even in the top 10 submitters or all that close. As you can see, there are many who have even less of a life than I do (or something) and have hundreds of submissions. New York County Lawyer keeps flirting with the #10 spot, and I think you guys know how much he posts.

    As for my motive, well, it's mostly just for fun while I slack off from my work as a sysadmin for a place that makes windows (the glass kind, not the Microsoft kind). Sure, I have an agenda to push, but I'm just some guy who fits entirely too many Slashdot stereotypes, which is why I link to the EFF donate page, or to that "I Wouldn't Steal" page the EU folks made. I should probably link to the US Pirate Party more often, too.

    I use an unregistered account for a number of reasons. One is that I'm doing this from work. Another is that anyone who believes as I do is free to share the ID and post stories to Slashdot.

    Unlike the others who dump as many submissions as they can, I try to cull what I think are the best stories of the day. I frequently ignore stories that later appear on Slashdot anyhow. An example from today would be how the UK ISPs put out a statement that they're against policing users. The statements are new, but the story isn't. I just covered it yesterday, so I felt it was too much of a rehash and ignored it. When I think there's something new, I try to link to the previous stories and give better coverage.

    Also, you may have noticed that I try to be diligent in marking PDF (and .DOC) files, naming unnamed 'researchers' who discover things, giving you the original story where possible (rather than some sites re-re-re-report of whatever), linking to Wordpress and similar blogs via Coral Cache (and seeding the cache by visiting the site BEFORE I send it to Slashdot). Not to mention whichever other random ideas that come up periodically when someone writes a (+5, Insightful) saying "Why the HELL didn't you do X???" I've had to rewrite more than one headline to fit in the length limits without a damn ? at the end, bite my tongue to avoid hilarious and snarky quips I would like to add as the last line, and find those damn typos that manage to sneak past me even though I spell check my submissions.

    So, that's it in a nutshell. If you don't like me, I'm sorry, but there's not much I can do about that, though I'm open to reasonable suggestions. I have no idea when I'll get too bored or busy to continue. I have no idea if people will ever take up posting in "my" name. But that's who and what I am and I'm always trying to find ways to make better submissions.

    In other words, except for the attention-grabbing name, I'm a pretty typical Slashdotter.

    - I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property

    1. Re:I submit a lot, that's how. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a pretty typical Slashdotter.

      I once knew a guy named Slashsen, do you think you might be related?

      </obscure Scandinavian joke>

    2. Re:I submit a lot, that's how. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although someone replied to you that I was Zonk's sock puppet, I have no link to any of the Slashdot editors as far as I know.
      HA HA DISREGARD THAT I SUCK COCKS

      - I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property
    3. Re:I submit a lot, that's how. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I just like to say, I've noticed that your submissions have a very high quality. I'd like to thank you for them.

    4. Re:I submit a lot, that's how. by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      I'd like to second the guy who thanked you for the submissions. I also enjoy reading them.

  17. Legacy embedded devices? by mountain-man · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Has nobody mentioned all the legacy devices that will go dark as part of this? It's not just the brick phones, but the first-gen OnStar (etc) systems, cellular backups for burler and fire alarms, even some remote telemetry systems and/or SCADA systems.

    Of course, I said "cya" to my old bag-phone 15 years ago just like everybody else, but there's probably lots of these systems that will need to be replaced.

    1. Re:Legacy embedded devices? by gotzero · · Score: 1

      I am sure this is all part of planned obsolescence. The companies making those products will be happy to sell you a pricey upgrade.

      I doubt all of the smaller carriers are going abandon analog service, since it is the only thing out there in some of rural America.

      The big players probably did this because the bandwidth was mostly wasted, and I am sure because a lot of the people with REALLY inexpensive plans were in the analog world. There were some insane deals to be had out there for analog service a few years ago.

    2. Re:Legacy embedded devices? by Plekto · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Likely true about the planned obsolescence. But with massive areas of the country no longer covered, they will surely find some other way to fill in those gaps. It's just too many people to ignore from a revenue standpoint.

      My educated guess is that they will use those frequencies to provide some sort of digital replacement service. Really poor speed or voice only), but covers a wide area.

      Yes, it's going to be painful for the first year or two, but they have to pull down the old system before they can put in the new ones.

    3. Re:Legacy embedded devices? by sizzzzlerz · · Score: 1

      Not true. We here in the SF Bay Area have overlapping coverage for the 1G AMPS, 2G TDMA Digital AMPS, 2.5G GSM and CDMA, and 3G Wideband CDMA. Not to mention the POTS wired telephone service. I'm sure thats true for other metropolitan areas as well. There is absolutely nothing technical to prevent multiple formats from operating simultaneously. In all likelihood, the providers of wireless service in any given area will maintain multiple formats as they upgrade. Afterall, they've already made the investment in the old equipment and that produces revenue as they bring the new one online.

  18. When analog is better by billstewart · · Score: 1

    A friend of mine kept analog service for a few years after everybody else had switched to digital. He liked driving around the hills, where coverage was still spotty, and while digital is better when the signal's good, if the signal's bad, analog is noisy but digital won't connect at all. It's not a universal problem, but it worked for him. These days he's got some little digital set with data functions and a camera, of course...

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  19. Long Overdue by Plekto · · Score: 1

    Just like cassette tapes, analog phones are long overdue for a proper burial. It also opens up a nice bit of the spectrum for other uses, which is always a good thing. AND, it makes phones a little bit less expensive as they no longer are required to have an analog fall-back mode(which rarely if ever worked anyways).

  20. I miss the old dual purpose analog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  21. They're nowhere near that fast... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Usually, I do this for a bit in the morning, before I have anything to do. Wired & Ars are both good sources, so yeah, I do use them a lot (maybe too much; I now try to trace the story back further unless their coverage really adds something).

    But most of my submissions take about a day to get accepted. Probably because there's no real news at times, so they take the best of the 'leftovers' they have saved up. If anything, there's a slight bias against my submissions, I'd say. The editors seem to prefer the more unique stories. Once or twice, I've even lost attribution and been bumped down to 'an anonymous submitter', but it's no big deal. Heck, once I even asked them to do it for that story if they felt it would detract from the news, but they didn't publish that story at all.

    On the whole, I'd say that they usually post the best submission they have at the time. Sometimes, they do make that decision a little early for the 'big' news, though, and you'll see plenty of better submissions in the Firehose that probably weren't there when they scheduled it to run in a few hours. They usually prefer to add an update to the bottom of the story in that case, per my observation.

    In the mean time, though, all this submitting has given me an appreciation for how hard it is to find decent news. Sometimes, there's nothing out there that's worth reporting and I don't submit very much, if anything, on those days. But there's almost always at least one or two stories, though they're just not exciting ones. I keep trying to expand the number of sites I check, but there are only so many that have anything worth reporting on.

    I tried submitting some other things like the latest malware trends, but Slashdot only rarely posts things about new virus trends or the latest patches and exploits, so I mostly don't bother. Articles on space get accepted pretty often, but there aren't that many big or interesting discoveries, though we've had a few good ones lately (like that 'spider' crater). I probably do best in law, though, because I've learned a number of legal terms via Groklaw and I try to explain them properly in my submission. But big stories from Groklaw are submitted fast, so I'm usually too late to get them these days. Rob Weir's blog has good insight on OOXML most of the time, but honestly, not all of the posts are that newsworthy.

    In other words, appreciate it. It's damn hard to find good stories, especially considering that I'm working for free here. I mean, if it wasn't for the crazy name I used, no one would notice :-) I think that this is why the editors take the submissions they do: as you can see from the Firehose, there really ISN'T that much in there that's good, and I spend time trying to make my submissions worthwhile, though it isn't always perfect.

    Oh, and BTW, I *do* have a real account. It's not Zonk or any other editor. It's old, but not a very low UID at all, though I do sometimes get mod points. I have a bunch of friends, several freaks and foes as well as excellent karma and approximately a dozen accepted submissions. So that explains why I 'just appeared' out of nowhere submitting lots of stories: I already knew what I was doing when I took up the cause, I just hadn't bothered to dig up so many beforehand. I almost wish that I used it from work at times. Being behind a censor/proxy that even intercepts SSL connections with a bogus cert, the timeout on posting comments anonymously is REALLY annoying at times, so I have to choose them carefully. And sometimes I spend parts of the hour or more I might have to wait revising what I was going to say.

    Anyhow, I'm more surprised no one has noticed that other guy, the user 'pickens' who submits as "Ponca City, We Love You" all the time. It's him that I wonder about :-)

  22. It is a big deal because... by jjrff · · Score: 1

    ... the midget who operates the switch will be out of a job.

  23. I doubt this will affect most AMPS-only sites by punka · · Score: 2, Insightful

    To everyone wondering about their favorite AMPS-only areas, I highly doubt those towers will be deactivated.

    The whole purpose of this deactivation is so that the cell phone companies can make MORE money, not less! One person using AMPS in a metropolitan area ties up several digital lines. But until monday, none of those AMPS towers could be turned off (per this FCC mandate)!

    Thus, I suspect that the only AMPS towers going offline come Monday are those that were costing them money (the ones in areas that already have digital coverage). Shutting down towers in AMPS-only areas cuts off paying customers, and erodes a nearly ubiquitous and cost-effective last-mile coverage tool.

    As a result, those who live in the City -> roam in a Rural area won't be affected (as long as you have a phone with both radios). The ones who will be affected MOST are those who live in Rural -> roam to the City. If their rural AMPS phones don't support both AMPS & the current digital standards, they will not get any reception in that city area.

    Disclaimer: IANACPCS (I Am Not A Cell Phone Company Spokesperson)

  24. There is one big advantage to an analog phone by xkr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    AT&T was so determined to get me off their old network, they finally made me an offer for a plan that was half the price of their cheapest new plan - including a 2-year contract and a free phone. Then, yesterday, I upgraded one of my kids from "pay as you go," to a copy of my dirt-cheap digital plan. They didn't want to do it, but finally agreed. So you see -- analog can be cheaper !

    --
    I will create a sig when innovation restarts in the U.S.
    1. Re:There is one big advantage to an analog phone by Dan541 · · Score: 3, Funny

      "There is one big advantage to an analog phone"

      Yes you wont be mugged for your phone!

      ~Dan

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
  25. Easier to Wiretap by kidcharles · · Score: 4, Interesting

    AT&T and Verizon, huh? They probably just want to phase out analog because it is easier to store digital phone calls to sell to the government.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une sig.
    1. Re:Easier to Wiretap by saikou · · Score: 1

      And what exactly makes you think that "Analog" tower is not connected to the T1 with digital converter that works exactly the same regardless of which radio tract your call came through? Digital handling has been around for a loooong time, with all long-distance being handled like that as well.
      Plus that little box in your neighborhood that has "Don't dig, fiber network" pole next to it also handles all your calls in digital format. So, this argument is a complete BS.
      There were two big reasons for maintaining Analog connectivity -- FCC mandate and hope for cross-over roaming charges. Same towers almost always have digital equipment on them, GSM or CDMA, depending on rural carrier's preference.

    2. Re:Easier to Wiretap by kidcharles · · Score: 1

      You are completely right on all counts, I don't really believe what I said. It was just a sarcastic dig at the telecoms.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas une sig.
    3. Re:Easier to Wiretap by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      No, analogue is much easier to tap. When GSM was introduced here, that was one of the selling points. You can build a device that will listen in on an analogue call very cheaply, but GSM does frequency hopping so fast you need much better equipment to intercept (of course, past the tower, they are equally easy to intercept). Oh, and with a digital signal, you can relatively easily add end-to-end encryption. My father's mobile had an experimental chip in it around ten years ago that would encrypt phone calls. I've not seen them available for general use, but I wouldn't be surprised if they are standard for government phones now.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  26. Justification for shutdown by PPH · · Score: 1

    I always suspected that AMPS/TDMA were being phased out for phone service due to the inability of the operators to impement E911 location servcices on it.

    You would think that the FCC would allow the cellular companies to hold a few channels open for analog. Even if they don't support E911, an emergency call where the caller has to give an address is still better than no call at all. But, if they leave the channels open, they could become quite valuable to a certain set of users that don't want their position to be tracked.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Justification for shutdown by fingusernames · · Score: 1

      That TDMA thing always irks me. Current GSM is TDMA, you know (though next generation will be CDMA). It means Time Division Multiple Access, essentially packetizing data. So while some forms of TDMA may be obsolete, the world's most popular mobile phone system also is a form of TDMA.

      Larry

    2. Re:Justification for shutdown by kriston · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, they intended to replace TDMA as soon as GSM came along. TDMA was evolutionary step towards GSM. W-CDMA is based on GSM under the covers, too.
      It's all about how many users they can fit into the channels they are licensed.
      CDMA is the undisputed ruler of bandwidth but call audio quality suffers in congested cells, though at least CDMA users are almost guaranteed the ability to complete a call even if you cannot hear the called party clearly.
      GSM is always good quality at the expense of the bandwidth used per user.
      GSM errs on the side of user call quality.
      CDMA errs on the side of user call completion rate.
      TDMA offers none of this (neither does AMPS for that matter).

      --

      Kriston

    3. Re:Justification for shutdown by anothy · · Score: 1
      how is this "insightful"?

      TDMA was evolutionary step towards GSM.
      only retroactively. TDMA (really D-AMPS) was a direct competitor to GSM (which was introduced only a year or so later). GSM (up through some of the 3G technologies) happens to be based on TDMA technology, so D-AMPS (also based on TDMA technology) -> GSM was an easier upgrade path in most ways than D-AMPS -> CDMA. it was certainly not envisioned as an upgrade path when created.

      W-CDMA is based on GSM under the covers, too.
      exactly backwards. GSM 4G (and some 3G) services will be based on Wideband CDMA, because the lower-level tech in CDMA has always been better than that in D-AMPS/TDMA. the GSM folks recognized this (after the fact, but still) and have incorporated those portions of the air interface.

      CDMA is the undisputed ruler of bandwidth but call audio quality suffers in congested cells, though at least CDMA users are almost guaranteed the ability to complete a call even if you cannot hear the called party clearly.
      what? this implies some form of scaling back of the audio bandwidth allocated to each mobile, which i've never heard of. i think you're just making it up. please cite.

      GSM is always good quality at the expense of the bandwidth used per user.
      again, cite. same for the next few. there are certainly differences (GSM, like D-AMPS/TDMA, sucks for call handoff), but i think you've made these up.

      TDMA offers none of this
      in terms of the air interface characteristics, GSM basically is TDMA (although with somewhat different propagation characteristics from operating in different frequency bands). GSM doesn't improve significantly on the TDMA air interface, it improves in pretty much everything above that layer.

      (neither does AMPS for that matter).
      AMPS is a very different set of tradeoffs. there you actually do see the sort of call completion vs. call quality tradeoff you claim above (with AMPS doing well on call completion at the expense of frequently crappy quality). AMPS also degrades gracefully, so your quality has a nice curve from clear to nil, whereas the digital technologies all have much steeper (and earlier) falloffs.
      --

      i speak for myself and those who like what i say.
    4. Re:Justification for shutdown by Luyseyal · · Score: 1

      Just wanted to say I loved my old Ericsson and Nokia TDMA phones (don't remember the model numbers anymore...). The quality was top notch and much better than when I switched to GSM.

      I can't tell you how many people thought I was calling on my damn landline. Then again, maybe they all had friends with Sprint... <shudder>

      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
  27. Sunset not due to FCC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The network is being shut down because the carriers begged the FCC to allow them to do it. Not because the FCC made them do it.

  28. Monday? Closed?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    That rickety-ass analog shutting down entire days of the week now. wtf.

    1. Re:Monday? Closed?!? by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1

      Hey. I for one am enjoying my three-day weekend.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
  29. Analog cell phones by GWBasic · · Score: 1

    In the mid-90s, my parents picked up a cheap analog Motorolla. It sounded so good, no one could tell that it was a cell phone. When I used a StarTac in places with analog-only coverage, I also would get much better sound quality. I've never heard a digital phone come close to its quality.

    1. Re:Analog cell phones by azrider · · Score: 1

      In the mid-90s, my parents picked up a cheap analog Motorolla. It sounded so good, no one could tell that it was a cell phone.
      That's because even the "cheap" Motorola's were still commercial quality radios. The new phones are indeed cheap (as in trash, not as in low cost). Give me a StarTac (or for that matter a MoCom or MoTrac) over most of what you will find today. There is a reason that Sabres and Astros still command high prices on the secondary market.
      --
      And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
      John 8:32(King James Version)
  30. I wish people would do that, actually. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's one of the intentional features of the name, actually. I don't think much of anyone has taken me up on the offer, though :-)

    Okay, there is that one guy down there who posted the link to the Bash.org joke where the guy leaves his IRC session unattended saying to ignore anything typed into it for a while because it'll be his brother. After which, his brother types "HAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCK!"

    But I don't think that counts...

  31. So long... by Bluewraith · · Score: 0

    ... and thanks for all the fish! Perhaps now we can use the freed bandwidth for more usefull things such as a free public WiFi.

  32. Yes by pavon · · Score: 1

    Up till 3 months ago, every phone I owned was Tri-Mode (AMPS, 800 CDMA, 1900 CDMA). It used digital service in town, but in very rural areas, and when you go camping, you are far more likely to pick up an analog signal than anything else. So I made sure to get a tri-mode phone to carry with me for emergencies. I finally switched to GSM when I got tired of paying $45 for Verizon service when I only use about 100 minutes a month. At that point I knew they were going to be shutting down the analog service within the year anyway, so there wasn't much reason for me to stay.

  33. Slashdot Icon by pavon · · Score: 1

    So now that AMPS is shutting down does this mean that slashdot will have to upgrade its cellphone icon to GSM? I mean it's nice to have a device that can double as a weapon, but you'll still have your Model M.

  34. I agree, but by caveat · · Score: 1

    Digital handles poor signal better.

    When I lived in CT I had a triband Motorola; at home I had a full six bars of analog coverage and it was amazing, the best quality of any phone I've ever used, corded, cordless, wireless, you name it.

    But when I drove out to the styx and dropped to one or two bars of analog, oh lordy. It was TERRIBLE - constant static, deafening "power station" noises blasting at random, buzzing clicking popping whistling screeching, you name it. My current phone and location I have 0-1 bar depending on the weather and lunar alignment, it does drop every so often, and sometimes gets a little choppy, but other than that it's more than usable.

    Like Mae West, when analog is good it's very good...and unlike her, when it's bad it's very bad ;)

    --

    Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
  35. Re:Don't toss them in the trash - send to 20500 by base3 · · Score: 1

    The point will be made when they throw the sender in GTMO for mailing a "suspicious electronic device" to the White House.

    --
    One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
  36. Does this mean that I just won't get a signal? by GoldMace · · Score: 1

    There are a lot of places where I currently only get an analog signal. Does this mean that mean that I just won't be able to use my cell phone at all in these areas? I'm not talking rural areas, there are several major metropolitan areas where all I get is analog. I use Alltel, but I think I've been using someone else's network in these places.

  37. Can you hear me now? You could hear me then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    At its funeral, I need to finally chime in.

    I was in the cell phone industry in the U.S. in the late 1980s. The systems were analog, and most phones were installed in vehicles and were relatively expensive. The cheapest phones were several hundred dollars and went up to a few grand for the smallest handheld phones. I also recall that roaming rates were as high as $.90 per minute in certain cities. For obvious economic reasons, most people did not have cellular phones.

    At the beginning of the TDMA era, I was asked to beta-test the new-fangled digital phones by giving them away to our best customers. My staff installed many of them for our customers...who would turn down such a gift when even the brochure purported 'CD quality'? It wasn't long though before the angry calls came in: hands down, they hated them; most demanding that I reinstall their old equipment. 'It sounds like I'm in a tunnel; it's very echoy.' 'The call quality isn't clear.' 'It sounds like the caller has hung up on me.' Sound familiar? Well I told the customers what my boss told me to say 'they're testing them now, upgrades will come and tuning will occur'.

    Time passed... Today, I don't see that digital phones have gotten any better, even 20 years later. For starters, the switch to digital was, in part (if not mostly), to fit more people on the same # of frequency channels. For initial TDMA, three digital calls could be crammed onto one analog voice channel (we even watched it as it occurred on our monitoring spectrum analyzers). That extra capacitiy means more money for the cellular carrier, of course. Now the downside, as you bandwidth banditos already know, is that there has to be a tradeoff; and I'm telling you that the tradeoff was in voice/call quality. The quarter-second processing delay during conversations make you feel like you're talking to a news correspondent in the Mideast. And the sampling rate is so poor, that voices are mere metallic shadows of their original composition. Ever try to listen to someone playing music for you over a cell phone? If not, try it, you'll see what I'm talking about.

    So why am I bringing all of this up now? It dawned on me once as to why people just accept such crappy call quality today: they don't know any better. If people bought their first cell phone 15 years ago or more recently, then they probably did not use an analog phone for years so as to compare it to its digital counterparts. Further, if someone HAD an analog phone 20 years ago, a comparison of today's cellular tower coverage/build-out to that of decades ago is also inaccurate, be the phone analog or digital. Heck, I wouldn't know any better either if I hadn't "been there" during the transitional phase, with access to all kinds of these (expensive) phones, etc.

    I guess that's why I bring this up now, the ignorance of this is about to be made permanent, with the carriers cashing in all the while. My mom just gave up her bag(!) phone which I got for her decades ago. On its last active day its calls were still indistinguishable from landline calls. Maybe once in a while there would be some static, but the calls would continue through it. It's a shame that the analog systems will not.

    As I am still connected the cellular industry, I must post anonymously.

  38. Say what you will... by LaRoach · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...about "crappy" analog, but my cell service under analog was much clearer than it ever was under digital. Nasty compression artifacts, warbled sound and crappy coverage are the norm now. When I had analog (many moons ago) most people couldn't even tell I was on a cell phone.

  39. Traffic lights will also lose connectivity by kriston · · Score: 3, Informative

    This also means that some traffic lights will lose connectivity.
    The CPDP data protocol, used by many embedded system modems like those in traffic control will also be shut down since it is part of the AMPS network.

    Good thing it's Presidents' Day on Monday!

    --

    Kriston

    1. Re:Traffic lights will also lose connectivity by SaturnNiGHTS · · Score: 2, Insightful

      that's "CDPD", or "Cellular Digital Packet Data". obligatory link, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_digital_packet_data

      cdpd had great bandwidth for its time, and solid 14.4k on a cdpd capable handset [such as the mitsubishi t250]. unfortunately, att pocketnet service has been phased out many years ago...

      --
      Sig: Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    2. Re:Traffic lights will also lose connectivity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most lights don't go off when they lose signal, they default to a really poor timing diagram.

  40. Looks like someone is plugging that analog hole by LuxMaker · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Fast and hard!

    --
    I regret that I only have one mod point to give per post.
  41. Not just voice, AMPS data devices are DOA too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At work, we have an AMPS telemetry device on our backup power generator. When it turns on, it uses the AMPS connection to notify everyone via an email. Security systems often work the same way.

    It's low bandwidth and cheap and it works.

    But not after Monday.

  42. Wow you guys are slow by conufsed · · Score: 1

    Most of the AMPS network was shutdown in Australia at the end of 1999, with the exception of a few rural areas where GSM coverage wasn't equivalent, and since time as Telstra created a CDMA network, the Australian government funded some of the CDMA towers to cover these areas.

    Now we are going the same again in rural areas where Telstra has announced they are shutting down the CDMA network and get everybody on to their HSDPA network (otherwise known as next g), but coverage isn't as good yet, and for once we have the governement actually looking after users side and said Telstra has to keep the CDMA networking running for now

  43. RIP Oki 900 by dave562 · · Score: 1

    Although it has been impossible to get valid ESNs for the thing since the late 1990s, I'm going to miss my Oki and the old days of A/B channel analog. It isn't nearly as efficient as digital in terms of users per cell site, but I swear the voice quality was a whole lot better once you actually got a connection.... even if it took 15+ seconds to hear the first ring as the sites handed you off to BFE because all of the closest sites were already overloaded.

  44. think of the less fortunate... by SaturnNiGHTS · · Score: 2, Interesting

    so..exactly what does this mean for all of those emergency 911 handsets that have been given out to beaten spouses, people worried about their safety, grandmas driving around with an old handset, etc? all of those people are left in the dark, and worse, with a false sense of security that their handset will still contact emergency services.

    --
    Sig: Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
  45. I run for office a lot, that's how. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now all you need to be after all that is a poster who researches the material completely before posting replies. Gives plenty of background material and never uses a fallacy. And above all tries to not follow the herd. Then clone yourself because that's the only way slashdot will reverse the downward spiral it's been in since Taco sold the site.

  46. Say what you will...Analog crashes better. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    "When I had analog (many moons ago) most people couldn't even tell I was on a cell phone."

    Except when you yelled "I'm gonna crash!!".

  47. Re:Don't toss them in the trash - send to 20500 by youthoftoday · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    oh right. But you still have to be Asian or Arabic to qualify for guantanamo, right?

    --
    -1 not first post
  48. 911/donated cell phones/abused women by dpbsmith · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What about the thousands of people--often abused women in dangerous situations--who have been given donated cell phones through numerous charitable organizations so that they can dial 911 in an emergency?

    Have they been warned about the upcoming transition? Are the cell phone companies going to give them new digital phones?

    1. Re:911/donated cell phones/abused women by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Have they been warned about the upcoming transition? Are the cell phone companies going to give them new digital phones?

      Probably not, since they're not obligated to. If you feel strongly about it, donate a couple of cheap digital phones to the cause.

    2. Re:911/donated cell phones/abused women by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the thousands of people--often abused women in dangerous situations--who have been given donated cell phones through numerous charitable organizations so that they can dial 911 in an emergency?

      Have they been warned about the upcoming transition? Are the cell phone companies going to give them new digital phones? Yes, I told the three of them yesterday.
  49. Re:Don't toss them in the trash - send to 20500 by base3 · · Score: 1

    I'm not so sure about that--I think Democrats qualify, too.

    --
    One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
  50. If you're that worried about emergencies... by tivoKlr · · Score: 1

    For a lot less money, you can invest in a piece of technology I just bought for snowmobiling, called a "SPOT", it's a pager sized device that sends ok, I need help, and 911 type messages to whomever you designate (except for the 911 message, that's handled by the company behind SPOT).

    SPOT uses the globalstar satellite network and has a built in GPS receiver, so it sends coordinates with every message, even the OK messages you can send to your friends and family.

    http://www.findmespot.com/

    I'd say this is perfect for RV'ers or anyone else that is worried about that emergency breakdown or worse, the MI or significant trauma out in the middle of nowhere.

    Best part, the whole thing is browser configurable.

    I don't work for SPOT, I don't sell SPOT, I just have one and feel safer. I think it could allay the fears of many people living in the sticks using analog cellular (until Tuesday) as it is a way to communicate with your loved ones and to request help that isn't tethered to ANYBODY's analog or digital network.

    --
    Ocean is land, covered with water.
  51. Re:Can you hear me now? You could hear me then... by tivoKlr · · Score: 1

    I agree with all of your statements, the point I'd like to bring up is that given the ridiculous poliferation of cellphone ownership and usage (to the point of elimination of land lines) it seems that somewhere, something would have to give and it definitely is in voice quality/sample rate/etc. due to how many calls are packed into the same (relative) amount of bandwidth we had for analog calls 20 years ago. I still get busy signals where I live, mostly when our area is inundated by vacationers using up all our cellular capacity, and forget about trying to use EDGE after the ski area closes for the afternoon, all the road warriors that are "on vacation" are busting ass in their hotel rooms working...

    I remember my bag phone, I thought it was pretty sweet, simply because it worked, but boy I was happy to switch to a Motorola flip phone, it was at least 2" thick and had battery life that was measured in minutes...but it was an improvement over the bag phone at least for weight purposes.

    Jeff

    --
    Ocean is land, covered with water.
  52. Thanks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're welcome.

    It's hard, though. No matter how hard you try, it's so easy to miss something and then there are long threads about how on earth you could possibly have missed X and the story is totally wrong. The worst, though, is that sometimes it *isn't* wrong, the person has just misread something...

    But that's pretty much Slashdot. You can't believe everything that's modded +5 :-)

  53. Shouldn't they warn customers? by Aidtopia · · Score: 1

    Effectively, I'm losing coverage. The article says Verizon has been warning customers, but this is the first I've heard of this. Sure, my phone does digital, but never from home. Only the analog network reaches me here. And I don't live in a rural area. I'm in the hills just east of San Francisco Bay. Coverage here sucks.