A more rational approach -- how I would like to change the cell phone industry.

On Jul 1, 7:24 am, shawn.cormi...@gmail.com wrote in
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
:

> how would u like to change the cell phone industry?

Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
whatever practical radio frequencies available.

Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and
start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and
a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz. In addition, the following must
also apply:

1. In its uncompressed form, the audio must have a bit-resolution of
at least 16-bit

2. The sample-rate of the compressed and the uncompressed version of
the audio must be the same.

Radium <(E-Mail Removed)> hath wroth:

>On Jul 1, 7:24 am, shawn.cormi...@gmail.com wrote in
>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
>> how would u like to change the cell phone industry?

>Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
>whatever practical radio frequencies available.

Why bother? Analog cell phones are going away on Valentine's Day
2008.
<http://dialzero.blogspot.com/2007/06/analog-cellphone-service-to-end-after.html>
I won't be sending you a valentine card. You're not my type.
Are you also working on whale oil products and sealing wax?

>Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and
>start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and
>a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz.

Oh, you want music over your cell phone? Of course that means fewer
users per MHz. Very roughly, the current 8Kbits/sec encoding rate,
compared to your 44Kbit/sec, will only handle about 1/5th the number
of users. So, your cell phone bill goes up about 5 times. Of course
you don't mind because you'll have hi-fi oozing out of your phone. You
might want to research variable rate codecs, such as EVRC.

>1. In its uncompressed form, the audio must have a bit-resolution of
>at least 16-bit

The encoding resolution is not changed by compression. If you encode
something with 16 bit resolution, and compress it, you still have 16
bit data coming out. It's the data rate or thruput that changes with
compression.

>2. The sample-rate of the compressed and the uncompressed version of
>the audio must be the same.

Not possible. If the rate in and rate out are identical, then there's
no compression happening.

At least you're consistent. You got everything wrong, again.

--
Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Jeff,

He typed the message on his Commodore 64 with an Atari floppy drive!



Jeff Liebermann <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Radium <(E-Mail Removed)> hath wroth:
>
> >On Jul 1, 7:24 am, shawn.cormi...@gmail.com wrote in
> >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...696d6abf90c8ed
> >13?hl=en&
> >> how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>
> >Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
> >whatever practical radio frequencies available.
>
> Why bother? Analog cell phones are going away on Valentine's Day
> 2008.
> <http://dialzero.blogspot.com/2007/06...ice-to-end-aft
> er.html> I won't be sending you a valentine card. You're not my type.
> Are you also working on whale oil products and sealing wax?
>
> >Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and
> >start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and
> >a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz.
>
> Oh, you want music over your cell phone? Of course that means fewer
> users per MHz. Very roughly, the current 8Kbits/sec encoding rate,
> compared to your 44Kbit/sec, will only handle about 1/5th the number
> of users. So, your cell phone bill goes up about 5 times. Of course
> you don't mind because you'll have hi-fi oozing out of your phone. You
> might want to research variable rate codecs, such as EVRC.
>
> >1. In its uncompressed form, the audio must have a bit-resolution of
> >at least 16-bit
>
> The encoding resolution is not changed by compression. If you encode
> something with 16 bit resolution, and compress it, you still have 16
> bit data coming out. It's the data rate or thruput that changes with
> compression.
>
> >2. The sample-rate of the compressed and the uncompressed version of
> >the audio must be the same.
>
> Not possible. If the rate in and rate out are identical, then there's
> no compression happening.
>
> At least you're consistent. You got everything wrong, again.

--
-

Radium wrote:
> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, shawn.cormi...@gmail.com wrote in
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
> :
>
>> how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>
> Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
> whatever practical radio frequencies available.
>
> Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and
> start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and
> a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz. In addition, the following must
> also apply:
>
> 1. In its uncompressed form, the audio must have a bit-resolution of
> at least 16-bit
>
> 2. The sample-rate of the compressed and the uncompressed version of
> the audio must be the same.
>
Darn:
I was just getting used to your purposed long-wave cell phone.
The approximately mile long antennas would drastically cut down on
people trying to drive and talk at the same time, just think how many
lives that could be saved.
Oh well, I just wait for it to appear along with my Matel Hover board
and "Mr Fusion" reactor for my Delorean.
Ken

Radium wrote:
> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, shawn.cormi...@gmail.com wrote in
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
> :
>
>> how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>
> Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
> whatever practical radio frequencies available.

That idea was touted and attempted over twenty years ago. Back when
cellphone handsets were better described as concrete blocks instead of bricks.

Gosh...I miss my 70 watt Micors and darn near crystal clear audio on IMTS
systems with 30 mile range. But that was thirty years ago.

"Radium" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, shawn.cormi...@gmail.com wrote in
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
> :
>
>> how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>
> Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
> whatever practical radio frequencies available.

You are still a clueless idiot

"Jeff Liebermann" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Radium <(E-Mail Removed)> hath wroth:
>
>>On Jul 1, 7:24 am, shawn.cormi...@gmail.com wrote in
>>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
>>> how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>
>>Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
>>whatever practical radio frequencies available.
>
> Why bother? Analog cell phones are going away on Valentine's Day
> 2008.
> <http://dialzero.blogspot.com/2007/06/analog-cellphone-service-to-end-after.html>
> I won't be sending you a valentine card. You're not my type.
> Are you also working on whale oil products and sealing wax?

The FCC does not require that analog service be turned off. Only that
carriers are not required to continue analog service past that date.
A good number of rural areas will probably continue to use Analog cellualr
service for a few years after that.
>
>>Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and
>>start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and
>>a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz.
>
> Oh, you want music over your cell phone? Of course that means fewer
> users per MHz. Very roughly, the current 8Kbits/sec encoding rate,
> compared to your 44Kbit/sec, will only handle about 1/5th the number
> of users. So, your cell phone bill goes up about 5 times. Of course
> you don't mind because you'll have hi-fi oozing out of your phone. You
> might want to research variable rate codecs, such as EVRC.
>
>>1. In its uncompressed form, the audio must have a bit-resolution of
>>at least 16-bit
>
> The encoding resolution is not changed by compression. If you encode
> something with 16 bit resolution, and compress it, you still have 16
> bit data coming out. It's the data rate or thruput that changes with
> compression.
>
>>2. The sample-rate of the compressed and the uncompressed version of
>>the audio must be the same.
>
> Not possible. If the rate in and rate out are identical, then there's
> no compression happening.
>
> At least you're consistent. You got everything wrong, again.
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
> 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
> Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Radium <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, shawn.cormi...@gmail.com wrote in
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
> :

> > how would u like to change the cell phone industry?

> Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
> whatever practical radio frequencies available.

As you've been told before, analog cell phones are going away.

What part of "going away" are you too blazingly stupid to understand?

> Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and
> start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and
> a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz. In addition, the following must
> also apply:

The audio bandwidth of the phone system is about 3 KHz.

You are an idiot.

<snip remaining crap>

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:45:00 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:

>In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Radium <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, shawn.cormi...@gmail.com wrote in
>> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
>> :
>
>> > how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>
>> Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
>> whatever practical radio frequencies available.
>
>As you've been told before, analog cell phones are going away.
>
>What part of "going away" are you too blazingly stupid to understand?
>
>> Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and
>> start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and
>> a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz. In addition, the following must
>> also apply:
>
>The audio bandwidth of the phone system is about 3 KHz.
>
>You are an idiot.
>
><snip remaining crap>


How about just national enforcing Californias proposed Consumer code
for cell phone companies.

On 7/19/07 7:56 AM, in article (E-Mail Removed),
"(E-Mail Removed)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:45:00 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>
>> In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Radium <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, shawn.cormi...@gmail.com wrote in
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...6abf90c8ed13?h
>>> l=en&
>>> :
>>
>>>> how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>>
>>> Analog cell phones should stop using FM and should start using AM at
>>> whatever practical radio frequencies available.
>>
>> As you've been told before, analog cell phones are going away.
>>
>> What part of "going away" are you too blazingly stupid to understand?
>>
>>> Digital cell phones should stop using the compression they use and
>>> start using monaural WMA compression with a CBR of 20 kbps or less and
>>> a sample rate of at least 44.1 KHz. In addition, the following must
>>> also apply:
>>
>> The audio bandwidth of the phone system is about 3 KHz.
>>
>> You are an idiot.
>>
>> <snip remaining crap>
>
>
> How about just national enforcing Californias proposed Consumer code
> for cell phone companies.

How about telling the state of California to go to hell?

If they want a change in National status there is a place to propose it.