Motorola S9 and the Touch (and other general Q's)

[deegimus]

Originally Posted by Krazy4Real

I have the s9 and the touch. They work great. I use the s9 for about 1.5 to 2 hours each time I go to the gym. It never cuts out. I can leave my phone on the floor or in my pocket and it works great.

I concur. (Paid $67 on NewEgg)

DJ

[iceblue]

I can successfully conclude the issue on the 6800 is RAM. The device cuts out do to lack of available memory. I did allot of tests and under each stress test of memory being pulled the device lags.

[kellybrf]

the cutting in and out likely has nothing to do with the phone. if you actually read the s9 manual it addresses the issue, and tells you not to keep the phone in certain pockets, etc. i forget exactly what it says, but i now if i keep it in my back pocket i get/got the cutting in and out with my m610, upstage, muziq, q and touch

[iceblue]

Originally Posted by kellybrf

the cutting in and out likely has nothing to do with the phone. if you actually read the s9 manual it addresses the issue, and tells you not to keep the phone in certain pockets, etc. i forget exactly what it says, but i now if i keep it in my back pocket i get/got the cutting in and out with my m610, upstage, muziq, q and touch

Already tested all the positions, found that to be most irrelevant. Consider the entire factor that Bluetooth is a short range radio signal 802.15 therefore making position not very troublesome based upon output frequencies of device.

Class
Maximum Permitted Power

mW(dBm)
Range (approximate)

Class 1

100 mW (20 dBm)
~100 meters

Class 2

2.5 mW (4 dBm)
~10 meters

Class 3

1 mW (0 dBm)
~1 meter

In most cases the effective range of class 2 devices is extended if they connect to a class 1 transceiver, compared to pure class 2 network. This is accomplished by higher sensitivity and transmitter power of the Class 1 device. The higher transmitter power of Class 1 device allows higher power to be received by the Class 2 device. Furthermore, higher sensitivity of Class 1 device allows reception of much lower transmitted power of the Class 2 devices. Thus, allowing operation of Class 2 devices at much higher distances.

Version
Data Rate
Version 1.2
1 Mbit/s
Version 2.0 + EDR
3 Mbit/s
WiMedia Alliance

(proposed)

53 - 480 Mbit/s

[edit] Bluetooth 2.0

This version, specified on November 10, 2004, is backward-compatible with 1.1. The main enhancement is the introduction of an Enhanced Data Rate (EDR) of 3.0 Mbit/s. This has the following effects:[7]

• Three times faster transmission speed—up to 10 times in certain cases (up to 2.1 Mbit/s).
• Lower power consumption through a reduced duty cycle.
• Simplification of multi-link scenarios due to more available bandwidth.

The practical data transfer rate is 2.1 megabits per second and the basic signalling rate is about 3 megabits per second.[8] The "Bluetooth 2.0 + EDR" specification given at the Bluetooth Special Interest Group (SIG) includes EDR and there is no specification "Bluetooth 2.0" as used by many vendors. The HTC TyTN pocket PC phone, shows "Bluetooth 2.0 without EDR" on its data sheet.[9] In many cases it is not clear whether a product claiming to support "Bluetooth 2.0" actually supports the EDR higher transfer rate.

[kellybrf]

alright, you made me pull out the manual...(which netted me an extra charger i forgot about, so thanks for that!)

the quality of bluetooth transmission may also be affected by the position of your music device. should you experience distorted or choppy audio, move the position of your music device or phone to a different location until the signal improves.

and later

enhance your outdoor s9 experience by placing your music device somewhere above your waist, as indicated above

insert image of hipster in hoodie with hands in pocket, and a blue ring around his torso and chest labeled 'optimal bluetooth experience zone'

ive had luck with all of the phones i listed in my pocket, but ive also had them be choppy and as soon as i moved them to the 'optimal bt experience zone' the audio came back just fine. the mogul does indeed have a crappy bt stack, but the s9 is a particular headset as well

[iceblue]

In all honesty thats just there way of having a reply to people calling and complaining all the time. My stuff isn't working again and I paid for it. They can simply say its because the device is in the wrong position blahh blahh and avoid the truth of your device is under engineerd and or we used cheep hardware to build ours. But if you actuly look at radio frequency transmition this isn't the case and clearly points to device under engineering.

The wireless communication standard 802.15.4 was established by the Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). A few examples of wireless IEEE standards include the 802.11 standard which defines communication for wireless local area networks (LANs) and 802.16 that is used for broadband wireless communication in metropolitan area networks.

While both 802.11 and 802.16 standards are concerned with higher bandwidth Internet access applications, 802.15.4 "blue tooth" was developed with a lower data rate, simple connectivity and battery applications in mind. The 802.15.4 standard specifies that communication can occur in the 868 MHz to 868.8 MHz, the 902 MHz to 928 MHz or the 2.400 GHz to 2.4835 GHz industrial scientific and medical (ISM) bands. The 868 MHz and the 902 MHz bands offer the least amount of bandwidth under the specification with 20 kHz and 40 kHz available for each band, respectively.

So lets apply our frequency radio transmissions found in 802.15 to our signal graph.

Now we clearly found ourselves staring at frequency wave length graphs. Paired with the above knowledge we now know and understand under what density and distance our signal travels out. The greater our frequency rises the more distance achieve by tightening our wave length. But the denser our objects become the less cable the signal is to penetrate the device. By lowering the signal we broaden our wavelength making our distance drop while allowing our data signal to pass denser objects such as wood and dry wall but suffering data transfer rate. The distance supplied in our data sheet and density of the wave clearly dictates a clothing pocket or the inside of your leg to your shoulder traps location becoming a moot and arguless point.

[kellybrf]

your theories are nice and all, but in reality you can see all the complaints about choppy audio, and if you move it into their optimal zone the problem disappears.

[iceblue]

While I understand the difference from theory and real world, especially being a mechanic, I also understand the fundamental basis of the theory of operation of 802.15 concluding all available possible variances. Though the basis of the theory can not be denied the subjection of operation can conclusively be challenged. IEEE wireless technology is the basis of my conclusion and that of which I derive my personal opinion basis from. You and everyone else in the forum is completely and legitimately capable of developing there own comprehensive opinions based how they feel.

Your real world testing may also be within the scope of theory of operation and in accordance of your personal opinion including personal opinions derived from other users and other users acting upon themselves. However my physical testing and experience on this subject using a ppc-6800 with Motorola S9 show in accordance to my opinion based upon the theory of operations found from IEEE 802.15 as well.

This does not prove or disprove that one of us is right and the other is wrong. It only shows the basis of an optimized working order is purely up for subjective values. While I thank you for your input and feel it is valid as well, I would just like to share my hypotenuse of operation on this matter with the community.

I do not feel the issue is sully represented from the MS9 itself or the HTC 6800. While the operational flaw can be masked buy increasing one or more individual components in the phone or MS9 it does not address the core fundamental functionality flaw of the product. Where I believe the issue lies but not proven is within the RAM/ROM chip itself and not the operation of the MS9 or the 802.15.4 chipset.

Lack of RAM found in the ppc-6800 may cause memory stacks to occur in excessive levels causing write/retrieve times to become excessively high from the ROM to the RAM and from the RAM to the ROM making playback during seeks and or stacks choppy. While this can be masked by increasing FSB levels and core frequency’s over the chipsets entirety and pipe line or the audio cards RAM dack itself I still believe the bottle neck present is not the chipsets entirety or pipe line but within the ROM/RAM.

This is seen by reviewing the HTC 6900 showing that the 6900 and the 6800 share the same chipset pipeline “Qualcom 7500” but not the same ROM/RAM chipset. While they claim changes in the 802.15 the theory’s shown on this product dictate this would do little to nothing. Where as addressing the ROM/RAM chipset would do something but would mean very little to non educated users making marketing much more appeasable to just make a needless change to 802.15 and base the improvements on the directly relevant product.

Thank you
Chris Scott.

[kronium]

Originally Posted by kellybrf

your theories are nice and all, but in reality you can see all the complaints about choppy audio, and if you move it into their optimal zone the problem disappears.

Wrong, I've used the S9s on my mogul and had constant cutouts in various positions. Using the same pair of S9s with a Touch, and things are FANTASTIC. Not one cutout in any position on my body. Pairing is also quicker. It is not the headphones, it's the phone.

[iceblue]

Originally Posted by kronium

Wrong, I've used the S9s on my mogul and had constant cutouts in various positions. Using the same pair of S9s with a Touch, and things are FANTASTIC. Not one cutout in any position on my body. Pairing is also quicker. It is not the headphones, it's the phone.

Thank you for putting another confirmation on my theory. Makes me feel that I didn't waste tons of hours researching and testing for nothing.