[Gta04-owner] Modem crashing?
Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller
hns at goldelico.com
Fri Feb 17 10:33:26 CET 2012
Am 17.02.2012 um 10:02 schrieb Marcel Holtmann:
> Hi Radek,
>>>> Why should they implement and certify voice commands, PCM audio
>>>> interface and so on if it were a data call only modem?
>>> either they have a call state notification command and never told you
>>> about it or this modem has never been used for voice calls.
>>> If anybody would have been serious about using this in a phone type
>>> device with voice calls, then a call state notification would exist. The
>>> polling is expensive and will drain your battery. In addition doing that
>>> on USB is not really battery friendly either.
>> Btw you can detect that the call ended with arecord - the umts soundcard stops
>> sending data...
> this is all kinda nice stuff, but fundamentally we need an unsolicited
> notification that informs us about call state changes. Everything else
> is just wasted time.
Unfortunately no. We are not in a position (regarding number of units)
to define what the modem manufacturer should do for us.
And, we are not in a position to swap the modem on the fly. It is
tightly integrated into the space and signals that are available.
In the meantime, I got an answer from OPTION. They do not know about our bug
but asked which firmware version we have. It turned out that we don't have
modules with the latest one. Which comes from the fact that we
got them from a distributor and they ship by FIFO principle. I.e. we got
modules with a production date several months ago. And nobody upgrades
already produced modules. So this does not come unexpected.
The only way to change this is that we reduce the stock roundtrip time
by getting more users and buyers. Then, we get less aged devices.
While we can suspect that it could be possible to upgrade firmware, this is beyond
our current capabilities. First of all, we don't know how a firmware upgrade
can be done and if it is succesful and/or introduces other bugs that we
find out only after we have done the upgrade. Then we may have to repeat.
And our users will have different firmware versions installed and the middleware
has to cope with that situation as well. So it introduces complexity.
Not to forget the logicstics of collecting the devices and somehow applying
patches (I have not enough information how complex this is and what
it means and how much time it would consume).
Therefore, it is IMHO wasted time to think about such changes or upgrades.
It is much easier to see that we have a bug (and everyone has the same one.
Which simplifies our life) and find a workaround in our software.
And again, we are not yet in the role of an important customer of OPTION
so that we can demand anything from them (or any other modem manufacturer).
To change this, please help to make the Group tour a success! Which
also means that we should focus on a workaround first.
> Yesterday I realized that even Sierra has included such a command in
> their modems.
Yes, they may be better from a programmer's point of view, but as said
above, we have to live with the GTM601W for a while.
And, we have to separate a real bug (module does not behave as
specified) and a missing feature (we would like to see a feature that
simplifies our software but is not defined in the hard/firmware).
Radek's approaches are all addressing the bug, while Marcel votes for
new features. This does not have much to do with each other.
In the far future we may have less constraints regarding the module's
dimensions and can choose beween several.
More information about the Gta04-owner