Cellphone via headset ?

"NW_PILOT" wrote in message
...
If he signs a NDA, we will send him all the drawings. If he can make it

Sign a non disclosure agreement hahaha why would I want to do that I would
just buy one take it apart get all the part #'s values & redraw the pcb
with
minor changes & improvements being sure not to infringe on their
intlectual
property. Or use a schmetaic capture and redraw the PCB from a schematic
then make some changes thicken a trade here and there add a layer ect.

"part #'s values", "intlectual", "schmetaic", trade", "ect." (and of
course, a near-complete lack of punctuation)

Heh. Somehow, the thought of someone who writes like that "infringing on
intellectual property rights" is, um...funny.

Why are you so scared to sign an NDA? If you are seriously thinking of
competing with the guys, just have them put in writing what they already
told Colin: that they'll outsource production to you if you find their
claims to be false. If you are not seriously thinking of competing with the
guys, then so what if you sign an NDA?

Either way, there's no reason not to sign the NDA. Looks to me like what
you're really scared of is being proved wrong.

Pete

Cockpit,

For starters the headset one is more than likely a simple
analog input whereas the flightcell is fully microprocessor controlled - has
built in intercom - satelite input/output - individual gain control on all
channels - interferance rejection etc.


Which gives you exactly what in added functionality with regard to the OP's
request, namely using a cell phone in flight?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"NW_PILOT" wrote in message
...
If he signs a NDA, we will send him all the drawings. If he can make it

Sign a non disclosure agreement hahaha why would I want to do that I
would
just buy one take it apart get all the part #'s values & redraw the pcb
with
minor changes & improvements being sure not to infringe on their
intlectual
property. Or use a schmetaic capture and redraw the PCB from a
schematic
then make some changes thicken a trade here and there add a layer ect.

"part #'s values", "intlectual", "schmetaic", trade", "ect." (and of
course, a near-complete lack of punctuation)

Heh. Somehow, the thought of someone who writes like that "infringing on
intellectual property rights" is, um...funny.

Why are you so scared to sign an NDA? If you are seriously thinking of
competing with the guys, just have them put in writing what they already
told Colin: that they'll outsource production to you if you find their
claims to be false. If you are not seriously thinking of competing with
the
guys, then so what if you sign an NDA?

Either way, there's no reason not to sign the NDA. Looks to me like what
you're really scared of is being proved wrong.

Pete



Hey I admit my spelling and punctuation is bad WHO THE **** CARES it is
usenet !!!!!!!

Why would they want to have some one sign a NDA before giving them parts
info??? maybe to hide something!!!!! I am not scared of being proved wrong
that's why I responded asking for proof as in part #'s. I really have no
desire to broker out their product to small of an industry. We are trying to
justify their cost for their product's vs. other peoples products. You
proubaluly did not even care to read the entire thread just responded to
point out that my spelling and punctuation is bad.

Well this is Usenet and yes my spelling and punctuation is bad and only
loser ass-holes rub it in. Don't bother responding unless its in person!! I
am replacing the filter I had set to stop downloading your posts from the
server. I suggest you do the same with my posts unless you are so pathetic
you have to pick on people for their spelling and punctuation problems.

If you have that big of a problem be a man and deal with me in person and
don't hide behind your keyboard like a split tail, chicken ****,
fagot.........

please leave me alone and get some mental help!!!!!

"NW_PILOT" wrote in message


Hey I admit my spelling and punctuation is bad WHO THE **** CARES it
is usenet !!!!!!!

Actually, while occasional spelling/punctuation errors are easily
overlooked, constantly having to figure out where one logical thought ends
and the next one begins is very tiring and leads to people simply skipping
over posts by certain authors. You're not the first to display this habit,
but it's a fallacy to believe that you shouldn't pay attention to such
things just because "it is USENET".

Why would they want to have some one sign a NDA before giving them
parts info??? maybe to hide something!!!!!

Maybe because you've admitted to spending years reverse engineering
electronics? If they gave you the list of parts and you had a copy of their
product, wouldn't that make your job significantly easier? Also, part of
their offer was providing you with complete schematics of the product. You
should know the value of that intellectual property so why is it any
surprise they'd ask for an NDA before showing it to a professed reverse
engineer looking for a cheaper production?

We are trying to justify their cost for their product's vs.
other peoples products.

Actually, "we" are not justifying their cost. A) If the market will bear
it, more power to them. B) If their margins are too large, the market will
correct that by limiting their sales. C) If you can provide a similar
product for similar quality and lower cost, I'm sure the market would make
room for you.

Well this is Usenet and yes my spelling and punctuation is bad and
only loser ass-holes rub it in. Don't bother responding unless its in
person!! I am replacing the filter I had set to stop downloading your
posts from the server. I suggest you do the same with my posts unless
you are so pathetic you have to pick on people for their spelling and
punctuation problems.

If you have that big of a problem be a man and deal with me in person
and don't hide behind your keyboard like a split tail, chicken ****,
fagot.........

please leave me alone and get some mental help!!!!!

It's a bit ironic that your best spelling and punctuation show up in this
section of your post.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

"Newps" wrote in message
...


Cockpit Colin wrote:

If it costs them that much then they don't know what they're doing.
There are two companies making these that I'm aware of that don't come
close to this cost and several headset manufacturers that add them to
their headsets.


That was my (uninformed) opinion too - unfortunately I had to eat humble
pie
when I started asking the designers some "pointed" questions. For
starters,
as I said in a previous post, you have to compare apples with apples.
Show
me the microprocessor in the headset interface - show me the intercom -
show
me the seperate satelite phone connection - show me the individual
controls
over input / output levels for all of the above. Show me how some of the
competing products raise the mic bias level to actually make an
incompatible
headset compatible (and is fine tuned even more by adjustment of the mic
volume).

That's called overkill. I have no idea what's in my cellset. Don't
care. The cellphone volume is the same as the radio volume, you don't
realize how important that is until you use a unit that doesn't do that.
Unit works flawlessly, it rings in my headset and people on the other
end cannot tell I'm in the plane. If I didn't tell them that I was
flying they would never know it. I built a little L shaped stand that
is velcroed to my windshield so the phone antenna is always looking
outside, always get a signal and makes it easy to dial while in flight.


What cellphone and service are you using, and what sort of success have you
had in doing that (altitudes, coverage)?

Thanks,
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ

"NW_PILOT" wrote in message
...
[...]
If you have that big of a problem be a man and deal with me in person and
don't hide behind your keyboard like a split tail, chicken ****,
fagot.........

Says the person posting behind an assumed name, using a free email account,
badmouthing a company and product you know nothing about.

I'm easy to find. If you want to deal "in person", feel free. I've got
nothing to hide, and I'd welcome the opportunity to explain face to face why
it is you clearly aren't really interested in seeing whether the cost of the
product in question is reasonable or not.

I take a large shoestring and tie it to my face.

;-)

"Newps" wrote in message
...


OtisWinslow wrote:

Why do you need a connection to your headset? I just slide
the earpiece of my flip phone under the headset earpiece
and it works just fine.

Because that way it's a handsfree operation.

I have Verizon. Originally it was Commnet, that turned into Airtouch
which then turned into Verizon. I never fail to get a signal if I am at
1000 AGL, unles I am deep in the mountains. I may have to get to the
ridge tops then. I have been in the middle of north central South
Dakota and the phone has rung and it worked great, other person couldn't
tell I was in the air. Right now I use a Kyocera 7135. Replaced the LG
4400 which overall worked great. Before that I had the Motorola T720,
that was probably the worst phone I've ever had, although having nothing
to do with its in flight qualities. I have found Motorola phones to
have the worst receivers. My wife has a Kyocera 414 after just
replacing the Kyocera 3135. All work great in the plane and in fringe
areas on the ground.

John Clonts wrote:
"Newps" wrote in message
...


Cockpit Colin wrote:


If it costs them that much then they don't know what they're doing.
There are two companies making these that I'm aware of that don't come
close to this cost and several headset manufacturers that add them to
their headsets.


That was my (uninformed) opinion too - unfortunately I had to eat humble

pie

when I started asking the designers some "pointed" questions. For

starters,

as I said in a previous post, you have to compare apples with apples.

Show

me the microprocessor in the headset interface - show me the intercom -

show

me the seperate satelite phone connection - show me the individual

controls

over input / output levels for all of the above. Show me how some of the
competing products raise the mic bias level to actually make an

incompatible

headset compatible (and is fine tuned even more by adjustment of the mic
volume).

That's called overkill. I have no idea what's in my cellset. Don't
care. The cellphone volume is the same as the radio volume, you don't
realize how important that is until you use a unit that doesn't do that.
Unit works flawlessly, it rings in my headset and people on the other
end cannot tell I'm in the plane. If I didn't tell them that I was
flying they would never know it. I built a little L shaped stand that
is velcroed to my windshield so the phone antenna is always looking
outside, always get a signal and makes it easy to dial while in flight.



What cellphone and service are you using, and what sort of success have you
had in doing that (altitudes, coverage)?

Thanks,
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ

I use T-Mobile GSM, Samsung E-715 Phone works only in populated areas up to
about 1,500' to 2000' AGL then falls on its face.


"Newps" wrote in message
...
I have Verizon. Originally it was Commnet, that turned into Airtouch
which then turned into Verizon. I never fail to get a signal if I am at
1000 AGL, unles I am deep in the mountains. I may have to get to the
ridge tops then. I have been in the middle of north central South
Dakota and the phone has rung and it worked great, other person couldn't
tell I was in the air. Right now I use a Kyocera 7135. Replaced the LG
4400 which overall worked great. Before that I had the Motorola T720,
that was probably the worst phone I've ever had, although having nothing
to do with its in flight qualities. I have found Motorola phones to
have the worst receivers. My wife has a Kyocera 414 after just
replacing the Kyocera 3135. All work great in the plane and in fringe
areas on the ground.

John Clonts wrote:
"Newps" wrote in message
...


Cockpit Colin wrote:


If it costs them that much then they don't know what they're doing.
There are two companies making these that I'm aware of that don't come
close to this cost and several headset manufacturers that add them to
their headsets.


That was my (uninformed) opinion too - unfortunately I had to eat
humble

pie

when I started asking the designers some "pointed" questions. For

starters,

as I said in a previous post, you have to compare apples with apples.

Show

me the microprocessor in the headset interface - show me the intercom -

show

me the seperate satelite phone connection - show me the individual

controls

over input / output levels for all of the above. Show me how some of
the
competing products raise the mic bias level to actually make an

incompatible

headset compatible (and is fine tuned even more by adjustment of the
mic
volume).

That's called overkill. I have no idea what's in my cellset. Don't
care. The cellphone volume is the same as the radio volume, you don't
realize how important that is until you use a unit that doesn't do that.
Unit works flawlessly, it rings in my headset and people on the other
end cannot tell I'm in the plane. If I didn't tell them that I was
flying they would never know it. I built a little L shaped stand that
is velcroed to my windshield so the phone antenna is always looking
outside, always get a signal and makes it easy to dial while in flight.



What cellphone and service are you using, and what sort of success have
you
had in doing that (altitudes, coverage)?

Thanks,
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ

That was my (uninformed) opinion too - unfortunately I had to eat humble
pie
when I started asking the designers some "pointed" questions. For
starters,
as I said in a previous post, you have to compare apples with apples.
Show
me the microprocessor in the headset interface - show me the intercom -
show
me the seperate satelite phone connection - show me the individual
controls
over input / output levels for all of the above. Show me how some of the
competing products raise the mic bias level to actually make an
incompatible
headset compatible (and is fine tuned even more by adjustment of the mic
volume).

That's called overkill. I have no idea what's in my cellset. Don't
care. The cellphone volume is the same as the radio volume, you don't
realize how important that is until you use a unit that doesn't do that.
Unit works flawlessly, it rings in my headset and people on the other
end cannot tell I'm in the plane. If I didn't tell them that I was
flying they would never know it. I built a little L shaped stand that
is velcroed to my windshield so the phone antenna is always looking
outside, always get a signal and makes it easy to dial while in flight.

If it's overkill for your needs than that's not the model for you - as I've
mentioned - if all you want to do is make a call then they have a cheaper
model that does that. If you appreciate more of the bells and whistles then
the flightcell might be your cup of tea. Eg how you can cut air traffic
comms down to 1/2 volume while you're on the phone - use it as an intercom -
adjust volume levels to compensate for various things within your avionics -
rechargeable batteries - chargers - connectors/adaptors etc

I've spent many hours talking with John (the creator) about it - like some
here he too thought it would be a 1 hour project on a Saturday afternoon -
but as he got into it and through the various revisions more and more things
had to be taken into account (more "bells and whistles") - I can't say if
it's the right product for any particular person - I can say however that
it's a VERY high-quality product that covers many more areas than competing
products that I know of. I use one and can personally testify that it does
what it should.

I could go back to John and get part numbers etc to prove a point, but to be
honest, I've really got more important things to do with my day - and I have
a feeling that once some peoples minds are made up they're not going to
change them at any cost. All I can say is I thought that way once too -
until I got to know a lot of the behinds the scenes things - at which point
I had to admit that they people that built it weren't idiots and aren't
ripping people off - if folks choose to question my integrity when I say
that, then so be it - I can live with it I don't always agree with John's
marketing techniques - but that's something we continue to have healthy
debates over.

Like many things in life it's very easy to reach a conclusion when you don't
have all the information - unfortunately, it's often the wrong concludion.

Well whatever. When you're $150 more than the competition and the
public sees the units as equal you're screwed.

Well then I guess he's lucky enough that enough members of the public have
done their homework, and don't see them as equal. If you want to meet the
maker call into the Flightcell booth at the next Oshkosh - John usually
flies across to be at each one (even though his youngest daughter is
starting to wonder who he is!)