Mobile Phone standby Time: Often BS IMHO Sagem MyC2-2

[Kate Fights, I Cry]

The panel on the box says 340 hours standby time
and 3 hours talk time.

You're lucky if you get 100 hours out if it on standby
though the talk time is pretty close to what they quote.

Why the huge quoted standby time and yet in practice
it's either half of that or barely so?

[Andrew M]

"Kate Fights, I Cry" <sittinginthepool@internode.on.net> wrote in message
news:428EF8D4.DAE57B97@internode.on.net...
> The panel on the box says 340 hours standby time
> and 3 hours talk time.
>
> You're lucky if you get 100 hours out if it on standby
> though the talk time is pretty close to what they quote.
>
> Why the huge quoted standby time and yet in practice
> it's either half of that or barely so?
>
>
>

The standby time is dependent on network activity. It is quoted under optimim network
conditions (ie right next to the cell, low tx power etc).

If you're between cells, far away from yr cell or in a busy area your phone will be
constantly talking to the base station. This reduces standby time from the optimum.

-Andrew M

[Heywood Jablome]

Each network carrier polls your phone every once in a while too. Telstra
polls your phone more than Vodafone, and Vodafone polls more than Optus. So
for the greatest standby time, Optus is best. But because it polls least
often, there is a greater chance of losing a call, especially when on the
move.

BTW moving on a freeway causes your phone to keep changing towers,therefore
decreasing standby time too.

Lots of factors.

[John Henderson]

"Heywood Jablome" <reply to thread> wrote:

> Each network carrier polls your phone every once in a while
> too. Telstra polls your phone more than Vodafone, and Vodafone
> polls more than Optus. So for the greatest standby time, Optus
> is best.

Agreed.

> But because it polls least often, there is a greater chance of
> losing a call, especially when on the move.

What's supposed to be the the reason for this greater
possibility of losing a call? Are you saying that the location
update procedure sometimes fails, requiring fallback to the
T3212 timer to update the HLR? And if so, where's the fault,
handset, network, or what?

> BTW moving on a freeway causes your phone to keep changing
> towers,therefore decreasing standby time too.

And what's the reason for this? If these new cells have the
same Location Area Code (LAC), I can't see how changes of
serving cell in idle mode could affect standby time. If the
LAC changes frequently, then yes (but that'd indicate a poorly
laid-out network).

John

[John Henderson]

Andrew M wrote:

> The standby time is dependent on network activity. It is
> quoted under optimim network conditions (ie right next to the
> cell, low tx power etc).

Agreed.

> If you're between cells, far away from yr cell or in a busy
> area your phone will be constantly talking to the base
> station.

If the signal's very weak or non-existent, then the phone will
be busy scanning ("listening") for something better. The
scanning activity level under these conditions can be
configured on some phones, but would usually decrease when
nothing's found in a reasonable time. Increased scanning
activity does use more power.

But there's no need for the phone to transmit unless 1) a call
is instigated, 2) it camps on a new cell with a different
Location Area Code, 3) the T3212 timer (set by the network)
expires, or 4) it isn't registered ("logged in"), and finds an
opportunity to do so.

John

[Ken Taylor]

"John Henderson" <jhenRemoveThis@talk21.com> wrote in message
news:3f9ra8F6lpn2U1@individual.net...
> Andrew M wrote:
>
> > The standby time is dependent on network activity. It is
> > quoted under optimim network conditions (ie right next to the
> > cell, low tx power etc).
>
> Agreed.
>
> > If you're between cells, far away from yr cell or in a busy
> > area your phone will be constantly talking to the base
> > station.
>
> If the signal's very weak or non-existent, then the phone will
> be busy scanning ("listening") for something better. The
> scanning activity level under these conditions can be
> configured on some phones, but would usually decrease when
> nothing's found in a reasonable time. Increased scanning
> activity does use more power.
>
> But there's no need for the phone to transmit unless 1) a call
> is instigated, 2) it camps on a new cell with a different
> Location Area Code, 3) the T3212 timer (set by the network)
> expires, or 4) it isn't registered ("logged in"), and finds an
> opportunity to do so.
>
> John

Agreed, though if you are between one or more cells and they are busy then
it's possible that your phone will be repeatedly camping onto a new cell.

Ken

[John Henderson]

Ken Taylor wrote:

> Agreed, though if you are between one or more cells and they
> are busy then it's possible that your phone will be repeatedly
> camping onto a new cell.

Camping on a cell in idle mode (no call active) is done without
regard to how busy the cell is. Only when a call is instigated
does this become inportant, and is catered for by the phone
transmitting its measurements (Network Measurement Results) at
that time so that handovers can be negotiated. NMR is done for
the neighbouring cell list (it's been monitoring the channel
list that's broadcast by the cell it's camped on).

In any case, frequent changes of camped-on cell (serving cell)
consume no additional power unless a change of LAC is involved,
and this should be rare.

John

[Ken Taylor]

"John Henderson" <jhenRemoveThis@talk21.com> wrote in message
news:3f9tuoF6omtoU1@individual.net...
> Ken Taylor wrote:
>
> > Agreed, though if you are between one or more cells and they
> > are busy then it's possible that your phone will be repeatedly
> > camping onto a new cell.
>
> Camping on a cell in idle mode (no call active) is done without
> regard to how busy the cell is. Only when a call is instigated
> does this become inportant, and is catered for by the phone
> transmitting its measurements (Network Measurement Results) at
> that time so that handovers can be negotiated. NMR is done for
> the neighbouring cell list (it's been monitoring the channel
> list that's broadcast by the cell it's camped on).
>
> In any case, frequent changes of camped-on cell (serving cell)
> consume no additional power unless a change of LAC is involved,
> and this should be rare.
>
> John

Fair enough. I thought that if the phone was re-registering it needed to
transmit ('x' amount of data), and that a full cell would push it over
elsewhere. But there's been a lot of water flow under the Wheatstone Bridge
since I looked at the principles of cell hand-over. :-)

Cheers.

Ken

[John Henderson]

Ken Taylor wrote:

> Fair enough. I thought that if the phone was re-registering it
> needed to transmit ('x' amount of data), and that a full cell
> would push it over elsewhere. But there's been a lot of water
> flow under the Wheatstone Bridge since I looked at the
> principles of cell hand-over. :-)

I know what you mean. There's just too much to know, and it's
all too easy to forget important bits. I've done it too often.

Those "primitive" GSM communications happen on a non-traffic
channel.

John