Wireless Home Phones?

I have a _very_ old Vtech wireless phone system (2-lines) that is gradually dying off handset-by-handset (I've already tried different battery paks, and that's not the problem).

Any recommendations for replacement?

What about this Dect 6 stuff? Any good, or just hoopla?? ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson
Loading thread data ...

I have a Panasonic 5.8 GHz DECT with three handsets that works ok. I can use it about 100 feet from the house. Sam's Club carries several brands & models of DECT phones.

--
Lead free solder is Belgium's version of 'Hold my beer and watch this!'
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

I've got a Panasonic DECT 6.0 KX-TG6473 with 4 handsets and a digital answering system. It works great...has more features than we'll ever need. It's shared "phone book" can hold fifty names. It uses 2 rechargeable Ni-MH AAA cells in each handset. Fry's has them on sale.

--
Virg Wall
Reply to
VWWall

Surfing I've run onto phones that are Bluetooth compatible... then I could get rid of landlines and just be cell-based, but with nice "home/office" desk phones.

Anyone here doing that? ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson

Depends what you want it to do. I have a Uniden Dect 6.0 system which works pretty well, as these things go - in the house, and as much as 500 feet out of the house with a clear line of sight to the base. None work through dirt very well. It does manage to ignore two different wireless networks running here nicely. Got last fall after doing without a wireless home phone for a while after the third system in 15 years croaked (while the 30 year old wired phones just keep working.)

Before I got a cell phone, I got by for several years (when not paying for cell phone paid for the $$$ system and then some) with an enGenius long range system - that worked out to half a mile reliably (if not through dirt, but ignoring buildings/trees nicely) and I personally tested it to work at 3 miles (with a nice clear line of sight - didn't work between half a mile and 2-1/2 miles on that test hike). Lasted past its 5-year warranty, got flaky in old age, company would be willing to take whack at fixing it, but the $$ fix has no warranty and I gave up and got a cell phone some time ago.

No idea on the bluetooth - I don't even have one of those "look like a crazy person talking to yourself bluetooth headsets" for the cellphone. Presumably all your average crazy person needs is the headset part, no phone or service required...

--
Cats, coffee, chocolate...vices to live by
Reply to
Ecnerwal

I've got the same thing, and I love it. Being able to call the kids using the pager function is great. No more yelling up the stairs at them.

Reply to
WangoTango

Anyone using this...

formatting link
...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson

"Jim Thompson" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

formatting link

No, although if you're looking at those combined Bluetooth/traditional cordless phone systems, here's another one that might strike your fancy:

formatting link

-

- $55 including two handsets

Reviews are mixed, though...

---Joel

Reply to
Joel Koltner

formatting link

-

Seems like a smart way to go would be a system with a charger... drop cell into it... cell is now connected to cordless sets in the house via Dect 6.0 rather than Bluetooth.

I'm pondering going this route... my 2-line land service now costs more than 2 cell phone service with the same features :-( ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson

"Jim Thompson" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

Yep, I replaced my older wireless phones about a year ago. Same problem that they wouldn't hold a charge.

I got a DECT 5.8 panasonic unit with 4 stations and answering machine in the base unit. Works well with one exception. We are on Verizon FiOS and there is on occasion, a terrible echo in the line. Wired phones work without any problem at all. I've had to contact Verizon fiber services a few times to have them tweak some parameters in the ONT (optical network terminal). The older panasonic had the same problem. There must be a digital delay on the sidetone which is not quite compatible with the FiOS system.

Once we got the echo issue tweaked, no complaints. Well one, the base station volume for message playback could have a bit more punch.

Oppie

Reply to
Oppie

"Jim Thompson" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

Other than the charger portion of it, that's what the Panasonic system there does... leave your cell phone (plugged into your regular charger, if you like) within ~30' (the Bluetooth range) of the "base," and then use the DECT-connected handsets around the house instead.

I'd ditch the land line unlesss you still get a lot of FAXes...

We started running out of cell phone minutes not quite a year ago now after my wife changed jobs (working from home), and we bought an Ooma system (uses your Internet connection for calls -- we have this one:

formatting link
, although there's now a newer model) that works quite well. Initially we just used their "basic" services that are free, although she switched jobs again a couple months ago and that new company reimburses her the $10/month for their premium service that lets you do lots of fancy automatic call routing/rejection, can be set to ring *multiple phone lines at the same time (e.g., your cell and regular phone)* when someone dials your number, etc. (Even with the basic services you already get web-accessible voicemail...) It's really quite neat...

We have the Ooma base unit plugged into a cheap Panasonic DECT cordless phone.

One limitation is that sending and receiving FAXes is a bit dicey -- it

*usually* works, but since there's some fancy CODEC that compresses the audio somewhat, occasionally the FAX machine ends up retrying several times before it's successful. (Although before we had the Ooma we paid OneSuite.Com for incoming FAX services... something like a month a month, I believe.)

---Joel

Reply to
Joel Koltner

"Jim Thompson" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

formatting link

Heres a bluetooth to POTS gateway:

Cheers

Reply to
Martin Riddle

Aha! So the Bluetooth link is short?

Super!

I presently receive faxes via MyFax, but still sending via a land-line. Looks like time to go entirely to MyFax.

I Skype regularly plus use GoToMeeting extensively, so long distance is almost passé. ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson

Hi Jim,

"Jim Thompson" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

Yes. There are a couple of different Bluetooth power specs, but the vast majority Bluetooth devices (like 99.9+% of all cell phones :-) ) spit out 10mW of RF which is supposed to translate into a link "up to 33 feet." In real-world usage, in an open area you often do get somewhat close to that, e.g., 20-25' or so.

I expect most people with that Panasonic system either (1) leave their phone right next to the "basestation" or (2) if *cell* reception is weak there, leave it in the nearest window or whatever that does have good cell reception. And they probably leave it plugged in to its charger.

The DECT handsets go much further -- certainly far enough to cover most any house up to a mini-mansion unless you have, e.g., foil-backed insulation or live in a concrete home with rebar.

Yeah, in your situation that sounds like a pretty good plan.

---Joel

Reply to
Joel Koltner

formatting link

After reading some reviews, this Xlink maybe a better choice. Better support, firmware upgrades.

Cheers

Reply to
Martin Riddle

I've got a pair of Vtech DECT 6.00's and they work fne other than battery issues on my handset because he SO will dischage it completely and then forget to put it in the charger.

But they're single line. I suppose they make dual line models too.

Reply to
T

Not to forget that anyone can listen in on the old (analogue) phones with a scanner :-) DECT is somewhat harder.

colin

Reply to
Colin Howarth

DECT 6.0 is 1.9GHz DSS (Digital Spread Spectrum).

You can also get digital phones in 900MHz, 2.4 GHz, and 5.8 GHz, as well as DSS in all of them, but, as of 2005, 1.9GHz is dedicated to UPCS (Unlicensed Personal Communication Services, exclusively voice) and is out of the busy 2.4 and 5.8GHz bands, with 2.4Ghz being the most crowded (Wifi, bluetooth, baby monitors, microwave ovens, amateur radio, video 'extenders' etc.) 5.8 Ghz is not nearly so crowded but

802.11a/n gets up there so, the theory goes, DECT is 'future proof' (as if there is such a thing).

DSS, for any frequency, generally has more range because they're allowed a higher transmit power. However, the higher frequencies have more trouble penetrating physical objects so the lower 1.9 GHz DECT is theoretically better than a 5.8Ghz DSS phone. (I say theoretically because I don't know what the allowable transmit powers are)

From marketing hype you'd think 900MHz cordless phones were dead and gone by now but, in addition to el cheapo 'consumer' analog models, there are some incredibly expensive 'industrial/commercial' ones like this puppy:

formatting link

Well, DSS and "3x more power than any 2.4 GHz phone systems on the market!" And low frequency. It's for the range. That's over a grand for one base unit/handset but 3,000 acres on a farm? Zowie!

Originating in Europe the name was originally just DECT and stood for "Digital European Cordless Telephone." Now 'world wide' it supposedly stands for "Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications." The '6.0' is U.S. and Canada marketing fluff because we've all been trained that

900MHz phones were better than the earlier 43-50 MHz jobs, 2.4GHz is better than 900Mhz, 5.8GHz is better than 2.4GHz, and so... 6.0 must be better than 5.8, right? Sure as hell aren't going 'retro' with 1.9, now are we?

DECT is also considered more secure but I've not gotten into the details to know just why or how much. I doubt it really matters to the typical home user unless you're a CONTROL secret agent but, in that case, you'd want a properly secure shoe phone anyway.

formatting link

Would you believe... Clickety, clickety, clickety: the original 'digital'.

Reply to
flipper

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.