Re: MONA T. RONICS

[RTS <gafa@xxxxxxx>]

On 4/29/2017 9:36 AM, mleuck wrote:
> On Saturday, April 29, 2017 at 9:06:00 AM UTC-5, RTS wrote:
>> On 4/29/2017 2:12 AM, mleuck wrote:
>>> On Friday, April 28, 2017 at 5:29:54 PM UTC-5, Jim Davis wrote:
>>>> On Thursday, April 27, 2017 at 4:44:43 PM UTC-4, ED wrote:
>>>>> Just curious of what other installers think of the above monitoring/dealership company that sells systems to consumers who are not told that the mainboard of the security system that they have purchased, cannot be taken over by another company for monitoring. And this is done in collusion and collaboration of companies such as Honeywell.
>>>>
>>>> Nowdays ..... any alarm system that uses 4/2 format or CID to a phone line can be taken over.
>>>
>>> Only an idiot still uses 4/2 format
>>>
>>
>> Not to put to fine a point on the "name" calling,
>>
>> Not every place in America or the world has the quality of phone service
>> that will allow acceptable CID to function.
>> A.T.T. is one of the biggest offenders in our region for this failing..
>> (floating impedance) (floating voltage) (cross voltage in multi pairs)
>>
>> Now if you know of a way to CID using pulse voltage I'd be happy to give
>> it a try..
>>
>> RTS
>
> In those cases you'd ditch the phone line and install a cell
>

excellent ideal  but  again   A.T.T.  service is iffy at best
(even with directional antenna)  and no other carrier service is
available in the region...

I will say that 2G service did work till they changed over to 3-4G
and service then stopped as the carriers moved to a different location
and signal strength dropped below transceivers ability to detect.

OOh  in case your think of cable,  doesn't work either..  only video
available.

now satellite  internet is possibility  but for alarm signals  it's a
little out of most customers price range...

RTS