Are you tired of spending $500.00+ for a digital scanner?

[kf4pep]

There is software in my Pro-96 but *Not* their software, so no fee, Get it now?

Their software is writen for commercial equipment only, *NOT SCANNERS*.

HUH?

It has IMBE in it, as it can decode IMBE. IMBE is the vocoder scheme developed by DVSI, and they hold the patents.

So your scanner most definitly has DVSI software, if not hardware, in it. No way around it.

As for reverse engineering, that would be like reverse engineering windows and selling it...you can't do it without violating patents.

http://www.dvsinc.com/products/software.htm

 

[DonS]

So your scanner most definitly has DVSI software, if not hardware, in it. No way around it.

Small clarification...

You wouldn't necessarily need hardware or software created by DVSI, but you'd definitely need technology patented by DVSI. It's possible, though it doesn't seem very likely, that DVSI could license someone to build their own implementation of an IMBE vocoder. That would seem to be a bit silly, though, since DVSI is almost certainly going to charge a fee and/or royalty anyway. May as well use the software and/or hardware product(s) from DVSI.

 

[N_Jay]

Care to elaborate with facts?

The FACTS are that the licensing fees are not simply per unit, and until you have been through negotiations, and have a good estimate of how many units you will be selling there is almost no way to put a "per Unit" cost on them.

My wild-ass-guess it runs from $25 to $500 depending on type of equipment and volume sold.

 

[DonS]

The FACTS are that the licensing fees are not simply per unit, and until you have been through negotiations, and have a good estimate of how many units you will be selling there is almost no way to put a "per Unit" cost on them.

My wild-ass-guess it runs from $25 to $500 depending on type of equipment and volume sold.

That guess is probably about right.

I found what seems to be the E.F. Johnson / DVSI License Agreement I referred to earlier: http://www.secinfo.com/dsVsb.9276.z.htm . In it, E.F. Johnson was to pay DVSI royalties per "unit", where the unit count was based on the maximum number of coders or decoders used in a system. The royalty varied depending on application (P25 or non-P25) and number of units actually sold, from $3 up to $25, with a minumum royalty of $45,000 for each of the first 3 years.

After amortizing the initial $85,000 license fee, which again depends on number of units sold, the total per-unit "fee" could be anywhere from $3.01 (at least 8.5 million P25 units) to $220,000 (exactly one non-P25 system with only one coder/decoder). (I guess we could also include the "infinite" per-unit fee, in case E.F. Johnson sold no units of any type, but still owed the $135,000 minimum royalty and the initial $85,000 license fee).

DVSI is going to charge for any use of their intellectual property - that's why the company exists. There's no way any of us can figure out what the actual "per unit" cost is, unless we know the terms of the licensing agreement and the number of units actually sold. In the case of the PRO-96 scanner, though, the number is most certainly greater than zero, and most likely less than $500.

EDIT: Oh, for "pappy1"... "their intellectual property" refers to DVSI's patented IMBE technology. It does not necessarily refer to software actually written by DVSI. Based on your previous comments, I'm starting to think you may be confusing patent with copyright. In the former, any implementation, no matter who creates it, is subject to the patent owner's licensing. For copyrighted software, only the actual software written by the copyright owner is protected. In the case of DVSI, we're concerned primarily with a patent. Had DVSI merely implemented IMBE in a piece of software without actually patenting the IMBE "process", anybody else could've created their own implementation of IMBE with no problems. However, that's not reality. DVSI patented IMBE - you cannot legally create an implementation of an IMBE encoder/decoder without first getting permission from DVSI.

 

[DonS]

There is software in my Pro-96 but *Not* their software, so no fee, Get it now?

From page 3 of my copy of the PRO-96 manual:

The IMBETM voice coding Technology embodied in this product is protected by intellectual property rights including patent rights, copyrights and trade secrets of Digital Voice Systems, Inc.



​

Since a copyright applies to a specific piece of software, it would appear that the PRO-96 does, in fact, contain software written by DVSI. Of course, since it's IMBE, it's protected by patent rights (no matter who wrote it).

 

[UPMan]

There is a royalty paid to DVSI for digital scanners. I am not at liberty to disclose the amount, but roylaties on scanners are not a trivial part of the cost.

<Just trying to get this discussion off of this sticking point.>

 

[N4JNW]

So, what is a trivial part of the cost? Can you disclose?

 

[UPMan]

The volume control knob (the little plastic cap) is a trivial portion of the expense, as is the plastic poly-bag that the printed materials are put into.

 

[scannerfreak]

4 – I challenge anyone on this thread to show proof there is in fact a *License fee* for scanners.

Looks like you lost your challenge lol...

 

[N4JNW]

Looks like you lost your challenge lol...

+1!!!!!!!!!

 

[SkipSanders]

Just a little price point, DVSI sells their hardware implimentation AMBE 2000 chip for $33 each in lots of five. Whether or not they seperately charge for codecs on the chip, I dunno. You'd have to negotiate a deal with them, they don't have 'stock' prices on much, at least visibly.

I'd say minimum 'Royalty' or hardware cost, depending on how it's implimented, is $20-25. Maximum could be anything, depending on how the agreement with scanner manufacturers was negotiated. Bear in mind that DVSI wasn't, probably, particularly interested in allowing scanner use, in the first place, since it cuts into the 'selling point' for two way gear of 'hard to intercept'. They probably cut a very harsh deal.

I think the $250 figure comes from that being the cost, more or less, of the seperate digital card needed for the early uniden digital scanners. I doubt the hardware cost of the cards was more than $50, so let's assume Uniden is making some profit here, and say they likely had to pay $100 for 'rights' for each card. Remember that massive overpricing cut into Uniden's sales of both cards, and scanners. They'd probably have sold it cheaper if it didn't cost them at least $125 or so to 'make'.

 

[ohiodesperado]

Whaaaaaa.

Just go buy your scanner or don't. It kills me what some people will complain about.
If you don't like the expence of this hobby, try another, like drag racing. I am in the middle of putting a motor together for ONE of my cars. The crank is $500 plus. That's not the pistons, rods, cam or any of the machining that will need to be done, that is just ONE part in ONE motor.

If you are going to play with big boy toys, you will pay big boy prices, plain and simple.

 

[Contact]

You know, I really don’t agree with the OP’s comments (and I’ll explain why in a second), but I could understand where the person was coming from. I mean the scanner was $519.99; the additional antenna was another $16.99. Once I got the scanner through my front door, I quickly learned that the ARC software was the best way to go ($50.00+). Oops, got the soft ware, but because of Uniden’s infinite wisdom I had to run out and get a ($40.00) cable adapter to hook it to my computer (because honestly, why couldn't Uniden make the cable a USB port...why a serial port?) So we're at $630.00, plus tax is roughly $670.00.

I'm not complaining about the cost, because as some of you know, my BCD396T scanner was a gift to me. With this in mind however, even if I had to dish out all $670.00 on my own, I still wouldn't be complaining. $670 does sound like a lot, and in reality it is a lot, but I will not have to spend ANY MORE MONEY on anything until I either want a better antenna, or the batteries need replacing. Keep in mind that both of those expenditures are nominal and optional (as my 396 can run off AA batteries).

On the other hand, I am also a firearms enthusiast and I probably spend $300.00 a year in ammunition. So in the long run, my scanning is a cheaper hobby (that I really enjoy) than my shooting. Uniden makes great scanners and I'm sure that this scanner will be around far longer than 3 years. There is also a better payoff with my scanner because I can scan 24/7 if I wanted to, while I only shoot a couple times a month.

I agree that it may sound frustrating to pay all that money for a scanner, but there are no registration fees, no subscription services to pay for, no upgrades to buy, no additional supplies are needed, you don't have to buy anything to feed it (food, gas, or ammunition), no nothing...ever. Hell of a deal, when you think of it that way. It's a one shot hobby once the initial investment has been made.

All this notwithstanding the fact that it is one of the most complex scanners on the market (if I understand it correctly). So what if the scanners are just as expensive now as they were when they came out? The local radio shops around here still can't keep them in stock.

 

[loumaag]

Just a little price point, DVSI sells their hardware implimentation AMBE 2000 chip for $33 each in lots of five....

And this has nothing to do with their sale of IMBE licensing fees, chips, or software. Did you read this thread or are you just jumping in? (See my last post.)

 

[fireant]

I understand both sides however my thoughts are if you go out and buy a analog scanner you spend in the neighborhood of $200-$230 depending on what you buy maybe more or less with software and extras. If you live in a area and they go digital then you have to buy a $500 scanner so you are out around $700 area. If you went out and bought a digital scanner to start with you initially may be out some more money however you would likely be saving money in the long run.

My thoughts are at least we can listen to the digital imagine how upset and how much complaining we would all be doing if we could not hear P25 at all. I hate to drop $500 for a scanner just like all of you but its the price, I have to be willing to pay to enjoy this hobby. Have friends who buy $3000 bicycles and $1200 cameras and think $500 for a scanner is really not so bad just limits my purchases of them.

fireant

 

[torontokris]

Buy a nice used digital Pro-96 / Pro-2096
not the best scanner but some can be had for $200-$300

 

[skinnyblkelvis]

In Nashville,Tn. The pd/fd went digital before the digital scanners came out. When the bcd785 came out I ran to a privatly owed affiliate of Rat Shack and paid $800 for one! Of course later I felt ripped off(I was). But scanning is my hobby and I HAD to have a digital scanner right then and there! I Had to have a Pro 96,Pro 2096,bcd396t! What I don't have is a wife anymore!

 

[jon_k]

There are so few listeners who have actually decided to hold off on buying one until they're cheaper.

Well thats the problem. People are buying and demanding it. If people demand it, why lower the prices?

I am still holding back. I don't think it is worth it until prices are at least as low as $300, especially with the crappy ability of these. APCO 25 is the only thing these support practically, with no hope of ProVoice which is marketed as UNBREAKABLE when it would be easy with a scanner built to do so.

Why pay $500 for something that can just decode APCO 25? Sounds like a rip. Especially since not much is digital in my area yet. In 5 years if this area goes digital, there is no guarantee if it will even be APCO-25. Could be provoice. Provoice is something I would pay $600 for.

You think they are making $300 a piece on these? After just the DVSI licensing and R&D alone? I dunno about that..

Why did my VX-7R amateur radio cost $300? I would think R&D and licensing would cost even more for an amateur radio. Simply because you have to get the product FCC logo tested before you can sell it. Further the amateur radios have to follow strict design principals to avoid splatter and/or spurious emissions that could pollute the bandwidth around your transmitting frequency. This takes skill and precision with the transceiver. Then you add the reciever into the amateur radio and allow it scanning capability. (It's a scanner without trunktracking.) Then you add capability for WIRES / DSTAR. Yet it still only costs $300!

Now you see a scanner company who is simply making a PART-15 receiver device that has trunk/scanning decoding ability and may have to get licensing for decoding tech (I'd assume this is around $70-100) then you jack the price up to $500-700. It just doesn't add up to me. The R&D for an amateur radio is so much more (and serious, especially with transmission standards.) yet amateur radio HT's are __still__ cheaper!

 

[Turbo68]

In Australia things are totally different when it comes to radios the Uniden-396/996 when came out they where 1000 dollars and now u get them brand new with the remote head around 850 dollars and even whe the Yaesu-VR500 came out it was 800 dollars and u can
buy them for 460 dollars and prices in in this country they prices always go down & a few weeks ago i picked up an Icom-R3 brand new for $660 when u consider the end of last year this radio was selling around $1100.

Regards Lino.

 

[jleverin]

I agree with the statement here that it is that because people are willing to pay that for them. That's also why I don't have one yet, it would be foolish and irresponsible of me to take $500.00 that we can use to pay off a bill, buy food or gas and spend it on a new scanner. So I wait until I have the money saved up for it...I suspect that as things get tougher with gas prices and food prices and such, people will stop buying these things and the price WILL go down eventually-a little at least. There are probably people that are buying these things that would be in the doghouse if the spouse knew that they spent $500 on a radio. That's why I can do it, that's too much money to explain how it came up missing! I know some people spend a lot more on their equiptment, but they obviously have the disposable income to do that with.