900mhz
Member
- Joined
- May 13, 2005
- Messages
- 432
ouch is right. Meaningless comment. I allowed my wife to read this. She came out with an old Yiddish comment. I reserve comment.
- Status
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 6,197
Sigh... I did try to word my question in such a way that this thread would not become contentious. It is unreasonable to think that Uniden does not have a representative monitoring the Uniden tech support thread. Tell me that's not true.
This is a reasonable question, I'm sure there are many members that are also curious, why don't we give Uniden a chance to respond in case they don't monitor it daily.
Last edited:
900mhz
Member
- Joined
- May 13, 2005
- Messages
- 432
@trentbob Never to worry. Exactly my wife's sentiment. She is not a radio person, but she was curious about the thread.. Old Yiddish responses came out. My understanding is that repeating her responses would not be family friendly. That is why I married her. Old school. Honest commentary. Long live Walter Cronkite..
You know my view of this...
. "Air Spy/Voyager" Joe will pop on when the conditions are favorable. Good question though, deserves a response.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 6,197
Yeppers, you know I am very knowledgeable of the overall situation for many years, including the present situation.You know my view of this...
The reason I didn't want this to be contentious is I'd actually like to have a reasonable response, perhaps too much to expect but I am attempting in the best way I can, regardless of the realities of the situation.
It is a good question and we all deserve some explanation to help us to understand.
This warning looks like a typical CYA (no insult intended) warning seen for any update process.
ONLY use Sentinel to upgrade firmware. Some users have rendered their scanners non-functional using other update methods.
It is basically saying that the update process that Sentinel uses has been tested with the update and has no known errors. Other methods if they exist may not have the same read/write/handshake that Sentinel uses. If they differ this could result in bad data being written/overwritten or deleted causing the scanner to brick.
ONLY use Sentinel to upgrade firmware. Some users have rendered their scanners non-functional using other update methods.
It is basically saying that the update process that Sentinel uses has been tested with the update and has no known errors. Other methods if they exist may not have the same read/write/handshake that Sentinel uses. If they differ this could result in bad data being written/overwritten or deleted causing the scanner to brick.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 6,197
Yep, it's always been understood you only update the 436, 536, 100, 200 from the latest version of Sentinel. This is off topic for my question in this thread but you are correct.
I think it means that Sentinel retrieves the firmware from the 'official' Uniden server that's password protected and anything else will use another source where there's no guarantee. But on the other hand, the firmware is encrypted and therefore can't be hacked so I think other sites will have the real deal too.
The Sentinel FTP process is known to timeout with a certain satellite internet provider.
Yep, the FTP server password is easily obtainable (more than one way).
belvdr
No longer interested in living
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2013
- Messages
- 2,567
Not only that, there's no verification the site you're connecting to is actually Uniden's. Someone could poison DNS and have you go elsewhere and you'd never know it. At least with TLS, you get site verification and someone has to do a lot more work to trick you there.
Uhhh I'm pretty sure they're not hosting a highly coveted "Uniden Depot" on there lol...
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2020
- Messages
- 2,006
Clarification: Housekeeping update to accommodate revised hardware - No functional change from 1.26.00.
As for previous versions, read the release notes.
info.uniden.com
Most of them include the changes. There are a few versions on some models I have not yet received the change notes. Those were largely before it was my job to update those pages. Where I know about a specific version, I post it - with or without the release notes (with if I have them).
As was mentioned, it is always best to use the latest firmware - even if it does not directly make any changes to your unit.
Another clarification: Uniden Japan dates the firmware as posted. That is the date I use (in this case July). Uniden America just got notice of the change. That is probably because they modified the firmware before the new hardware made the change necessary. IOW, they got the firmware ready months ago.
A third clarification: Some users used NEW hardware and forced OLD firmware versions that do not support the new hardware. Those units would then not function properly. The fix is to use Sentinel to make sure they are using the latest firmware that is made for those units.
Some hardware changes: New receiver chips, new LCD drivers, and new displays. Not all units have all these changes, but these are examples of the "revised hardware" that may be in any of the affected units.
I do not have the info as to what serial numbers start the revised hardware. It's a moot point since the new firmware works on all units, and you should never assume any older firmware will work on new units. That is why the firmware is updated - to make it compatible. It is always backwards compatible unless specified otherwise.
Anything else I can answer about that version?
Once the firmware guys are done with these hardware updates, and with coming model firmware, I hope to be able to get time for bug fixes.
Bug fixes are important, but working hardware has to take priority.
P.S. As always, if your existing version is working to your liking, you are more than welcome to continue using that version and not update. This is not a mandatory update.
As for previous versions, read the release notes.
BCD436HPFirmwareUpdate < UnidenMan4 < TWiki
Most of them include the changes. There are a few versions on some models I have not yet received the change notes. Those were largely before it was my job to update those pages. Where I know about a specific version, I post it - with or without the release notes (with if I have them).
As was mentioned, it is always best to use the latest firmware - even if it does not directly make any changes to your unit.
Another clarification: Uniden Japan dates the firmware as posted. That is the date I use (in this case July). Uniden America just got notice of the change. That is probably because they modified the firmware before the new hardware made the change necessary. IOW, they got the firmware ready months ago.
A third clarification: Some users used NEW hardware and forced OLD firmware versions that do not support the new hardware. Those units would then not function properly. The fix is to use Sentinel to make sure they are using the latest firmware that is made for those units.
Some hardware changes: New receiver chips, new LCD drivers, and new displays. Not all units have all these changes, but these are examples of the "revised hardware" that may be in any of the affected units.
I do not have the info as to what serial numbers start the revised hardware. It's a moot point since the new firmware works on all units, and you should never assume any older firmware will work on new units. That is why the firmware is updated - to make it compatible. It is always backwards compatible unless specified otherwise.
Anything else I can answer about that version?
Once the firmware guys are done with these hardware updates, and with coming model firmware, I hope to be able to get time for bug fixes.
Bug fixes are important, but working hardware has to take priority.
P.S. As always, if your existing version is working to your liking, you are more than welcome to continue using that version and not update. This is not a mandatory update.
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2020
- Messages
- 2,006
It actually comes from feedback from the repair center and/or CSRs that detail users bricking their units using other means.
CYA? Yes - based on actual historical events.
Ubbe
Member
Try and get the serial numbers where it starts to use new hardware and details of what the hardware (circuit name) was changed to. If anything in the receiver chain have been altered it would be interesting to test that scanner and see if it changed the performance in any way.
The old release note for the 436 says:
" Note that LCN finder on DMR system using RAS will not be 100% reliable, since there is no error detection on RAS systems. You might need to run several times, noting the results each time, then selecting the LCN based on all results."
As Unidens scanners immediately skips conversations that are encrypted and never test for it several times, it might backfire in RAS systems that are not encrypted. Giving a user the selection of forcing a system or TG to ignore the encryption flag and be forced to monitor the conversation would probably help in a lot of situations, even to those who prefere to monitor and study encrypted calls.
/Ubbe
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2020
- Messages
- 2,006
I will see what I can find. HQ may not even have that info. Since there seems to be new hardware in the field, and since the firmware is dated June, I think it's safe to say an estimated SN cutover will be mid-2021. One reason I hesitate to cite a specific SN (even if I had it) is because it may get blowback from users with pre-cutoff units complaining about their units being "less valuable" with that info in the field. If there is one thing we have in excess, it's people looking for reasons to complain (and no, I do not consider your clarification request a complaint).
Looking back on some internal emails, I do have a lot number that I think starts the new hardware, but that is meaningless because I do not think the lot numbers are on the units anywhere. (it's a VU6xxx number). I also see this issue with users bricking their units started almost exactly one month ago, so that is very close to when they were released in the USA. Of course, I cannot say what dealers may have new or old units.
With respect to RAS systems, I'm not sure I understand the "might backfire in RAS systems that are not encrypted" part. If a key part of LCN Finder is missing on RAS systems, it may not matter if they are encrypted or not. I'm not sure exactly how LCN Finder works. I know some of it, but not the whole enchilada. That is worth pursuing, however. And if you have any input on that please PM me.
There is an item on the feature request list to ignore the encryption flag. There are many items above that, however.
You mentioned testing for changes in the receiver performance. This change for the x36 was a new LCD driver, so that should have no impact on perfornance, but testing is always welcome. Please keep in mind specs can and will vary from unit to unit to some degree.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 6,197
I rarely start threads but when I do I monitor them carefully to keep them on track and on topic. I'm sorry Joe M that you are not kept in the loop as you should be as you are a key player with Uniden scanners, that must be very frustrating for you, especially when it affects your response to the largest forum dealing with your products. Personally, I'm not satisfied with the performance of my x36 radios. Thanks for responding anyway, pretty much solidifying the ongoing narrative regarding Uniden. Thanks everybody for the replies. I won't be doing anything to my pretty much retired x36 radios.
Ubbe
Member
As I read Unidens statement it says that any data received in systems that are detected (falsely or true) as RAS will have errors in the data received (error correction are turned off) that will make the LCN finder unpredictable. But that's just one of the functions that will be compromised. The encryption detection are so much more sensitiv and will have a bigger impact on reception if it's not 100% reliable.
The RAS detection needs to be 100% reliable, the encryption detection needs to be 100% reliable. If any of those fail you will drop out of, or skip, conversations. It needs to be a function that can tolerate that 10% of the data info received are not accurate. Radio signals are not a 100% transparent transfer media.
The best solution as I see it would be to have RAS and encryption user selectable in a similar way as NAC, to set them to Search (as it works now) or forced to On or Ignore/Off.
/Ubbe
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2020
- Messages
- 2,006
So there would be a user flag for RAS, and one for encryption?
What is the operation if those are enabled or disabled? I assume the ENC flag would mute or not mute ENC transmissions. RAS would simply decode it as RAS or would decode it as normal?
My understanding is the enc flag is being used to toggle the Mute enc function. There might be a similar flag for RAS? Being able to enable disable the feature would be nice. certainly a on screen indicator similar to the ENC is a possibility. Maybe a strobing DMR/RAS on the display?
- Status
