JRayfield
Member
While there are some aspects to MOTOTRBO that are proprietary, the DMR protocol is not, so an agency wouldn't necessarily be 'stuck' with having to by Motorola equipment in all cases. But in some cases, if they want certain features, then yes, those might be proprietary. It's very similar with P25 - Astro 25 can include some proprietary features, but the 'basic' system is 'open' (for the most part).
Interoperability does not have to occur at the 'radio level'. In fact, not all P25 radios are 'interoperable'. A P25 conventional radio will not operate with a P25 radio on a trunking system, unless there's some kind of 'bridge' made between the two 'systems' (conventional and P25). This is something that appears to have been overlooked by many people. They think that if a radio is "P25", then it's "interoperable". But that isn't necessarily the case. I can easily set up a very nice 'interoperable' system with MOTOTRBO and analog, that will be just as 'interoperable' as a P25 conventional and P25 trunking system, for MUCH less money than the P25 systems.
What approach have they used in NYC and Boston to 'maximize' the analog technology? You've got me curious.
John Rayfield, Jr. CETma
Interoperability does not have to occur at the 'radio level'. In fact, not all P25 radios are 'interoperable'. A P25 conventional radio will not operate with a P25 radio on a trunking system, unless there's some kind of 'bridge' made between the two 'systems' (conventional and P25). This is something that appears to have been overlooked by many people. They think that if a radio is "P25", then it's "interoperable". But that isn't necessarily the case. I can easily set up a very nice 'interoperable' system with MOTOTRBO and analog, that will be just as 'interoperable' as a P25 conventional and P25 trunking system, for MUCH less money than the P25 systems.
What approach have they used in NYC and Boston to 'maximize' the analog technology? You've got me curious.
John Rayfield, Jr. CETma
Amongst the problems with MOTOTRBO is that it's proprietary, which means that if someone wants to use the technology they have to buy Motorola equipment. Which is going to create technical, operational, and funding problems since interoperability is key to getting grant money. If public safety, or some of it, is going to go digital, it makes much more sense for there to be ONE standard, not several.
MOTOTRBO works fine for non public safety entities that don't have to worry about communicating with other agencies or jurisdictions.
Personally, I like the approach that public safety agencies in NYC, and Boston, among others are taking by maximizing the analog technology.