SDS 100: Inferior Design, Materials and Support
- Thread starter kansaden
- Start date
-
- Tags
- uniden upman paul opitz
- Status
ScannerMan1989
Member
They have to put that disclaimer as do most other companies because of California . Nothing new at all.
TomTN
Member
How is it doing on the TACN system there where you're at?
Very little of TACN is simulcast so even the older Phase 2 radios such as the 325 work well with it.
If the girl in that silly photo had a tush the size of the one on an SDS100 the skinny, sleek, logically sized G4/5 girl would have nothing to worry about....
I would like my SDS100 to meet or exceed MIL-STD-810G (essentially a 4' drop / shock test,) but I'm not sure what the added cost would be for a consumer product, and if I'd be willing to pay the premium (probably would.) Mine has had some tumbles from 1.5', but the new fat battery has made it more stable and less prone to a topple.
Now that a few irate Uniden fanboys have trashed the OP...
I've never owned a high-end handheld scanner that broke when dropped, and I've dropped all of them once or twice probably. If as much effort as went into waterproofing (who exactly asked for that?) went into designing the SDS100 to be as tough as the similarly priced G4/5, I don't think the OP would have a broken scanner. Screwing up initially by making an incredibly power-hungry device that drained the original battery laid the foundation for this failure. Basic run-time testing would have revealed early on that redesign work was needed due to the short run time and excessive heat. From the power supply / consumption standpoint, the SDS100 is an electronic engineering failure. Putting a HUGE battery on the SDS100, where it bulges far out from the supporting case greatly increasing leverage, while making no provision to add extra security, is a failure of mechanical engineering.
The whole power / heat issue is absurd. A new iphone or galaxy has a far, far more powerful processor, and a much higher resolution screen, and those are the two main things that drain power in these phones and in the SDS100. There is no excuse for the excessive power drain or the excessive heat in such a large device with such a relatively crude processor and such a low screen resolution.
As I documented in early video reviews on youtube, and as I have confirmed in recent months by comparison testing using the SDS100s of others in the Phoenix area (yes with the latest firmware), overall SDS100 performance is (at least in this geographic area) unacceptable for the majority of people who have used this scanner. And yeah, the G4/5s blow it away in terms of receiving local simulcast systems. At best it's as good as the 436 which I still love, for non-simulcast / VHF / UHF / Air.
Instead of spending effort on more important things, a huge effort went into water-proofing this scanner, when most hobbyists have zero use for that feature. In the process Uniden created an absurd antenna situation, forcing scanner hobbyists who have the (mostly silly) obsession with installing aftermarket duck antennas to use mechanically poor solutions that leave the user vulnerable to breakage with even a small drop (another engineering miss). Duck antennas all suck. The range within which they suck varies a bit, but they are all somewhat close to a piece of random wire in terms of performance, but as Uniden should have known, scanner users are always looking for placebo "performance boosts" and aftermarket duck antennas are the number one go-to. Yet still, Uniden made this incredibly dumb design decision.
For those happy with this thing wonderful, but it gets tiresome seeing the excuse-making fanboyism posted on RR.
It seems that the OP was indicating that the SDS100 should have been better designed and built better, and that should be pretty obvious to anyone who wants to make an honest assessment. And spare me the "Uni-hater" title, I've bought and owned Uniden scanners for decades and a few of them are among my most cherished devices. I don't buy brands and logos, I buy things that work, and I don't make excuses for obvious mistakes. I'll buy another SDS100 again once I see some clueless person put one on Offerup for half of what it's worth, because I like scanners and electronic toys, and because I never hesitate to buy something that I can easily ebay at a profit...but I'm under no illusion that it is worth $650 to $700 (after tax and shipping). I wonder what percentage of the fanboys on RR really BELIEVE the excuses they make for this half-baked device, how many just don't want to face up to what a lousy investment it was, and how many truly believe this is somehow a good value.
I've never owned a high-end handheld scanner that broke when dropped, and I've dropped all of them once or twice probably. If as much effort as went into waterproofing (who exactly asked for that?) went into designing the SDS100 to be as tough as the similarly priced G4/5, I don't think the OP would have a broken scanner. Screwing up initially by making an incredibly power-hungry device that drained the original battery laid the foundation for this failure. Basic run-time testing would have revealed early on that redesign work was needed due to the short run time and excessive heat. From the power supply / consumption standpoint, the SDS100 is an electronic engineering failure. Putting a HUGE battery on the SDS100, where it bulges far out from the supporting case greatly increasing leverage, while making no provision to add extra security, is a failure of mechanical engineering.
The whole power / heat issue is absurd. A new iphone or galaxy has a far, far more powerful processor, and a much higher resolution screen, and those are the two main things that drain power in these phones and in the SDS100. There is no excuse for the excessive power drain or the excessive heat in such a large device with such a relatively crude processor and such a low screen resolution.
As I documented in early video reviews on youtube, and as I have confirmed in recent months by comparison testing using the SDS100s of others in the Phoenix area (yes with the latest firmware), overall SDS100 performance is (at least in this geographic area) unacceptable for the majority of people who have used this scanner. And yeah, the G4/5s blow it away in terms of receiving local simulcast systems. At best it's as good as the 436 which I still love, for non-simulcast / VHF / UHF / Air.
Instead of spending effort on more important things, a huge effort went into water-proofing this scanner, when most hobbyists have zero use for that feature. In the process Uniden created an absurd antenna situation, forcing scanner hobbyists who have the (mostly silly) obsession with installing aftermarket duck antennas to use mechanically poor solutions that leave the user vulnerable to breakage with even a small drop (another engineering miss). Duck antennas all suck. The range within which they suck varies a bit, but they are all somewhat close to a piece of random wire in terms of performance, but as Uniden should have known, scanner users are always looking for placebo "performance boosts" and aftermarket duck antennas are the number one go-to. Yet still, Uniden made this incredibly dumb design decision.
For those happy with this thing wonderful, but it gets tiresome seeing the excuse-making fanboyism posted on RR.
It seems that the OP was indicating that the SDS100 should have been better designed and built better, and that should be pretty obvious to anyone who wants to make an honest assessment. And spare me the "Uni-hater" title, I've bought and owned Uniden scanners for decades and a few of them are among my most cherished devices. I don't buy brands and logos, I buy things that work, and I don't make excuses for obvious mistakes. I'll buy another SDS100 again once I see some clueless person put one on Offerup for half of what it's worth, because I like scanners and electronic toys, and because I never hesitate to buy something that I can easily ebay at a profit...but I'm under no illusion that it is worth $650 to $700 (after tax and shipping). I wonder what percentage of the fanboys on RR really BELIEVE the excuses they make for this half-baked device, how many just don't want to face up to what a lousy investment it was, and how many truly believe this is somehow a good value.
I see a vocal crew of (unreasonably irate) Uniden bashers, but that's just my view. My SDR dongles get a lot hotter than the SDS100 - hot enough that the manufacturer includes heat sinks as part of the accessory kits. It's the nature of the RTL 820T2 core of the radio, and the associated processors. But I agree that the next iteration of simulcast capable radios need to be more robust, and better at dispersing heat. Note that a Raspberry Pi 3B+ running OP25 can get fairly hot (as well as the attached RTL device) - and it's processor is running at 20% (mine has a "case" which is actually a massive heat sink.)
Last edited:
With this post, I have decided that buying one should be put on hold. My 436 is great, and maybe I am really not missing anything by not having the latest and greatest.
Speaking of ducky antennas, I have to admit that I fell in that hole of hopefulness and slapped my RS 800mhz ducky on my 436 immediately upon purchase. For lower frequencies, are you saying that the standard stock antenna is good enough?
I think you're giving them too much credit on the waterproofing. They put the radio into an already existing marine radio case that was waterproof to begin with. While it didn't cost them anything because it had already been developed, it gave them something to advertise as a new "feature." Having been hit hit with mis-aimed hose lines coming over the top of a building more than once, it is a feature that appeals to me, but something that I am aware of and have taken steps to protect my non-waterproofed equipment against for many years.
scannersnstuff
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2006
- Messages
- 1,947
I had already decided to wait and see what whistling Whistler will have to offer. Even if they break the lsm distortion issue, and have somewhat decent vhf/uhf reception, their's may be a win.
Sign me optimistic.
Sign me optimistic.
eorange
♦RF Enabled Member♦
You can bet Whistler is taking note and adjusting their playbook.
Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk
Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk
Tramagod
Member
Uniden advertises the SDS100 as being “Water resistant”, not “Water proof “.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My diving watch is described as "water resistant" to a depth of 100 meters. That said, I wouldn't drop the SDS into a bathtub. It is rated JIS 4, which basically means "splash resistant."
Tramagod
Member
TomTN
Member
Drop resistance and water resistance are very low on my list of priorities with a scanner. For people who need those features, Motorola will happily sell you an APX8000 for $8,000.00+.
For those of us who want a scanner, most want a receiver that picks up the radio traffic we desire with as much versatility as possible. The SDS100 does this well. No, it is not a $8,000.00 Motorola. But then that APX8000 will not pick up DMR or NXDN, yet the SDS100 will.
Each has its purpose and price. Each user must decide what they need and what they are willing to spend to fulfill that need.
$650.00 will not buy you an $8,000.00 radio but in my opinion it sure does a lot for only $650.00. A good smartphone costs more than that.
For those of us who want a scanner, most want a receiver that picks up the radio traffic we desire with as much versatility as possible. The SDS100 does this well. No, it is not a $8,000.00 Motorola. But then that APX8000 will not pick up DMR or NXDN, yet the SDS100 will.
Each has its purpose and price. Each user must decide what they need and what they are willing to spend to fulfill that need.
$650.00 will not buy you an $8,000.00 radio but in my opinion it sure does a lot for only $650.00. A good smartphone costs more than that.
jeffdafoe
Member
If Whistler plans to have their radio out in the next six months, they're well past the point of being able to make any significant design adjustments.
-E
- Status