Why is Harris public Safety p25 better?

[BlueMoon2]

For those of you that are big Harris public safety p25 fans, I want to know why you think Harris is better than Motorola. Other than any proprietary Harris features, why do you believe that Harris public safety p25 systems and radios are better than Motorola? I want specific examples. I’m not interested in starting a big disagreement on here. I’m just interested in what you have to say.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DisasterGuy]

Anyone very familiar with both platforms at a field engineering level wouldn't take the bait here. The platforms simply take different approaches to things.

-Harris implements geo-diverse NSCs (Master Sites) that are fully redundant even on "small" systems. Motorola implements only one.

-Harris provides a "Distributed Control Point" concept where several sites can each function as the control point (Prime Site) where Motorola implements a single prime site.

-Harris allows all available RF channels to function as control channels as-needed where Motorola selects a primary and limited alternates.

-Harris makes it easy to connect distinctly owned and managed systems into a multi-region federation of systems using intra-WACN roaming where Motorola implements this using ISSI8000.

These are just a few infrastructure level differentiators that favor Harris. There are additional differentiators that favor Motorola architecture or EF Johnson Atlas infrastructure. One isn't per se "better" than the other, they are simply different approaches that may work better for some system implementations than others based on system design objectives.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[DisasterGuy]

Differentiators where Motorola may be favored over Harris:

-Motorola allows system level DHCP where all IP addresses in a Harris VIDA platform at statically assigned in the UAS.

-Motorola has implemented easy fleetwide subscriber management via their "Radio Management" platform where Harris is still using revisions to their legacy ProFile Manager and batch utility.

-Motorola has many integrated system managent applications (native and third-party) where Harris simply has a web based Regional Network Manager platform for system monitoring.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[GM]

Being a former user in the field of a Harris radio on a Motorola P25 backbone system, I like the fact that I can have more than 16 talkgroups on one scan list in a trunked system; whereas with Motorola, I can only scan 16 talkgroups per list at a single time. I was able to use my P7200 radio on one scan list with 210 talkgroups scanning on a single scan list at one time, where the APX7000 was only able to do 16. That was a huge advantage for me, looking at it from an inter-operable standpoint of being informed with multiple jurisdictions.

I also found the programming software much better to use than Motorola's CPS, and the fact that it was much easier to transfer data/codeplugs between radio types. I was able to transfer the data from my P7100 codeplug to the P7200 codeplug with a few clicks and I was up and running within 3 mins. of making those changes.

 

[carbineone]

With Harris I only need to buy one programming cable per radio type for the life of the radio. With Motorola they make you buy a $150 programming cable every time there is a major firmware revision. I think APX model radios are up to three different cable revisions.

 

[Outerdog]

Being a former user in the field of a Harris radio on a Motorola P25 backbone system, I like the fact that I can have more than 16 talkgroups on one scan list in a trunked system; whereas with Motorola, I can only scan 16 talkgroups per list at a single time. I was able to use my P7200 radio on one scan list with 210 talkgroups scanning on a single scan list at one time, where the APX7000 was only able to do 16.

The APX platform allows up to 250 scan list members.

 

[Thunderknight]

With Harris I only need to buy one programming cable per radio type for the life of the radio. With Motorola they make you buy a $150 programming cable every time there is a major firmware revision. I think APX model radios are up to three different cable revisions.

I am using my 6 or 7 year old APX (rev A) programming cable with current firmware 7000 and 8000.
The only issue I was aware of was using them with the 4000 (I think it was the 4000) because they lacked a ground on the accy connector antenna ring, so there was a newer programming cable that was compatible with all model APX portables.
So it's not true that a new major firmware release requires a new cable, at least not in the APX portables.

 

[mikewazowski]

The only issue I was aware of was using them with the 4000 (I think it was the 4000) because they lacked a ground on the accy connector antenna ring, so there was a newer programming cable that was compatible with all model APX portables.

Even then, a short jumper could be added to the Rev A cable to make it a Rev C cable.

The statement that Motorola requires you to buy a new cable for updated firmware is completely false.

 

[Thunderknight]

I also found the programming software much better to use than Motorola's CPS, and the fact that it was much easier to transfer data/codeplugs between radio types. I was able to transfer the data from my P7100 codeplug to the P7200 codeplug with a few clicks and I was up and running within 3 mins. of making those changes.

I have to say I used to agree with that statement. I really liked the original RPM (nee Programmer). And I kept lots of global sets and it made updating various models easy.
But I don't know what Harris was thinking with RPM2, but I find it very clumsy and not user friendly. Plus with all the firmware versions (e.g. what it works with), or what you need RPM vs RPM2 for, the inability to go forward and back in file versions depending on license keys for systems, etc.

I think APX with the drag and drop (open two instances side by side and just drag personalities, zones, etc between them) is very helpful. Although for some reason they still make it hard to drag and drop scan lists as they hard code the zone number into it.

But I still like the "original" RPM the best.

 

[carbineone]

Even then, a short jumper could be added to the Rev A cable to make it a Rev C cable.

The statement that Motorola requires you to buy a new cable for updated firmware is completely false.

So just asking why did my rev A cable not work with a newer APX6000 that I had to buy a new cable for?

 

[mikewazowski]

So just asking why did my rev A cable not work with a newer APX6000 that I had to buy a new cable for?

I wouldn't know but I've probably had the same firmware in many of the APX's I've programmed and I've never had to buy a new cable.

 

[kb4cvn]

The APX platform allows up to 250 scan list members.

Harris radios allow the scanning of 1024 talkgroups in a single group set.

Ditto with conventional channel...

This was introduced almost a decade ago.


Proprietary Features in Harris?
I don't know of any.
And I should know, I was in the Technical Assistance Center doing tech support for 11 years, before going on and designing/installing new P-25 systems.

Whereas Moto has dozens. I had to deal with the grief with new customers because their Moto radio and/or systems did something unique that nobody else in the industry supported. (Just one more of Moto's many marketing tactics to keep users purchasing only their products!)

 

[KE4ZNR]

Harris radios allow the scanning of 1024 talkgroups in a single group set.

Ditto with conventional channel...

This was introduced almost a decade ago.

To be fair anyone working in public safety trying to scan that many talkgroups/channels is an idiot. :wink::lol:

Marshall KE4ZNR

 

[RRR]

To be fair anyone working in public safety trying to scan that many talkgroups/channels is an idiot. :wink::lol:

Marshall KE4ZNR

You say that, but if you have a Harris system with the 100 "randomly assigned" talkgroups for individual station/unit paging, it makes perfect sense, that, and along with your 10-15 other general talkgroups.

Everything isn't always as you think it is.

 

[kb4cvn]

To be fair anyone working in public safety trying to scan that many talkgroups/channels is an idiot. :wink::lol:

Marshall KE4ZNR

Marshall, I agree with you 100%. As I rule, I limited average public safety user to 16 talkgroups (or conventional channels) or less on the knob at a time. Less confusion for everyone involved !!!

Just because you can do it, doesn't mean you should. :roll:


However I would, when specific customer requirements dictated, load a 17th and even 18th talkgroup in officer's radios, as a receive only group, to allow them to stay aware of what Fire and EMS were doing. They couldn't directly access the group or transmit on it, but they could do a NUISANCE DELETE (during the scan hang time) if needed.

It proved to be vary useful for LE units, especially on traffic accidents, to maintain situational awareness of when Fire and Medics were enroute, without having to query the Dispatcher.

 

[BlueMoon2]

I appreciate the input. I have new knowledge of everything from the infrastructure of the system to how many scanlists, etc. can go into a radio. Kb4cvn, there are definitely proprietary functions for Harris. When I did a foia, for the proposed new Harris system for albemarle and charlottesville, Harris redacted their proprietary information.

What I can’t figure out is why so many jurisdictions love Harris and wouldn’t dream of going with Motorola. The other thing is that for videos especially on YouTube of Harris radios demonstrating audio quality, there are very few. For someone trying to learn more about Harris, it’s kind of hard.

I do appreciate all the input though!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Cameron314]

Kb4cvn, there are definitely proprietary functions for Harris. When I did a foia, for the proposed new Harris system for albemarle and charlottesville, Harris redacted their proprietary information.

Which aren't the same thing. You seem to be getting proprietary information in a bid mixed up with system functions.

 

[BlueMoon2]

So, I’m hoping and guessing that it is possible to make the top selector knob on a Xg-75p the channel selector knob instead of the System selector knob?

Our area currently uses the left and right buttons on the face of the radio to change zones on the Motorola’s we have. I’m assuming that the cps for the Harris p25 radios can do the same thing.

I also know that in one zone, we can mix trunked channels with conventional channels . I.e. atac8 and talkaround 1 (simplex conventional)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[scanmanmi]

Whereas Moto has dozens. I had to deal with the grief with new customers because their Moto radio and/or systems did something unique that nobody else in the industry supported. (Just one more of Moto's many marketing tactics to keep users purchasing only their products!)

Then doesn't that make them a better system if they can offer more?

 

[DisasterGuy]

Then doesn't that make them a better system if they can offer more?

Again, there really isn't such a thing as "better" but rather what meets a design objective better.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk