BCD436HP/BCD536HP: Latest Firmware version?

[rhombus_000]

So I finally took the plunge, dug deep into my wallet, and picked up a 436. I was wondering what the most recent firmware version is, since I may have messed up the initial update process. I am currently running v1.03.00, not sure if the other data is relevant but on the screen it also lists "SUM=11D,M-Ver=1"

When I first hooked it up, it updated the database and then said a firmware update was required. I wasn't thinking, and I had the unit hooked into my usual remote scanner location on the other side of the house running through a 60 foot CAT-5 USB extender, which occasionally drops out making me worry about the update.

When it got to the point where it told me to hit the power button on the scanner, I moved it inside directly to a USB port on the computer. After that nothing happened when I tried to continue, or at least it did not appear to, so I'm wondering if the update took place at all. When I tell Sentinel to check for updates, it says the firmware is current. Scanner is working fine.

Off topic, but while I'm here a quick review after a day's use... very happy with the receiver sensitivity, P25 decoding, and trunk tracking. All seem to be noticeably better when run side by side with a 996XT. As for the interface... they made it so easy so use, they went full circle to the point of being difficult again. There are a number of things I don't like about it compared to the XT, but the only thing that's almost making me think of selling it is the fact that you need to be next to the scanner to program it. So much for true remote control...

 

[fxdscon]

I am currently running v1.03.00, ..

1.03.00 is the latest version for the 436.

.

 

[rhombus_000]

Thanks!!!

 

[AC0RV]

Where can I get a copy of that verison. I can not find a link to it ?

 

[AC0RV]

nevermind. I checked the scanner and have the latest firmware.

 

[fxdscon]

Where can I get a copy of that verison. I can not find a link to it ?

The file is not posted for download, updating the firmware is done through Sentinel.

.

 

[troymail]

The file is not posted for download, updating the firmware is done through Sentinel.

.

Index of /files/firmwares/436

 

[fxdscon]

Index of /files/firmwares/436

Is that an official Uniden Site?

.

 

[n3617400]

Is that an official Uniden Site?.

no but i keep track of updates on the official site

 

[kd7eir]

So I finally took the plunge, dug deep into my wallet, and picked up a 436. I was wondering what the most recent firmware version is, since I may have messed up the initial update process. I am currently running v1.03.00, not sure if the other data is relevant but on the screen it also lists "SUM=11D,M-Ver=1"

When I first hooked it up, it updated the database and then said a firmware update was required. I wasn't thinking, and I had the unit hooked into my usual remote scanner location on the other side of the house running through a 60 foot CAT-5 USB extender, which occasionally drops out making me worry about the update.

When it got to the point where it told me to hit the power button on the scanner, I moved it inside directly to a USB port on the computer. After that nothing happened when I tried to continue, or at least it did not appear to, so I'm wondering if the update took place at all. When I tell Sentinel to check for updates, it says the firmware is current. Scanner is working fine.

Off topic, but while I'm here a quick review after a day's use... very happy with the receiver sensitivity, P25 decoding, and trunk tracking. All seem to be noticeably better when run side by side with a 996XT. As for the interface... they made it so easy so use, they went full circle to the point of being difficult again. There are a number of things I don't like about it compared to the XT, but the only thing that's almost making me think of selling it is the fact that you need to be next to the scanner to program it. So much for true remote control...

You want to sell your 436 because it's not a "true remote control" device? I don't recall anyone, anywhere, marketing the 436 as a "remote control" scanner.

I get confused by people buying something for a purpose that it's NOT designed for, and then saying that is a reason for returning it. My car does not fly IFR routes, should I return it as well? My HF radio does not communicate on my local 800 MHz P25 system, I guess it's going back to Icom!

The number of people bad-mouthing this scanner because it does not meet their fantasy specifications seems to grow everyday.

If a tool is not intended for the purpose that you try to use it for, and it does not perform your intended purpose, then it is YOU that has failed, not the tool.

 

[phask]

I do not see where he said he wants to sell it. Nor that is a "true remote control" device?

He's running an extended USB via Ethernet - something commonly done though not really supported.

In fact OP States " ... very happy with the receiver sensitivity, P25 decoding, and trunk tracking. ..."

I think you need to re-read the post.

You want to sell your 436 because it's not a "true remote control" device? I don't recall anyone, anywhere, marketing the 436 as a "remote control" scanner.

I get confused by people buying something for a purpose that it's NOT designed for, and then saying that is a reason for returning it. My car does not fly IFR routes, should I return it as well? My HF radio does not communicate on my local 800 MHz P25 system, I guess it's going back to Icom!

The number of people bad-mouthing this scanner because it does not meet their fantasy specifications seems to grow everyday.

If a tool is not intended for the purpose that you try to use it for, and it does not perform your intended purpose, then it is YOU that has failed, not the tool.

 

[kd7eir]

I do not see where he said he wants to sell it. Nor that is a "true remote control" device?

He's running an extended USB via Ethernet - something commonly done though not really supported.

In fact OP States " ... very happy with the receiver sensitivity, P25 decoding, and trunk tracking. ..."

I think you need to re-read the post.

I think YOU need to re read it. Let me QUOTE from his post -

"Off topic, but while I'm here a quick review after a day's use... very happy with the receiver sensitivity, P25 decoding, and trunk tracking. All seem to be noticeably better when run side by side with a 996XT. As for the interface... they made it so easy so use, they went full circle to the point of being difficult again. There are a number of things I don't like about it compared to the XT, but the only thing that's almost making me think of selling it is the fact that you need to be next to the scanner to program it. So much for true remote control...

 

[kd7eir]

Come on, folks. If you are going to accuse someone of not reading something, make sure that you yourself have READ AND COMPREHENDED what you are talking about.

It's a waste of everyone's time to argue that someone did NOT say something that is PLAINLY right there in their post.

 

[kd7eir]

I do not see where he said he wants to sell it. Nor that is a "true remote control" device?

He's running an extended USB via Ethernet - something commonly done though not really supported.

In fact OP States " ... very happy with the receiver sensitivity, P25 decoding, and trunk tracking. ..."

I think you need to re-read the post.

As for running it via USB/Ethernet, the scanner requires PHYSICAL INTERACTION to accomplish several tasks, so expecting it to accomplish those tasks remotely is pure folly. No other explanation - pure and simple using a tool in a manner that it was never designed to be used and then complaining when it fails to function is foolish, and frankly should be embarrassing to the person committing such act.

If you want a scanner to do something that the 436 does not do, then do not buy the 436! I cannot possibly be the only person here that can comprehend this.

 

[phask]

Oops missed that - too many run on lines and not enough paragraphs.

Why doesn't the OP just get a 996 - run it as far away as you can fudge a usb, or use serial cable. I think you can do serial a few hundred feet - but it's been years since I did this in the lab.

I think YOU need to re read it. Let me QUOTE from his post -

"Off topic, but while I'm here a quick review after a day's use... very happy with the receiver sensitivity, P25 decoding, and trunk tracking. All seem to be noticeably better when run side by side with a 996XT. As for the interface... they made it so easy so use, they went full circle to the point of being difficult again. There are a number of things I don't like about it compared to the XT, but the only thing that's almost making me think of selling it is the fact that you need to be next to the scanner to program it. So much for true remote control...

 

[rhombus_000]

Oops missed that - too many run on lines and not enough paragraphs.

Why doesn't the OP just get a 996 - run it as far away as you can fudge a usb, or use serial cable. I think you can do serial a few hundred feet - but it's been years since I did this in the lab.

I do have a 996... and I use software I wrote to control it remotely. This can be done with all of the other scanners made by Uniden in recent memory without having to interact with the scanner physically.

"PC Programming and Control" is listed as a feature of the 436 on the Uniden website. To me, when I was thinking about buying one, suggested that the 436 would be able to be controlled remotely as in earlier scanners. If you have to be sitting next to it to push buttons, it's not really PC control is it? Maybe PC assisted control?

All of these issues can be fixed with simple and long overdue firmware updates... the biggest one would be to have the scanner default to serial mode after say 30 seconds of no selection. This alone would fix the biggest problem... and it couldn't take more than a few lines of code to impliment.

And if they made it possible to switch between Mass Storage and Serial mode remotely (not sure if this is possible hardware wise), that would fix the other half. I'm not going to be holding my breath.

But the way I see it is I spent $500 for a scanner that's not complete yet, and does less than the 996 I paid $400 for (aside from TDMA).

 

[rhombus_000]

You want to sell your 436 because it's not a "true remote control" device? I don't recall anyone, anywhere, marketing the 436 as a "remote control" scanner.

I get confused by people buying something for a purpose that it's NOT designed for, and then saying that is a reason for returning it. My car does not fly IFR routes, should I return it as well? My HF radio does not communicate on my local 800 MHz P25 system, I guess it's going back to Icom!

The number of people bad-mouthing this scanner because it does not meet their fantasy specifications seems to grow everyday.

If a tool is not intended for the purpose that you try to use it for, and it does not perform your intended purpose, then it is YOU that has failed, not the tool.

Fantasy specifications? There are thousands of scanners streamed online. If you were to buy a 436 for this VERY COMMON purpose, any time the computer cycles the USB ports your feed will go down until you can get to the scanner and select serial mode again.

The loss of USB connection issue is not caused by my extended cable setup, it's just made worse by it. Several other people here have reported that the connection drops out and the unit must be powered off and on again to get it working again, even when plugged directly into a computer.

If this scanner was never intended to be controlled remotely, why does it have an extensive serial protocol designed specifically for remote control???

 

[Voyager]

Sounds like your real complaint is that this scanner does not have a dedicated control port as in previous models. (a solution for which would to be a firmware update for the port to default to serial after a time-out for the menu selection when it reboots.)

 

[Citywide173]

As for running it via USB/Ethernet, the scanner requires PHYSICAL INTERACTION to accomplish several tasks

Although I am not positive, I believe the OP is using something similar to this:

USB Extender over CAT5E or CAT6 Connection up to 150ft - Monoprice.com

It is a USB connected to his computer, longer than most, but still within what should be expected to work. He's not trying to control the radio attached to a different computer over the ethernet, which I would agree to be outside of the expectation range.

Computer control of the radio is an advertised feature.

 

[Citywide173]

Sounds like your real complaint is that this scanner does not have a dedicated control port as in previous models. (a solution for which would to be a firmware update for the port to default to serial after a time-out for the menu selection when it reboots.)

This would solve a ton of issues!