Excitement starting to turn to disappointment

well now isn't this an interesting thread. I bought it for 2 reasons:

GPS because I do go to many places in my travels where I do not know how to get to where I'm going..but the BlueTooth capability was a very important feature. As such and if I cannot use the keypad on the TT to dial a number or after dialing add an extension...I'm hooped and up for sale it goes.! Back to E-bay you B**tch..!!

I won't even talk about the mp3 capability...the top two matter large.

Anyone have a BB 8830 and paired it with the TT...???
If so...results..???

stk
 
Bb 8830

.....Anyone have a BB 8830 and paired it with the TT...???
If so...results..??? stk

Got it working flawlessly here. As I went through the set up on the 720, because it only lists the BB8100, I selected "other" all the time, and let TT figure it out. (My first instinct would have been to select the 8100 all the time as the 'next best model' but choosing 'other' all the time worked.)

After that, when I finally figured out how to enable everything necessaary on the Crackberry, it all works great!

Since my sync with MS outlook involved about 500 names, I know have that many Ph #'s at my fingertips via the 720 as well.

Hope that helps...
 
3. ...This is a clear oversight by the developers...it appears as if they just simply forgot about it.
I don't think it is an oversight. Echo cancellation is a tricky proposition (when done properly at least), and it also requires a lot of processing power.

You know what happens when a microphone and an active speaker (connected to that mic) are in close proximity right?

I am guessing that the TomTom dynamically controls the output of its own speaker to supress feedback and echo, but how is it supposed to control the output of your car stereo? It can't. Amplification is being done by your car stereo. If you have a 'car kit' it may be able to do it, but not when it's just connected with an audio cable, as it has no way to control the amp in your car stereo.

4. ..the feature is not supported. If the feature is not supportred then why have a button? This is not only an oversight, but inexcusable in my opinion.
The feature is not supported by your phone and/or phone provider. Are you using a CDMA phone?
 
I don't think it is an oversight. Echo cancellation is a tricky proposition (when done properly at least), and it also requires a lot of processing power.

I would have to defer to an echo cancellation expert. I know a little about it, but I don't know enough about internal vs external speaker interaction to speak intelligently about it. I do know that there are software stacks for this very purpose available and that there are other products that use car speakers for the phone audio, so it shouldn't be that difficult of a feature to include.


The feature is not supported by your phone and/or phone provider. Are you using a CDMA phone?

For this, I must respectfully disagree. CDMA (GSM is another) is the protocol that the cell phone uses to talk to the cellular network. That has nothing to do with how the cell phone talks to the TomTom (via Bluetooth).

I might have believed that the phone doesn't support the feature except I know other people that have the same phone and the DTMF keypad works fine. Even TT's tech support acknowledges that "it should work" but they are unable to determine why.
 
Last edited:
There is NO, I repeat NO, reason that TT can have the DTMF pad work with ALL phones. If the phone does not support it they can always create the tones them selves. It's SOOOOOOO easy to create the darn tones.
 
Got it working flawlessly here. As I went through the set up on the 720, because it only lists the BB8100, I selected "other" all the time, and let TT figure it out. (My first instinct would have been to select the 8100 all the time as the 'next best model' but choosing 'other' all the time worked.)

After that, when I finally figured out how to enable everything necessaary on the Crackberry, it all works great!

Since my sync with MS outlook involved about 500 names, I know have that many Ph #'s at my fingertips via the 720 as well.

Hope that helps...

Which cell service do you use? I'm with Verizon and canNOT get the DATA services to work on the 8830.

I got the phone book transferred (I really do need to clean that up!!!) and just "bluetoothed" with my sister over the tt920.

But I would like to get DATA working if possible.
 
Which cell service do you use? I'm with Verizon and canNOT get the DATA services to work on the 8830.....

Its Bell Canada, so that probably doesn't help you to know.

One other thing that worked for me:

Bell was NOT in the list of service providers (despite being the largest in the country), so its another spot where I picked "Other" and let it use some default settings.

Perhaps go through the set up again, and try that?

Sorry, no other suggestions.
 
I think I may have overly confused the situation with my previous post, apologies for that I will try to clarify...

I would have to defer to an echo cancellation expert. I know a little about it, but I don't know enough about internal vs external speaker interaction to speak intelligently about it.
The point is not that there is anything wrong with the echo cancellation in the TT (it works perfectly with it's own speaker), but that there is no way for the TT to control your car stereo's output over an audio cable. Without this ability to control the signal output, it will go into mad echo/feedback loop. If you connected the TT directly to your head unit via a car kit, then it may be a different matter.

I do know that there are software stacks for this very purpose available and that there are other products that use car speakers for the phone audio, so it shouldn't be that difficult of a feature to include.
I don't think there is any other product that will let you have phone audio output from a card stereo that are connected via an audio-in socket. The feature is not missing from the TT, it just cannot be implemented properly over an audio cable.

CDMA (GSM is another) is the protocol that the cell phone uses to talk to the cellular network. That has nothing to do with how the cell phone talks to the TomTom (via Bluetooth).
Firstly, IS-95 (CDMA) and GSM are very different. IS-95 is not a network protocol (like GSM), it specifies only the air interface of the system. Thus the services offered (and how they are implemented) over a CDMA network are decided entirely by the operator.

Furthermore, there are notorious problems with DTMF over IS-95 networks, mainly because CDMA chipsets utilize lossy compression techniques (optimised for voice) which distort many of the DTMF tones to the point where they are unrecognisable by the receiving system (particularly the tones for 0 and * keys).

However, all of the above is not directly related to your problem, which is related to the BT profile on your phone. If all BT connection profile were created equally, there would be no problem. Unfortunately they are not. Manufacturers (and operators) are basically free to choose what features will be supported/available over the BT connection. If they decide that DTMF signaling will not be supported by the BT profile, then you cannot use that feature from the TT.

That is why the TT reports 'Feature not supported'. TT's BT profile does allow it (that's why other people can use it), your phones BT profile does not.

I might have believed that the phone doesn't support the feature except I know other people that have the same phone and the DTMF keypad works fine. Even TT's tech support acknowledges that "it should work" but they are unable to determine why.
The phone as it leaves the factory does support this, the replacement BT profile installed by your handset provider does not. You could try asking them why, and if/when a replacement BT profile will be available.

Of course, you can simply verify all of the above by using a friend's (who is with a different network) phone. I think you will find that there is nothing wrong with the TT.
 
There is NO, I repeat NO, reason that TT can have the DTMF pad work with ALL phones.
Exactly. Or did you mean "can't"?

If the phone does not support it they can always create the tones them selves. It's SOOOOOOO easy to create the darn tones.
This seems like a nice solution, although I don't think it will work.

Although the DTMF tones will be passed along on the 'voice' channel, the (voice optimised) compression used by CDMA chips can change the frequency, effectively destroying the DTMF tone. To the human ear it will sound the same, but I think that DTMF signaling equipment will just hear it as 'voice' and ignore it. The variance in tone must be less than 1.5% for DTMF signaling to occur.

Of course, I could be completely wrong!
 
Last edited:
Exactly. Or did you mean "can't"?

This seems like a nice solution, although I don't think it can actually work.

The reason is that each DTMF tone actually consists of two tones (one of which is inaudible). I imagine that the audible part will be passed along just fine using the 'voice' channel, but the (voice optimised) compression used by CDMA chips will corrupt (or remove) the inaudible part of the signal, destroying the DTMF tone. To the human ear it will sound the same, but I think that DTMF signaling equipment will just hear it as 'voice' and ignore it.

Once again I will respectfully disagree. DTMF (Dual Tone Multi Frequency) consists of 2 AUDIBLE tones that are played simultaneously as you press each digit. You are correct that the audible part will be passed along on the voice channel, since both tones are audible they will be passed in band perfectly. This is why you can use DTMF digits to secondary dial for things like voicemail. There are many devices that use the method that was proposed by Timon. There is no reason that the TT couldn't store the DTMF tones on the device and pass them via in band audio.

If you doubt this, record the DTMF digits used for your voicemail password. Then hold the speaker up to your phone's mic and play the recording the next time you dial into your VM. I guarantee that it will work.
 
Exactly. Or did you mean "can't"?

This seems like a nice solution, although I don't think it can actually work.

The reason is that each DTMF tone actually consists of two tones (one of which is inaudible). I imagine that the audible part will be passed along just fine using the 'voice' channel, but the (voice optimised) compression used by CDMA chips will corrupt (or remove) the inaudible part of the signal, destroying the DTMF tone. To the human ear it will sound the same, but I think that DTMF signaling equipment will just hear it as 'voice' and ignore it.

I've used DTMF signaling for many years on Ham radio repeaters so I totally understand how it works. Each DTMF digit does consists of two tones but they are both audible.

There are a total of 8 tones that make up DTMF, 4 high tones(1209, 1336, 1477 and 1633 Hz) and 4 low tones (697, 770, 852 and 941 Hz) placed in a 4x4 matrix. The frequency of the the tones were picked so that they could be highly compressed and still be easily detectable.

The tones selected should not a any problems passing through any cellular network and still be detected at the receiving end.
 
Once again I will respectfully disagree. DTMF (Dual Tone Multi Frequency) consists of 2 AUDIBLE tones...
You are quite right mgates1456, my mistake. Apologies. I have edited the offending post accordingly.

...tones are audible they will be passed in band perfectly.
Not perfectly on a CDMA phone. For the same reason voice is not carried perfectly, lossy compression.

If you doubt this, record the DTMF digits used for your voicemail password.
I don't use VM, and even if I did...

I guarantee that it will work.
Yes, because my phone is GSM! :D

Anyway, let's not argue. I was just trying to help you out with the problems you appear to be having (my set-up works fine). The quickest solution to all your problems is to get a new (fully supported) phone. I would suggest a GSM-based one. Sorry I don't have any better suggestions for you.
 
I would suggest a GSM-based one. Sorry I don't have any better suggestions for you.
FYI - I pass DTMF over a TDMA phone at 4:1 compression algorithm (not lossless). Manages to trigger any IVR system I've ever had reason to hit with it (e.g., Sear's Service, last night). I wouldn't lock someone into GSM on the basis of the prior arguments...

Of course, that has zip all to do with whether the TT will dial a phone. The idea that a cell phone can be dialed with audio tones through its microphone (the equivalent of what's being described in several posts here) is bogus.

Until the phone is actually connected to the network (unless it's an old analog cell system -- still possible out there in the boonies), tones are usually irrelevant to the original dialing process. It's digital signaling between the phone and the cell site equipment. It's whether or not the numbers can be passed via Bluetooth to the phone in a meaningful way is what matters, and we're talking a Bluetooth "Audio Gateway" connection here, not a digital one. I'm not sure if there are any digital cell switches that even respond to DTMF, and all that can be passed between the TT and your phone over the BT audio gateway profile is audio.

The hands-free units that I've seen respond only to one of two things --

Spoken commands over the audio gateway (not DTMF tones)
... or
Dialing the number on the phone itself, with the audio handled over the hands-free device

That's not to say that you couldn't design a phone that interpreted DTMF arriving over a Bluetooth audio gateway interface, I just don't think it's done. The phone would have to interpret these in about the same way it does voice dialing commands. Has zip to do with the subsequent "dialing" data sent to a digital cell site by a phone.
 
Last edited:
Its Bell Canada, so that probably doesn't help you to know.

One other thing that worked for me:

Bell was NOT in the list of service providers (despite being the largest in the country), so its another spot where I picked "Other" and let it use some default settings.

Perhaps go through the set up again, and try that?

Sorry, no other suggestions.

Thanks for the reply. What NUMBER did you use? Did you change it to the #777, I've seen mentioned for leave that at the default - something like *9.# (tom tom elsewhere at the moment)

I think Verizon locks up their data service quite tight!
 
FYI - I pass DTMF over a TDMA phone at 4:1 compression algorithm (not lossless)
I believe you, because TDMA = GSM. It is a world away from IS-95.

I wouldn't lock someone into GSM on the basis of the prior arguments....
You talk about lock-in's?? Only CDMA handsets can't be moved between operators! Each CDMA handset is literally locked to the provider. With a GSM phone you can swap the SIM to one from any provider, from any country, or transfer the phone number from one provider to another!! I have 3 different SIM cards from different countries, so I can always make local rate calls. If I want to change one from Vodafone to T-Mobile for example, I can keep the same phone and the same phone number!! That's not what I think of as a lock-in.

Ask yourself why 85% of the planets mobile phones use GSM tech and <1% use CDMA...

But hey, I just offer my $0.02 worth. Take it or leave it, it's all the same to me. I was just trying to help...

I honestly don't understand the loyalty to CDMA many people here show. If you don't work for Qualcom (or a network operator) there is not a lot positive to say about it. The main advantage is that it is cheaper for an operator to deploy a CDMA network than a GSM one. I can't think of any real advantages to the users.
 
Of course, that has zip all to do with whether the TT will dial a phone. The idea that a cell phone can be dialed with audio tones through its microphone (the equivalent of what's being described in several posts here) is bogus.
On this point I could not agree with you more! :)
 
I believe you, because TDMA = GSM. It is a world away from IS-95.
Don't try to sell that to Motorola (one of the few TDMA handset suppliers). GSM has at times been laid over local TDMA infrastructure (e.g., AT&T), but they're still, if not apples and oranges, oranges and tangerines.

TheSpook said:
Ask yourself why 85% of the planets mobile phones use GSM tech and <1% use CDMA...

Europe did it because they landed on a single standard early.

TheSpook said:
I honestly don't understand the loyalty to CDMA many people here show. If you don't work for Qualcom (or a network operator) there is not a lot positive to say about it. The main advantage is that it is cheaper for an operator to deploy a CDMA network than a GSM one. I can't think of any real advantages to the users.
The SIM card is about the only benefit that GSM offers, and most carriers have web or PC based services to let you dump your phone book if you want to switch phones. If you're talking power requirements, propagation, bandwidth (and hence, cost) or just about anything else that counts in the end-use experience, CDMA usually does a better job.

BetaMax <> VHS. GSM got the early lead in Europe. They certainly didn't want to purchase American made handsets, and their home-grown manufacturers would have had to license CDMA which wasn't yet even available. It was (and remains) an issue of economics and politics, not technology.
 
I received my TT 720 as a Christmas present and was very excited when I read about everything that it was capable of. The map functionality, bluetooth, and mp3 player are all great. But, now that I am starting to get a little deeper into the TomTom's capabilities, I am becoming more disappointed in the unit.
I know the feeling. I even returned my unit once with the idea of getting something else. When I started looking at the other units, Magellan 4250 and Nuvi ??, I liked the Magellan A LOT! However, the horror stories I read on various forums about Magellan service turned me away.
I like the capabilities to browse maps on the TomTom, which isn't possible on the Nuvi.
All the extras seem to be solely for Europe as TomTom is based in Netherlands. I think this unit's going back this weekend! Not to be a xenophobe, but I'd like something that fits in better to where I live. The TomTom just doesn't seem to cut it. :(
 
The idea that a cell phone can be dialed with audio tones through its microphone (the equivalent of what's being described in several posts here) is bogus.

I agree with the what you said. However, that is not what I said; I realize that playing DTMF digits to an idle cell phone will not do anything other than annoy whoever is sitting next to you.

If you go back and re-read my post you will note that I said you could play recorded DTMF digits into the mic of a cell phone AFTER you have dialed into your voicemail. My point was that the DTMF digits are passed via the in band audio of a cell phone well enough to be recognized by a VM or IVR system. This is true whether it is a CDMA or GSM phone. This is useful for any secondary dial situation. Maybe this would be a good compromise for TT, then whether or not the phone supports DTMF via bluetooth becomes irrelevent.
 
Sorry all, but I can't let this lie...

Don't try to sell that to Motorola (one of the few TDMA handset suppliers). GSM has at times been laid over local TDMA infrastructure (e.g., AT&T)
ALL GSM phones/networks are TDMA! That is a defining feature of GSM tech. CDMA is not and never can be TDMA, they are fundamentally different in the way that the available EM spectrum is used. Either all the transmitters/recievers in a cell are separated by time (TDMA) or by code (CDMA).

Europe did it because they landed on a single standard early.
And most of the rest of the world followed Europe's example because consumers clearly preferred the technology over Qualcomms.

..and most carriers have web or PC based services to let you dump your phone book if you want to switch phones.
That's nice. But I don't have to switch handsets or change phone numbers to switch between carriers!! And, I can change carriers in 5 seconds, by switching my SIM card.

If you're talking power requirements, propagation, bandwidth (and hence, cost) or just about anything else that counts in the end-use experience, CDMA usually does a better job.
Consumers don't care about power requirements (which incidentally are equivalent now. GSM used to use more power, but not any more), propagation (?) or bandwidth. Consumers care about price, ease of use (ie handset / network interoperability / roaming) and, most importantly, call quality. In these respects GSM is the clear winner.

It was (and remains) an issue of socio-economics...
Exactly, the consumers of the world have decided which technology they prefer, even though Qualcomm and the network operators (who must deploy more expensive GSM network infrastructure, and would prefer that their customers can't easily leave them) would prefer we all enjoyed CDMA instead.

Oh and BTW, my GSM handset is an 'American made' Motorola.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Latest resources

Forum statistics

Threads
28,827
Messages
194,366
Members
67,761
Latest member
Onedrifter

Latest Threads

Back
Top