Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!ginosko!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Antenna Question Message-ID: Date: 23 Oct 89 02:27:48 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Organization: Green Hills and Cows Lines: 25 Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 469, message 6 of 11 In article , lloyd!sunfs3!kent@husc6. harvard.edu (Kent Borg) writes: > One good reason for getting rid of the open coil would be so bits of > outdoors don't get stuck in there, changing the inductance of the > coil, and screwing up the performance of the antenna. > Another reason would be so that people won't know you have a cellular > telephone. This might not be a good thing. If you really don't want people to know you have a cellular phone, use a handheld. I had a standard cellular car phone for a couple of years. When it died, rather than pay a fortune to have it repaired I decided to move to a handheld. I never expected it to work very well in the car, particularly while in motion, and was certainly surprised to find that it worked better! There had obviously been some improvement in the transceiver technology in those intervening years. Needless to say, I find that my handheld is all I need for mobile communications and there is no unsightly antenna on my truck. Not really yuppie-approved, but such is life. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !