From: floyddb@alpha.c2.org
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 1995 19:55:55 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <199512231130.DAA26556@infinity.c2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Fri, 22 Dec 1995 andr0id@midwest.net (Jason Rentz) wrote:

>>        
>>
>
>The problem with the Interceptor is that I think it can only receive one
>freqency at a time, and it is adjustable by a thumb wheel, not digitally.
>This would tend to make changing frequencies at high rates VERY hard. :)
>Also it has no frequancy readout, so this means that if you know what freq.
>you should be at it is hard to tune in that freq. without searching a little.  
>                        Dr0id
>
>
>( Computer Consulting & Management   )
>(P.O. Box 421  Cambria, IL 62915-0421)
>

The demo of the Interceptor I saw seemed to show it jumping from 150 MHz to 450 
MHz without any external adjustments, it locked on the strongest signal.
Granted, it can only receive one frequency at a time, but there shouldn't be any
significant delays when the phone hops a frequency.  The Interceptor's 
frequency readout is a bargraph style LED.  The Scout, from what I can
see in Optoelectronics' ad doesn't have any frequency controls on it, it does
have a digital frequency readout.  As far as timing is concerned, the Scout 
might be less useful because I think it feeds the frequency into the scanner for
reception.  Most scanners take a significant amount of time to change
frequencies.

Merry Christmas

        Floyd D. Barber
        floyddb@alpha.c2.org
        Key fingerprint:
        8A 98 1F 6B 70 7A FE 24 
        35 D4 48 CF 9D F6 B0 91