This post has probably already been posted several times - I’ll try again anyway:
When will Swisscom have a product similar to that of Sunrise (Booster Box) available so that cell phone reception is still available for telephony in a “dead zone” (Wi-Fi is available, Wifi calling does not work).
Thank you very much for your answer, otherwise I will be forced to switch to Sunrise in the medium term - my neighbors have had great experiences with this Sunrise Indoor Box.
The Sunrise Indoor Box:
https://www.sunrise.ch/de/privatkunden/mobil-abos/mobilnetz/indoorbox.html
like the Salt Booster Box:
https://www.salt.ch/de/device-help/#/salt/booster-box
https://www.magicload.ch/images/Femtocell/orange_booster_box_quick_start_guide_de.pdf
are 3G/UMTS mobile radio antennas of the “femtocell” class:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Femtozelle
Femtocells have the disadvantage that they interfere with the cell phone signal from neighboring cell phone antennas:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Femtocell#Interference
Third generation mobile radio systems (3G/UMTS) place high demands on the time, phase and frequency synchronization of the mobile phone signal emitted by all mobile phone antennas. With 3G/UMTS, the requirements for time, phase and frequency synchronization are in the range of < 2 μs (2 μs = 0.000002 second). See also:
[http://www.oscilloquartz.com/insight-the-synchronization-of-3g-umts-networks-565-960-1](http://www.oscilloquartz.com/insight-the-synchronization-of- 3g-umts-networks-565-960-1)
Each newer generation of mobile communications systems, such as the 4th generation (4G/LTE), has even stricter requirements for time, phase and frequency synchronization. See also:
[http://www.chronos.co.uk/files/pdfs/wps/WP-Timing-Sync-LTE-SEC.pdf](http://www.chronos.co.uk/files/pdfs/wps/ WP-Timing-Sync-LTE-SEC.pdf)
Femtocells do not meet the high requirements for time, phase and frequency synchronization and are therefore considered “jammers” for neighboring mobile phone antennas.
The problem of time, phase and frequency synchronization could be avoided for femtocells if the mobile phone provider, here Swisscom, reserves its own frequency band for the femtocells and uses this frequency band exclusively for the use of femtocells. But this is in no way economical!
For the reasons mentioned above, the Swisscom customer can consider it a positive thing if Swisscom does not allow femtocells in its mobile network!
If there is no in-house mobile phone reception, the use of conventional cordless telephones (DECT/CAT-iq) is recommended for voice telephony. The use of WLAN is recommended for wireless in-house data transmission.
VoWLAN/WiFi calling also has its technical and radiation disadvantages and should be avoided!
When buying a DECT cordless telephone, pay attention to the ECO mode and the dynamic transmission power control for health reasons:
[https://www.bag.admin.ch/dam/bag/de/documents/str/nis/faktenblaetter-emf/faktenblatt- Schnurlostelefon.pdf.download.pdf/faktenblatt%20 Schnurlostelefon%20d.pdf] (https://www.bag.admin.ch/dam/bag/de/documents/str/nis/faktenblaetter-emf/faktenblatt- Schnurlostelefon.pdf.download.pdf/faktenblatt%20 Schnurlostelefon%20d.pdf)
CAT-iq cordless telephones only support ECO mode and dynamic transmission power control from CAT-iq 2.1 onwards.
It may be that femtocells are not technically unproblematic, but from the perspective of an affected customer they are of course a simple solution to a real customer need when there is poor mobile phone reception.
If Swisscom doesn’t want to offer it, that’s of course its right, but in order not to suffer a competitive disadvantage, it should move forward quickly with the topic of WiFi calling as an alternative, and unfortunately there is still a big problem with that: what happens next What is now being offered is unfortunately still far too device and subscription dependent. What would certainly be required here is general network availability for all Swisscom mobile numbers as quickly as possible…
Hobby-Nerd ohne wirtschaftliche Abhängigkeiten zur Swisscom
In emergency travel situations:
[https://community.swisscom.ch/t5/Andere-Abos/Connection Costs-Travel-Notsituation-Bahamas/m-p/511580](https://community.swisscom.ch/t5/Andere-Abos/Connection Costs-Travel- Emergency Situation-Bahamas/m-p/511580)
Making calls via the (hotel) WiFi (VoIP client, Skype, etc.) may be a good emergency solution. But at home I consider making calls via WLAN (WiFi calling/VoLTE) unacceptable because of the “WLAN background scan”.
Depending on the operating system, the WLAN background scan causes the WLAN client to disconnect the WLAN connection for a fraction of a second to 2 seconds every 30 to 120 seconds. These short Wi-Fi connection interruptions lead to short interruptions in calls or massive, short-term drops in voice quality during a telephone conversation over Wi-Fi.
The WLAN background scan is not a malfunction of the computer or smartphone. During the short-term WLAN disconnection, the WLAN client (e.g. computer or smartphone) searches for WLAN access points with better reception.
Because of the WLAN background scan, voice telephony with VoIP (e.g. Skype) via “normal” WLAN clients always offers a significantly worse quality of service than “real” wireless telephony with DECT and CAT-iq. See also:
[https://www.ghacks.net/2011/12/13/how-to-disable-wlan-background-scans/](https://www.ghacks.net/2011/12/13/how-to -disable-wlan-background-scans/)
[http://superuser.com/questions/881880/turn-off-wi-fi-scanning-on-windows-8](http://superuser.com/questions/881880/turn-off-wi-fi- scanning-on-windows-8)
Furthermore, the VoIP clients on the “normal” WLAN clients usually lack support for the necessary QoS mechanisms (WMM/IEEE 802.11e) for voice telephony over WLAN.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-Fi_Multimedia
