In alt.home.repair, on Thu, 8 Feb 2024 08:12:36 -0800 (PST), AK
<scientist77017@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 at 8:25:30?PM UTC-6, kelown wrote:
>> > My daughter found a way to make calls using my Wifi.
>> >
>> > I installed WhatsApp on my phone.
>> >
>> > It uses my WiFi to make calls.
>> How does WhatsApp handle inbound calls? How does your daughter make
>> outbound calls when no WiFi is available?
>
>WhatsApp uses a Wi-Fi connection to communicate cross-platform, unlike Apple iMessage and Messages by Google, which require cellular networks and Short Message Service (SMS).

I think you'll find that they can use wifi too. Most people with cell
phones have cellular coverage everywhere, and texts use so little data,
that no one thinks about or talks about whether the transmission is
cellular or by wifi.

I don't know of anything anymore that can use the cell signal that can't
also be done with wifi.

What couldn't use wifi in early years were regular dialing and SMS, but
then they developed wifi-calling, as an adjuct to normal calling, which
iiuc most but not all phones have in recent years. That was when phone
calls, which were the original purpose of cell phones, used a different,
earlier protocol than all the other later apps on the phone. Then iiuc
they developed VOIP, voice over IP (Well, I guess wifi calling itself
used VOIP, right?), and then a few years ago, they switched all the
phone dialers to VOIP and abandoned the method that had been used.

(I've pieced this together from haphazard reading. Corrections
welcome.)

If all the phones now use VOIP, how is it that in some places with weak
signals you can make phone calls but can't use other apps? If anything
it should be the opposite, because if the signal is weak, packets have
to be resent, so that the signal is slow, that won't affect, other than
slowing response, something like a web browser, but it would make a live
phone conversation almost impossible to maintain!

> WhatsApp's use of Wi-Fi is cost-effective, making it popular with users who do not have data plans with unlimited calls and text messaging.

No, but it's certainly popular because you can make international calls
for free, and my impression is that whatsapp had video calling before
the factory-included dialers did. Although skype had it when whatsapp
was just a gleam in its father's eye.

On Sun, 4 Feb 2024 05:44:00 -0000 (UTC), danny burstein posted for all of us to
digest...

>
> In <f88uri17gdr14r6hikpuah2a9h3hs6chps@4ax.com> micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> writes:
>
> [snip]
>
> >Your whole post is very interesting. I can remember when I-80 didn't
> >exist, and when it partly did but had sections that were 2-lane, back
> >around 1967 or 8, when I drove from Allentown north and then to chicago
> >one night, when I knew I wouldn't sleep anyhow. No restaurants or gas
> >stations either, so not having cell towers sounds about right.
>
> >Pennsylvania really is a quite rural state, despite being the keystone
> >of the colonies.
>
> Pennsylvania's DOT even ack's this lack of cellular coverage:
>
> roadsign at: www.dburstein.com/images/limited_cellular_911.jpg
>
> Sign says: "Emergency Cellular 911", and underneath that,
> a second sign saying "Limited Coverage".
>
> And this is a major Interstate in 2024

PennDOT does not control cell companies so at least they inform users. The
carriers probably tried to get towers but the residents balked. NIMBY The
solution? get a sat phone, hope the people along the road are aware of
problems, get a CB radio or hope nothing happens. Don't depend on PSP to bail
you out as they only have one trooper on duty and he's giving a ticket to some
grandma. Complain to the cell co's (for all the good it will do).

--
Hiram

On Sun, 4 Feb 2024 16:20:41 -0500, Ed P posted for all of us to digest...

>
> On 2/4/2024 1:55 PM, micky wrote:
> > In alt.home.repair, on Sun, 4 Feb 2024 13:03:37 -0500, Ed P
> > <esp@snet.xxx> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2/4/2024 12:44 AM, danny burstein wrote:
> >>> In <f88uri17gdr14r6hikpuah2a9h3hs6chps@4ax.com> micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> writes:
> >>>
> >>> [snip]
> >>>
> >>>> Your whole post is very interesting. I can remember when I-80 didn't
> >>>> exist, and when it partly did but had sections that were 2-lane, back
> >>>> around 1967 or 8, when I drove from Allentown north and then to chicago
> >>>> one night, when I knew I wouldn't sleep anyhow. No restaurants or gas
> >>>> stations either, so not having cell towers sounds about right.
> >>>
> >>>> Pennsylvania really is a quite rural state, despite being the keystone
> >>>> of the colonies.
> >>>
> >>> Pennsylvania's DOT even ack's this lack of cellular coverage:
> >>>
> >>> roadsign at: www.dburstein.com/images/limited_cellular_911.jpg
> >>>
> >>> Sign says: "Emergency Cellular 911", and underneath that,
> >>> a second sign saying "Limited Coverage".
> >>>
> >>> And this is a major Interstate in 2024
> >>>
> >>
> >> Take a look at the cell coverage maps. Still plenty of open spots.
> >>
> >> They can fill them in faster by charging you more every month to pay for
> >> the towers to be erected and maintained. Are you willing?
> >>
> >> https://www.fcc.gov/BroadbandData/MobileMaps/mobile-map
> >>
> >>
> >> When my daughter moved, she changed from Verizon to ATT. Why? Verizon
> >> wanted to put in a tower but the people in the area objected so now they
> >> get no signal.
> >
> > We don't need no stinkin' towers. Made my cousin sterile.
>
> I thought that was a benefit.

Another good one!

--
Hiram