Filed under: Gadgets, Tech, GM
OnStar going silent on millions of vehicles
A decision by the Federal Communications Commission that allows all cell phone companies to turn off their analog networks beginning in February of 2008 means that nearly two million people, or half of OnStar's entire subscription base, will soon find the other end silent when they press that blue button on their vehicle's dash. General Motors' OnStar service was originally built in 1996 on an analog network owned by Verizon Wireless because digital networks at the time didn't provide enough coverage to outlying and rural areas where many OnStar subscribers are located.
Still, the FCC ruled on the sunsetting of analog networks all the way back in 2002, and for two years General Motors continued selling vehicles equipped with analog equipment that it knew would become obsolete. While the New York Times article seems to cry foul that it took GM another two years to switch from analog-only to dual-mode (analog/digital) hardware, that timetable sounds about right to us. Without knowing which way the FCC was going to rule (many companies that rely on analog networks like ADT Home Securities lobbied the FCC along with OnStar to stay the execution of analog networks), General Motors likely wasn't prepared to pull the switch on its suppliers, and in the meantime equipped many vehicles with analog/digital-ready hardware that could at least be upgraded to dual-mode when the time came. That time is coming at the end of 2007, as all analog networks will be shut off on January 1st, 2008. At that time, any OnStar subscriber with a vehicle before 2002 and some with vehicles between 2002 and 2004 will find themselves all alone in the driver's seat.
OnStar has set up a webpage for subscribers who would like more info on the transition and to find out if their vehicle is capable of being upgraded to survive the switch.
[Source: New York Times]
Related posts:
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
emulous1974 8:13PM (11/20/2006)
See that kinda decision in my opinion is why companies do not do well in the marketplace.
Waiting to decide what a court says for something that your customers rely upon, rather than do what's best for your customers shows exactly why you can't make a buck to cover your expenses.
Instead of investing money into the lawyers and the lobbiests, it probably would of been cheaper to buy the freaking analog networks from Verizon and run them yourself, or at least develop an easy upgrade path for your customers.
Way to serve the customer GM.
Reply
Smoove D 8:50PM (11/20/2006)
It should surprise no one that GM kept putting obsolete technology in their vehicles. Just look at all the engines they manufacture that still use push rods!
Reply
matt hayward 12:10AM (11/21/2006)
You must be joking. The analogue network was switched off in Australia in 2000. you guys are still using that stuff?
Reply
JB 6:56AM (11/21/2006)
Typical GM. What they could have done was create an analog system that could be upgraded later with a module switch. Then, they could upgrade cars as they come in for service so that eventually all are Onstar-able even if the service is not currently being used. Heck, GM could even use this plan as a way of showing support for the customer. GM didn't build the cellular phone network.
But no, GM will act like it always has - screw the customer. Make them pay for an upgrade, if possible. Likely the suppliers have changed 2 or 3 times, too, so tooling and drawings are lost. Typical - take a bad situation, blow the chance to redeeem yourself, and make it even easier for owners to move on to other brands - and never come back.
Clueless in "the Tubes" they is.
Reply
Justin 7:55AM (11/21/2006)
Emulous...do you have any idea how much it would have cost them to buy an entire wireless network structure? For a company that's already bleeding money, that's completely unrealistic. If anything they just should have invested in dual mode equipment, like your own cell phone, which can handle both analog and digital.
I've never had OnStar, but I've always been curious how much usage it actually gets.
Reply
Mikeeeeeeeeeeee 7:57AM (11/21/2006)
Amazing, none of you mentioned all the cell phones that will also be turned off in many rural areas. Do any of you live in middle America? If so, best get the tin can and the string out because in 2008 that's what you will be using for a cell phone.
Reply
Mikeeeeeeeeeeee 8:13AM (11/21/2006)
Addition to # 6
You guys should Google "Verizon Wireless Coverage map" and just see the lack of DIGITAL coverage in November, 2007.
I bet if this had been Toyota you would have had some excust.
This national wireless coverage map shows the locations you may use you digital wireless cellular phone within the USA.
This map was prepared by Strategis Group, Inc., for use by B-system cellular carriers in the U.S. and Canada, and generally depicts the service area boundaries of B-system service carriers in each of the 50 States and Canada. Because an area is shaded does not necessarily mean that there is complete cellular coverage; in fact, there are "no coverage" areas (including areas too small to depict) within the shaded areas. Wireless service is a radio technology that is subject to transmission limitations caused by service area limitations (such as cell site availability), customer equipment or its installation, as well as weather, atmospheric, magnetic, environmental, topographic and other like conditions. In addition, service may be temporarily limited or suspended due to system capacity limitations or system repairs or modifications.
Reply
Guenther 8:47AM (11/21/2006)
Funny how the GM bashers allways like to post before READING. If the post is correct, the units shipped after 2002 are digital "ready", meaning they can be upgraded with a receiver module. I doubt supplyers were changed often, if ever. As for the significant coverage problem, even as the digital networks expand, there are just many areas left that won't (and shouldn't) be covered by cell towers every few miles.
#3Matt- So after the plug got pulled (literally) on analog in Oz, what was left for communication in the (extensive) rural areas of the country? Did satelite phone sale surge, or does everyone have amateur radio down there?
Reply
Richard Warren 12:38PM (11/21/2006)
This is nothing new and not a huge deal really. One of the businesses I own happens to be a cellphone store. We, just this year, traded out our customers analog phones. Sure we knew it was coming, yes our parent company knew it was coming and waited until this year. Why? Ever hear of the government changing it's mind? Like HDTV timing?
On the cars this should be a pretty simple "chip replacement" for the communictions side.
Reply
Steve Wiseman 1:10PM (11/21/2006)
This is really too bad. The analog networks coverage is much futher when you are in a far away location. I remember times when I was in the back areas of Yellowstone and the On-Star cell phone would still work. From what I understand, the new digital networks can't reach as far and there are fewer cells available.
Also I think the hidden cost that On-Star is getting hit with is all the little mom and pop cell towers that still charge crazy roaming fees. Switching to all digital will probably stop this right in its tracks.
Too bad all those cars will now have a broken system :(
Steve Wiseman
http://www.windows-admin-tools.com
Reply
Josh 2:03PM (11/21/2006)
OnStar is crap anyways. As a Fire Fighter we looked for a person in a snow storm for 3 hours because of the info OnStars GPS locating gave us and they had been off by over a 15 miles.
Reply
cawpin 2:45PM (11/21/2006)
@Smoove D - You mean all those pushrod engines that get better milage and make more power than the OHC engines of Ford and other manufacturers? Yeah, that same company.
Reply
Fabulo 4:43PM (11/21/2006)
Everybody knew the analog network spectrum was going to be recalled sooner or later. Even GM did. Lobbying is getting you only so far when your interest (OnStar in some, select, already sold vehicle) is weighted against the number of cell phone users and desires of expansion of cell telco (1 onstar car for 6,238 cell phones)
In other news, sometimes, when you subscribe to a service, you are at the mercy of your service provider or regulatory changes.
Onstar too is not the only kind of service like this, thay probably have more exposure because, if I remember correctly, they were ahead of the game when they introduced the service.
Reply
Bobbo 5:19PM (11/21/2006)
>Funny how the GM bashers allways like to post before
>READING. If the post is correct, the units shipped after
>2002 are digital "ready", meaning they can be upgraded
>with a receiver module.
Funny, if you had READ the article you would have read GM continued to sell analog only equipment for 2 years AFTER the FCC ruling in 2002. That means they were selling analog only junk into 2004 when they knew it was going to be worthless in 2007.
Having said that, Caveat Emptor. That's what you get when you buy crap.
Reply
JJtalkline 3:28PM (11/23/2006)
I like Chevy trucks and have for 30 years now. Probably will continue to buy Chevy's in the future, but then may consider shoping other makers too. Anyone want a rear-view mirror with some useless buttons on it?
Reply
Bill Lanier 12:48PM (11/25/2006)
Take Notice GM!
Your analog service/hands free personal calling was important to me as it is more reliable than my regular cell phone. It is expensive, but weel worth it!
You make cars with features that your customers want/wanted and now you tell a large number of them that you are letting them down. Many of us feel like fools/dolts and our children are coming of age to drive.
I was going to hang on to my reliable little IMPALA for quite some time and then buy another when my finances allow. But now I see what you and AMERICAN BUSINESS feel about us all. LOYALTY MEANS NOTHING!
We are just dollar signs to you.
It all makes me want to put myself in debt early and buy a TOYOTA with BLUETOOTH TECHNOLOGY just to spite you!
Signed: Betrayed in NC
Reply
Smoove D 1:29PM (11/26/2006)
@cawpin - No, other manufacturers like Honda, who smoke GM in HP and MPG last time I checked.
Reply
Easton Harvey 4:22AM (11/29/2006)
anyone know of any class action lawsuits that have been filed due to devaluation of our vehicles due to GM's negligence?
Reply
Figment90 10:07AM (12/29/2006)
Betrayed in NC.
My sentiments exactly. We have an '01 Impala. We purchased for the mileage and safety features. We were looking at many manufacturers, since many have good star ratings. The OnStar was the deciding point. Figured that by the time our son was of driving age, would be the time we would have to get another car. Hubby uses 5 days a week to travel round trip 100 miles. Well that time has come and GM has let us down. Our next car purchase will be a Honda. Nowhere have I heard that the wireless companies are totally dropping analog as of January 1, 2008. They have to convert all their towers all over. The FCC mandate was that the wireless companies no longer have to support analog. GM has decided to drop their analog customers. Well GM as lost us as customers and all my family members (Aunts/Uncles/cousins, etc) and friends. They don't care about us, well we don't care about buying from them.
Reply
Figment90 10:08AM (12/29/2006)
I see a mention of class action. I haven't heard anything, but if anyone has let me know. Figment90@aol.com
Reply