Kiwi's XPS test results are up.

[JimDrew]

Julez, as I have told you many times before, why not make a formal request to the Digi Corporation for their antenna patents (pending and granted).

[Julez]

I did, and they didn't bother to answer.
So, unless we get a patent number from you, there won't be to many people around who believe this claim of yours.
You claim it, you have to prove it.
Digi does not claim it, they don't have to prove anything.

[aviti]

Jim Drew,

You should patent your sales process. It is certainly unique and you claim it is successful. You use arguments and unsatisfied customers to create interest and thereby sales right?

[Julez]

Well, I just contacted the Digi support.

Here is a transcript of the chat we had:

	Quote:
	Please wait while you are transferred to another agent. Hayden: Hello Hayden: How are you today? Julian: I'm fine, thanks. Hayden: Looking at your previous conversation with Krisanne... It appears you have questions regarding the Wire antenna that comes on the 2.4 GHz modules. Hayden: is that correct? Julian: yes, exactly, the whip antenna version Julian: from what I know about antennas, these appear to be groundplane monopoles, is that correct? Hayden: It is... In this case the Radio acts as the groundplane Julian: yes, the pcb surface of the module, as I understand Julian: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikibook...le_pattern.gif Julian: is this the correct radiation pattern? Hayden: http://ftp1.digi.com/support/images/...eeAntennas.pdf Look on page 6. Hayden: This shows the radiation pattern for that antenna. Hayden: But the picture you showed should be very close to the pattern of the antenna Julian: thanks a lot. does your company have any patents concerning this antenna? Hayden: Not that I know of. Julian: thank you very much, you helped me a lot. Have a nice day! Hayden: Sure thing. Have a great day

[Woketman]

Thanks Julez, I guess that exposes just a little bit more JD mis-direction.

What will the true believer Fan-Boys say now?

[skubacb]

I really love it Jules now you are asking me to do your work. In a word, NO. Do it yourself. Otherwise stop crying about not getting something that you, yourself will not take the time to find. BTW you can do patent searches.

There you go again W. Stating something as a fact that you do not know. How many other things do you not know that you will state as fact?

Why do you need a patent number? Go out and do a real world test for yourself. I have told you and W more than once how to do the test. I have done it and darn if I do not get spherical reception of the XPS receiver. So, since I real world tested, I do not need patent numbers or Boeing data.

Otherwise go rent an anechoic chamber and prove JD and XBee wrong. I keep seeing it posted that it is all a lie. Well, prove it is what you say or be quiet. Put your money where your mouth is.

Now go save the RC community from Spectrum systems that completely stop talking to the TX.

[Woketman]

OK, so I take it from skubacb response that he concedes and admits that JD is full of crap.

Thanks skubacb, it takes a big man to admit that. We respect you now!

[flarssen]

	Quote: Originally Posted by skubacb
	I have done it and darn if I do not get spherical reception of the XPS receiver.

So you got the same level of reception from all directions? Should be easy to find out using the telemetry feature...

[Julez]

Hi!

There is another interesting fact. JD uses the same FCC ID code for his stuff, that the standard modules use: "OUR-XBEEPRO"
You can check it here:
https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/...ericSearch.cfm

Now here is the list of antennas, which are allowed to be used to comply with the FCC test:
https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/f...ive_or_pdf=pdf

Nowhere do I see some kind of "multi-element" antenna or something else, or any claims of patents.

This means, as JD uses the FCC ID from the standard module, he is only allowed to use the standard antennas. If he used any antenna type that would alter the RF properties of the modules in any meaningful way, he would not be allowed to use the FCC ID of the standard module.

	Quote: Originally Posted by JimDrew
	Julez, "spherical" is our term. Digi calls it omni-directional, or as their lead engineer put it "a ball with north and south dimples".[]

The antenna list showes some nice "omni-directional" antennas, like this one:

	Quote:
	A24-F15NF | Omni-directional (Fiberglass base station) |15.0 dBi |Fixed |2 m| 17.1 dB

Wait a moment - a 15.0dBi antenna, being "omni-directional"? Clearly, "omni-directional" cannot mean something like "equal in all directions" here, as that would imply, that the antenna in question would amplify the signal in all direction all by itself. The only way to amplify a signal for an antenna is to be more directional, that means, more power in one direction, less in another. So "omni-directional" clearly only refers to the horizontal plane (like a pancake).
Jim obviously thought in the beginning, that Digis 2D "omni-directional" means 3D- spherical. The antenna descriptions prove, that this is not the case.

[JimDrew]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Julez
	I did, and they didn't bother to answer. So, unless we get a patent number from you, there won't be to many people around who believe this claim of yours. You claim it, you have to prove it. Digi does not claim it, they don't have to prove anything.

Digi most certainly does claim it. Digi has patents both pending and granted for the antenna technology.

As stated by Digi's engineers, "the radiation pattern of the XBEE modules is a ball with north and south dimples". This is how we came up with the term "spherical".

[Woketman]

Once again, Julez has shown JD to be just a liar. The Fan-Boys must REALLY hate Julez!!!

[Julez]

	Quote: Originally Posted by JimDrew
	Digi most certainly does claim it. Digi has patents both pending and granted for the antenna technology.

Why has no Digi representative I contacted ever heard of these patents?
It is their *job* to know these modules, after all.
Why do the patented antennas not appear in the list of antennas approved for the use with Xbee modules?

[aramsdell]

My radiation pattern is just fine. Works like a charm.

[tadawson]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Julez
	Why has no Digi representative I contacted ever heard of these patents? It is their *job* to know these modules, after all. Why do the patented antennas not appear in the list of antennas approved for the use with Xbee modules?

I would not expect the support pukes to know much of anything about patents, certifications, legal issues, etc. Try contacting a real engineer . . .

The support pukes job is to tell you how to fix typical application problems, not necessarily to know design decisions, paperwork, and legalities . . . or for that matter, much internal detail, at least not in most companies. Typically, as soon as problems get beyond pretty trivial, the support guys wipe off the drool and go look for a real engineer . . .

So, I would assume that Jim and XPS, having more of an OEM relationship with Digi, work with folks at a much higher level than what Joe-Blow off the street can get to with a blind call or e-mail . . .

- Tim

[Julez]

Well, Tim, I guess that most people here will regard the actually existing information from a support agent and the FCC sheets more credible than the non-existing information of an imaginary engineer.
Hard facts is what counts, and so far, I am the only one who put his money where his mouth was.
All I hear in response are alleged relationships, smoke and mirrors, but nothing substantial, nothing that can be relied upon, no patent number.
If all you can do is to resort to insulting support agents, I fear that will not convince many people.
The only *facts* we have point in the direction, that no antenna patents exist.
What facts do you have to support your claim?