Early cellphone effects? (V2.0?)

Inspired by this thread

I am by no means a technical expert on cellular technology, but I find the claim far-fetched. The hard part of analog cellular isn't the actual transmitting, which is simple radio. It's in the switching between cells and that takes computing power that wasn't there until the 80s. Old style car phones existed as early as the 60s (perhaps earlier, I'm not sure) but it was an operator assisted radio connection. Widespread cellular got rid of the operator and automated everything and moved from a central radio connection to multiple low-power cells. 1947 was the year the transistor was invented, a necessary precursor to all of this. All in all, it might have gotten you an extra decade at most -- putting the first cell networks in the early to mid 1970s. Maybe, if the prospect drove the necessary innovation in computing and batteries. I read this article independently from the post earlier this week and it seemed more an attempt to make an ideological argument than a scientific one.
I don't disagree in principle, but transistors didn't get used in cellphones in the '50s & '60s because there was no market for them: cellphones didn't exist. So, if the spectrum assignment was done around 1947-50, there might well be a market for transistors in cellphones (instead of just hearing aids & radios).

That demand might also drive development of improved batteries; lower consumption from transistors versus vacuum tubes would already help.

Computing power, I'm less sure about, but I can't help think demand has an effect on innovation, the same as for batteries & transistors.

That said, I wonder about "networked" phones leading to something akin to Internet/World Wide Web without input from DARPA or DoD. Is that pie in the sky?
 
Pictures guy with army WW II back back style radio for cell phone and car batteries to run it. ;)

I think first and foremost the military could push the tech at first, then having that spill over into the commercial space.
The tech could be pushed 10 years earlier so that by the 80's instead of the giant bag phones you could have the more simple phones. that part is doable. there is still the need for supporting infrastructure
 
Pictures guy with army WW II back back style radio for cell phone and car batteries to run it. ;)
Using vacuum tubes, you might be right. I imagine a short-range, low-power transmitter, a much more "local" system, & so (probably) more celltowers (to begin with). Think of early hearing aids.

That makes growing out a national network harder & more expensive...
I think first and foremost the military could push the tech at first, then having that spill over into the commercial space.
I think that's likely. I can imagine a "command network" linking unit commanders, with a "cell tower" vehicle keeping them in contact. Question in my mind: comm interception. Does this require scrambler? Are the signals low-enough power you need to be effectively on top of them to intercept? (Obviously, the enemy will target the "cell tower" vehicle...)

I'm also thinking you'd see value in police & taxi use (police first, I'd guess). This might supplant the car radios (which weren't widespread even in the late '40s, AIUI), & might improve communication sooner & faster: cellphones for every detective (or even a shared phone, signed in/out, for each shift: all still get use of one, but only a third as many bought) might be available at lower per-unit cost than radios for every car, which would put pressure on phone makers to bring/keep cost down & improve performance. (The Army is less likely to be so concerned about cost...)
 
Perhaps if the telephone companies pushed car phone harder in wealthy communities? Most places it would take a while to recover the cost of the infrastructure. Car dealers for upscale cars could gain another up sell item.
 
Perhaps if the telephone companies pushed car phone harder in wealthy communities?
"Geo-fenced", in effect? That makes sense. You'd still need some tower construction to link the "beads on the string", or, at least, a way to connect from cellphone to landline (& IDK how that's done now, let alone in 1950:eek:;)).
Car dealers for upscale cars could gain another up sell item.
That has me thinking more "carphone" than "cellphone", which isn't quite what I had in mind.

OTOH, if there are more "car cellphones" (so to speak), does (can) that make every carphone a mobile cell tower? Can a signal be multiplexed through & re-radiated? Or does that require computing power that didn't exist?

There's an obvious effect or two on law enforcement: prowls with radio OTL were able to respond more promptly to call-ins of crimes, & able to share info more readily. That reduced crime, by making cruisers more responsive. (It would also, ultimately, change how crime is reported, with the development of the 911 system.)

It also actually reduced the need for really high-performance police cruisers (tho most PDs didn't go that way, AFAIK): as C&D (IIRC) put it, in response to a slow cruiser in the '80s, "Cop cars have cop radios.":eek:

PD cruisers relying on cellphone instead of radio means some cultural changes. The obvious one? There will be no "Adam-12": without a radio in the car, there won't be any callsign... And "ST:TOS" will have very different communicators.:eek: (They might, just, resemble modern smartphones, combining the comm feature with the tricorder.:cool:)

There are more important cultural impacts that come to mind, too. What happens to police brutality when everybody has a cellphone? (Maybe not much, judging by the number of killings despite ubiquitous cellphone video...)

What effect does it have on U.S. wiretapping laws? (I'm totally unfamiliar with others, so feel free to weigh in.) OTL, interception out of the air was legal until 1967.:eek::eek:
 
Last edited:
Top