Help 9/22 HTC Evo 4G update to fix 9-1-1 issue?

[JL44516]

hey fellas i cant wait to get my evo and i have read plenty of threads on numerous websites that have stated there is an issue with calling 911 and the evo rebooting itself. since the update that came out yesterday has a "GPS Fix" does that mean it will fix this 9-1-1 issue? i have searched and no one has covered this so if someone can clear this up for me it would be greatly appreciated. thanks guys.

 

[MyHTCevo]

I have NEVER had this problem. I've called 9-1-1 twice on the phone and it has always behaved property.

 

[novox77]

I can't say with certainty, but I do believe that the latest update will fix the 911 issues some people were reporting.

That issue was caused by the phone rebooting before the 911 call is placed (doh!). Later it was discovered that the cause of the reboot was the enabling of the phone's GPS. When you make a 911 call, the phone goes into a special power-saving mode with GPS enabled, so that emergency responders can locate you quickly. Unfortunately with the GPS reboot bug, it sabotaged the entire call.

Since GPS rebooting is fixed with this update, this should also fix the original 911 reboot issue as well. Let's see if this is true or not in practice.

 

[cabbie]

i certainly hope so, i dont know how anyone goes about testing it out, you cant just be calling 911 for phone testing purposes. this was a huge unacceptable blackeye on the evo, and im an evo fanboy

 

[novox77]

From what I've read, you most definitely can test a 911 call. When the operator picks up, tell them first that this is NOT an emergency and that you are testing your mobile phone's ability to make an emergency call. Explain that your model phone had known issues with 911 in particular and not regular phone calls.

To be courteous to the 911 operators, you may want to choose the time/date of your test carefully. Avoid holidays, since that's when they get really hosed. Weekdays are better than weekends, and middle of the business day is when they are least busy.

 

[JL44516]

ok i hope it fixes it. thank you guys...

 

[cabbie]

From what I've read, you most definitely can test a 911 call. When the operator picks up, tell them first that this is NOT an emergency and that you are testing your mobile phone's ability to make an emergency call. Explain that your model phone had known issues with 911 in particular and not regular phone calls.

To be courteous to the 911 operators, you may want to choose the time/date of your test carefully. Avoid holidays, since that's when they get really hosed. Weekdays are better than weekends, and middle of the business day is when they are least busy.

i didn't think of it like that. im not willing to do it but still if its the way you say it is, then I suppose it isn't an issue. So whose willin to try it?

 

[trojanman]

Just fyi...I had to make a 911 call last weekend (I downloaded the update last night, so it didn't have the update when I made the call) on my EVO and it worked fine. It went into some sort of special emergency mode and I think the background turned a reddish-pink color (didn't really pay attention since I was driving and it truly was an emergency, passed an unfortunate auto accident seconds after it happened).

There were NO problems with the phone rebooting while on the line or after I spoke with the operator.

 

[mcl1981]

No, it is not ok to call 911 to see how it works. I'm a 911 dispatcher. Anyone that tells you otherwise is wrong.

 

[GiftedPlacebo]

No, it is not ok to call 911 to see how it works. I'm a 911 dispatcher. Anyone that tells you otherwise is wrong.

It has been common practice to call 911, state it is a non emergency call for address verification. I've personally done this for years and never had a complaint from a 911 operator. As part of my job running IT at the company I work for, we seemingly are always installing phone systems, moving offices, etc etc. and verifying the address associated with our phone numbers is just part of the procedure.

 

[novox77]

The problem here is that the existing "rules" for 9-1-1 dialing have not fully caught up with the evolving technology. The FCC has been pretty strict about how a wireless phone needs to operate when dialing 9-1-1. One of those requirements includes something called Phase II, which requires the phone dialing 9-1-1 to also transmit location data to a certain degree of accuracy.

The existing unwritten rule says that you shouldn't test a 9-1-1 call. This was valid when the only mechanism was the phone. But now that GPS service is involved (and in the case of the Evo, the GPS may cause the phone to reboot and never place the 911 call), this introduces a legitimate need for 9-1-1 testing.

9-1-1 dispatchers will typically take the stance of: test your cell phone by dialing a friend, not 9-1-1. But that completely misses the point. It's the special emergency mode of the wireless phone that really needs to be tested, not the actual placement of the 9-1-1 call. And yes, you never need to test 9-1-1 from a land line because there is no GPS involved, and land lines are quickly traced to determine location.

Unfortunately, no mechanism exists to place a test call with a wireless phone, or to have the phone go into a test mode. As wireless quickly takes over land lines, these are some of the policies that ought to be considered as part of the existing infrastructure.

 

[karp]

I contacted my local 911 provider (via the city I live in) a few weeks ago who had no problem with me making a test call. Before the update I didn't have 911 problems, but did have problems with the phone rebooting in a call when GPS was active. It was pretty hit or miss so I imagine that the 911 calls would have been the same had I continued to make test calls (I didn't). Sometimes the phone would reboot immediately after connecting to a call other times it took 10-20 minutes.

I've checked my phone twice since the update by making a call with navigation running (method used before). Two 10-15 minute calls did not have a problem at all. I'm pretty hopefully that this update fixed the problem, but I'm going to keep testing to be sure.

 

[mcl1981]

It has been common practice to call 911, state it is a non emergency call for address verification. I've personally done this for years and never had a complaint from a 911 operator. As part of my job running IT at the company I work for, we seemingly are always installing phone systems, moving offices, etc etc. and verifying the address associated with our phone numbers is just part of the procedure.

Your common practice is not common and it is abuse of the 911 system. It is illegal in likely all jurisdictions. If you did that where I am, you would be told to stop once and further instances would have you in court explaining why your test is more important than someone having a heart attack I was trying to help before you wasted my time. Please stop. There are other more appropriate ways to verify your phone line's address. Call the phone company, stop being lazy.

The existing unwritten rule says that you shouldn't test a 9-1-1 call. This was valid when the only mechanism was the phone. But now that GPS service is involved (and in the case of the Evo, the GPS may cause the phone to reboot and never place the 911 call), this introduces a legitimate need for 9-1-1 testing.

Its not an unwritten rule. It's the law. And it is still valid for a reason.

9-1-1 dispatchers will typically take the stance of: test your cell phone by dialing a friend, not 9-1-1. But that completely misses the point. It's the special emergency mode of the wireless phone that really needs to be tested, not the actual placement of the 9-1-1 call. And yes, you never need to test 9-1-1 from a land line because there is no GPS involved, and land lines are quickly traced to determine location.

And their stance is correct no matter what excuse you make.

Unfortunately, no mechanism exists to place a test call with a wireless phone, or to have the phone go into a test mode. As wireless quickly takes over land lines, these are some of the policies that ought to be considered as part of the existing infrastructure.

Too bad. Your desire to play with you're phone is still not a legitimate use of 911. You obviously have no clue what goes on behind the scenes at a busy 911 center. There is a good reason for these rules and LAWS and you're desire to test your phone is one of the primary reasons those laws and rules exist in the first place.

 

[motoman740]

Too bad. Your desire to play with you're phone is still not a legitimate use of 911.

So, you mean to tell me that I should wait until I am in the middle of a life threatening emergency in order to find out that I cant reach 911 because the only phone that i may have with me is re-booting because of a software issue? That test call is not placed to "play" with the phone but to save lives in a REAL emergency.

 

[mcl1981]

No. I'm saying you shouldn't call 911 unless you have an emergency now. Period. End of story.

So please tell me why people with real actual happening now emergencies should have to stand aside and while you test your phone? Answer that please.

 

[Ramzes13]

No. I'm saying you shouldn't call 911 unless you have an emergency now. Period. End of story.

So please tell me why people with real actual happening now emergencies should have to stand aside and while you test your phone? Answer that please.

What this looks like is a failure to communicate a valid point from both parties. Thisbeing said, all jurisdictions have different rules and technologies involved. Before anyone calls 911 from a cell try calling the non- emergency number first for your locality and explain that your cell phone has Known issue swhen dialing an emergency call (BTW this is not playing with a feature) and you would like to know if there is a proper time or even a possibility of being allowed to make test call. I know for a fact that you can go this route because I used to install cable voip services and had to make sure the e-911 service worked when I was done. Cheers.

Also since 911 is a public service the public has the legal right to know that when you need the service, it will work accordingly.

 

[Ramzes13]

One more thing about mc's "point" about not being lazy And calling the phone company to verify your phone's address...the exercise here is to check gps functionality during a call. The phone company during an immediate emergency isn't going to be able to tell you your address when youre injured on the side of unmarked road in the middle of the night. And if they did provide that, are you really going to tell local dispatch your coordinates? (Saying that the phone doesn't reset because you couldn't verify functionality the day before).

 

[novox77]

@mcl1981: Can we just discuss the issue without the venom?

Anyway...

I went to my town's police department and asked them about testing 911. Their knee-jerk reaction was: don't do it. I asked them if it was illegal, and they said that there was no law, but since they get the calls from wireless 911 calls, they are saying that they don't need the burden of handling non-emergency issues.

All makes sense.

So then I told them that my particular model cell phone had a known issue where the GPS would sometimes reboot when it was activated. I mentioned Phase II, and the officer knew what I was getting at. I explained that with the Evo, there's a chance that my 911 call never goes through because the GPS kicks in to provide location before the call is placed. And if the GPS reboots my phone, they never even know I called.

The officer agreed that this is a tough situation. He still recommended that I don't test my phone, especially if the issue was not reproducible all the time. He said that the issue should be addressed by getting the attention of the manufacturer.

All Makes sense. And apparently HTC got the memo and released the recent GPS rebooting fix.

Lastly, I asked the officer if I were to test my phone for the reason I gave, would I get in trouble? He said that as long as I state clearly that the issue is a non-emergency and quickly get off the line, they would not pursue the issue. Worst thing to do is just hanging up. He stated that lots of people do just that on Christmas day when people get new phones as a present and they decide to test 911. That really interferes with their job as emergency responders.

So there you have it. If you have any doubt, contact your local municipality (via non-emergency channels) and clarify.

 

[mcl1981]

Before anyone calls 911 from a cell try calling the non- emergency number first for your locality and explain that your cell phone has Known issue when dialing an emergency call (BTW this is not playing with a feature) and you would like to know if there is a proper time or even a possibility of being allowed to make test call. I know for a fact that you can go this route because I used to install cable voip services and had to make sure the e-911 service worked when I was done. Cheers.

This is acceptable practice. If the dispatcher says no, then the answer is no and there's a reason for it.

Also since 911 is a public service the public has the legal right to know that when you need the service, it will work accordingly.

Completely false. There is no such legal right.

One more thing about mc's "point" about not being lazy And calling the phone company to verify your phone's address...the exercise here is to check gps functionality during a call.

Because that person I was talking to who was using it to test the address was testing a LANDLINE. Calling 911 is lazy. Call the phone company and verify they have the address right.

@mcl1981: Can we just discuss the issue without the venom?

What venom? Apparently you conciser anything that disagrees with you to be venom. I'm not going to blindly agree with you to make you feel all warm and fuzzing inside. Sorry, that's not venom just because you don't like it.

I went to my town's police department and asked them about testing 911. Their knee-jerk reaction was: don't do it. I asked them if it was illegal, and they said that there was no law, but since they get the calls from wireless 911 calls, they are saying that they don't need the burden of handling non-emergency issues. All makes sense.

It's not a knee-jerk reaction. Again if you had any clue what went on in a busy 911 center, you would understand. You are asking a dispatcher to put a heart attack, fire, or shooting on hold to answer your test calls. Sorry, that's not a knee jerk reaction. That is standard procedure and in most places it is the law. They don't have this reaction / policy / law for nothing.

The officer agreed that this is a tough situation. He still recommended that I don't test my phone, especially if the issue was not reproducible all the time. He said that the issue should be addressed by getting the attention of the manufacturer.

Yes, it is a tough situation and I don't have a better answer for you either. But I do know that the officer is right and you shouldn't do it. Oh shoot, I'm being venomous again...

Lastly, I asked the officer if I were to test my phone for the reason I gave, would I get in trouble? He said that as long as I state clearly that the issue is a non-emergency and quickly get off the line, they would not pursue the issue. Worst thing to do is just hanging up. He stated that lots of people do just that on Christmas day when people get new phones as a present and they decide to test 911. That really interferes with their job as emergency responders.

So they plead with you not to do it for a host of very good reasons. And your response is "well if I do it anyway, will I actually get in trouble"? Great. This is why it's actually against the law in most places. Because people don't give a crap about anyone else but themselves. Real emergencies be damned, I want to test my phone!

So there you have it. If you have any doubt, contact your local municipality (via non-emergency channels) and clarify.

This remains to be the only accurate piece of advice.

 

[novox77]

What venom? Apparently you conciser anything that disagrees with you to be venom. I'm not going to blindly agree with you to make you feel all warm and fuzzing inside. Sorry, that's not venom just because you don't like it.

I'm just asking for some civility on your part; I have no problem if we disagree. Your point is clear: that testing 911 is illegal. And I think that warrants discussion: is it true or not, and if so, should the current system change to support some sort of testing, especially when the phone carrier is no longer the only ones responsible for ensuring that 911 works.

Based on what I've read here , no one has the intent to abuse 911. There's no need to treat us like we are the ones prank calling 911 for laughs. I know that must be very frustrating in your line of work, but please don't take out your frustration on us. We just want to discuss the issue.

 

[novox77]

Browsing online, I've seen some suggestions by some for a testing-only number (like 912 or 919). I think this would solve the issue quite well if implemented correctly.

912 should be an automated service (no human operator) that uses an IVR-based system to allow you to diagnose your "emergency" call. IVR = interactive voice response, and it's the automated messages you hear when you call customer service (press 1 for xx; press 2 for yy, etc).

So when you call 912 from a wireless phone, the IVR will inform you that your call was successfully placed. It will also give you the option to confirm that your GPS signal is received, and optionally, give back an address based on that GPS signal.

With something like this in place, people can test as much as they want without affecting the real emergency responders. The municipality doesn't need to hire some dedicated person just to answer test calls. IVR systems are very easy to set up. And a small piece of software needs to be written to integrate the IVR with the GPS data. Manufacturers can use this service to QA their wireless devices more thoroughly so that these kind of fatal bugs don't end up in customer's hands.

 

[mikeinatl]

Browsing online, I've seen some suggestions by some for a testing-only number (like 912 or 919). I think this would solve the issue quite well if implemented correctly.

912 should be an automated service (no human operator) that uses an IVR-based system to allow you to diagnose your "emergency" call. IVR = interactive voice response, and it's the automated messages you hear when you call customer service (press 1 for xx; press 2 for yy, etc).

So when you call 912 from a wireless phone, the IVR will inform you that your call was successfully placed. It will also give you the option to confirm that your GPS signal is received, and optionally, give back an address based on that GPS signal.

With something like this in place, people can test as much as they want without affecting the real emergency responders. The municipality doesn't need to hire some dedicated person just to answer test calls. IVR systems are very easy to set up. And a small piece of software needs to be written to integrate the IVR with the GPS data. Manufacturers can use this service to QA their wireless devices more thoroughly so that these kind of fatal bugs don't end up in customer's hands.

This is an EXCELLENT suggestion. I've never tested calling 911, but it's important for me because my street is right next to the line between two counties that have different 911 systems. Combined with the phone issue, that could be huge if a real emergency were to arise.

And to mlc1981, I'm sure the request for civililty came from your tone. You may not realize it, but you give off a condescending tone that really doesn't open up the conversation for just that - conversation.

 

[mcl1981]

Browsing online, I've seen some suggestions by some for a testing-only number (like 912 or 919). I think this would solve the issue quite well if implemented correctly....

Will not happen and physically impossible. The Phase II wireless E911 system would have to be completely duplicated to support it and it is not neccessary. It is equipment at every cell site and every regional switch for every carrier. Who do you propose pay for that kind of infrastructure? Its not just installing an IVR. We're talking about MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF HARDWARE and software. All so you can call it and see if your phone crashes. It's completely impractical and unneccessary.

Wireless E911 does not provide any information that it can read back to you in this mystical IVR system. It doesn't come up with an address. It returns an estimated lat/long and reliability estimate. Your location may or may not be GPS derived. At the 911 center, it also shows this location on a map. It does not show an address, the owner, or anything else. Just the phone number and it's best guess at a location.

This is an EXCELLENT suggestion. I've never tested calling 911, but it's important for me because my street is right next to the line between two counties that have different 911 systems. Combined with the phone issue, that could be huge if a real emergency were to arise.

There is nothing you can test that will have any effect on living at the county line. As I said above, your location is an estimated lat/long that varies based on GPS, radio location, or antenna sector. This is why the dispatcher asks where you are. Testing it will not tell you anything useful because location results will vary and change every time you place a call. I watch the location jump all over the map in the middle of a single call, let alone remain consistent among multiple calls.

And to mlc1981, I'm sure the request for civililty came from your tone. You may not realize it, but you give off a condescending tone that really doesn't open up the conversation for just that - conversation.

I'm being perfectly civil. I can't control how people misinterpret what I'm saying because they disagree. Everything I've said is straight up fact and reason that CAN RESULT IN SOMEONE LIVING OR DYING as a result of your actions. If I sound stern, good. That's my intention.

 

[Ramzes13]

The request for civility in tone isn't an issue with this thread, I have read some of your other posts, and really do come off very condescending, which isn't totally appreciated here. Some of your input though has been somewhat helpful.

 

[mcl1981]

The request for civility in tone isn't an issue with this thread, I have read some of your other posts, and really do come off very condescending, which isn't totally appreciated here. Some of your input though has been somewhat helpful.

I guess you didn't see the last part of my reply.

I'm being perfectly civil. I can't control how people misinterpret what I'm saying because they disagree. Everything I've said is straight up fact and reason that CAN RESULT IN SOMEONE LIVING OR DYING as a result of your actions. If I sound stern, good. That's my intention.