A: This is caused by the wrong cable or connection.
The problem is that not all Mini-B USB cables and connections are the
same -- some are 5-connection and some are 4-connection.
The reason is that Standard-A USB has only 4 connections, whereas Mini-B
USB has 5 connections, the extra connection being the device ID pin.
Some Mini-B USB cables omit the 5th connection.
Only 5-connection will work properly for Motorola charging (without a
Motorola USB driver). A correct cable or connection is what's needed.
Q: Why is charging of Motorola phones so slow on the travel charger?
A: The standard travel charger packaged by Motorola with many current
phones puts out insufficient power for fastest possible charging and for
continuous use while charging.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
For example, charger SSW-0509 for the V551 puts out only 375 mA. The
V551 detects this as a slow charger, and thus keeps the external display
backlight off during charging. Worse, there's not enough current to
keep up with use of the phone while charging, so while the phone is use,
the battery will still be discharged even with the phone on the charger.
With a fast charger the external display backlight is on during
charging, and the phone can be used while the battery is charging.
Motorola makes fast 1500 mA chargers that are compatible with these phones:
* SPN4716* (where * might be "B" or "C"), also known as
* NNTN4250 (nominally for Nextel, but also works with non-Nextel phones).
These chargers are readily available from dealers and on eBay for under
$15 (plus shipping).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Motorola mini USB (EMU) chargers for RAZR, KRZR (with power output if known):
* Wall "travel" (AC) charger (comes with the phone)
+ Motorola SPN5185/SPN5185A/SPN5185B/98604H: 550 mA (mid)
+ Motorola SPN5202/98605: 850 mA (fast)
* Car (12V) charger
+ Motorola SYN1630/SYN0847/98603H/VC700
* External rechargeable battery/charger
+ Motorola SPN5353/P790/98782H
* (5 pin) mini USB cable to computer: 500 mA
+ Motorola SKN6371C
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(For what it's worth, Motorola probably saves less than $1 in cost by
packaging slower chargers instead of fast chargers with its phones.)
John Navas wrote:
> charger?
>
> A: This is caused by the wrong cable or connection.
>
> The problem is that not all Mini-B USB cables and connections are the
> same -- some are 5-connection and some are 4-connection.
> The reason is that Standard-A USB has only 4 connections, whereas Mini-B
> USB has 5 connections, the extra connection being the device ID pin.
> Some Mini-B USB cables omit the 5th connection.
> Only 5-connection will work properly for Motorola charging (without a
> Motorola USB driver). A correct cable or connection is what's needed.
>
> ================================================== ==========================
>
> Q: Why is charging of Motorola phones so slow on the travel charger?
>
> A: The standard travel charger packaged by Motorola with many current
> phones puts out insufficient power for fastest possible charging and for
> continuous use while charging.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> For example, charger SSW-0509 for the V551 puts out only 375 mA. The
> V551 detects this as a slow charger, and thus keeps the external display
> backlight off during charging. Worse, there's not enough current to
> keep up with use of the phone while charging, so while the phone is use,
> the battery will still be discharged even with the phone on the charger.
> With a fast charger the external display backlight is on during
> charging, and the phone can be used while the battery is charging.
>
> Motorola makes fast 1500 mA chargers that are compatible with these phones:
> * SPN4716* (where * might be "B" or "C"), also known as
> * NNTN4250 (nominally for Nextel, but also works with non-Nextel phones).
> These chargers are readily available from dealers and on eBay for under
> $15 (plus shipping).
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Motorola mini USB (EMU) chargers for RAZR, KRZR (with power output if known):
> * Wall "travel" (AC) charger (comes with the phone)
> + Motorola SPN5185/SPN5185A/SPN5185B/98604H: 550 mA (mid)
> + Motorola SPN5202/98605: 850 mA (fast)
> * Car (12V) charger
> + Motorola SYN1630/SYN0847/98603H/VC700
> * External rechargeable battery/charger
> + Motorola SPN5353/P790/98782H
> * (5 pin) mini USB cable to computer: 500 mA
> + Motorola SKN6371C
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> (For what it's worth, Motorola probably saves less than $1 in cost by
> packaging slower chargers instead of fast chargers with its phones.)
>
> ================================================== ==========================
>
> Q: Where can I get USB modem drivers for Motorola cell phones?
>
> A: <http://developer.motorola.com/docstools/USB_Drivers/Handset_USB_Driver/>
> [registration required, but free]
>
> 1. UNinstall any existing driver in Device Manager before installing this
> driver.
>
> 2. Install this driver _before_ connecting cell phone.
How about putting this stuff on a web site somewhere. It's not
something we need to see on the newsgroup every few weeks!
In article <elmop-9BBEE9.12125829122008@mara100-84.onlink.net>, Elmo P.
Shagnasty <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
> "Standard" by whose standard?
>
> If enough of us say that it's "standard usenet practice" to go beat the
> **** out of you and leave you for dead in the middle of the road, would
> you accept that?
OK, I'll let you have him first. But there's gonna be a long line
behind you.
On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:12:58 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in
<elmop-9BBEE9.12125829122008@mara100-84.onlink.net>:
>In article <qkvhl4ppc6jur05f8p0ue94dle9ku2bjtv@4ax.com>,
> John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> >How about putting this stuff on a web site somewhere. It's not
>>
>> <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola>
>>
>> >something we need to see on the newsgroup every few weeks!
>>
>> It's standard Usenet practice,
>
>"Standard" by whose standard?
Usenet guidelines. You've never read them, have you?
>If enough of us say that it's "standard usenet practice" to go beat the
>**** out of you and leave you for dead in the middle of the road, would
>you accept that?
I don't pay attention to childish thugs and bullies.
--
Very best wishes for the holiday season and for the coming new year,
John
John Navas wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:12:58 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
> <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in
> <elmop-9BBEE9.12125829122008@mara100-84.onlink.net>:
>
>> In article <qkvhl4ppc6jur05f8p0ue94dle9ku2bjtv@4ax.com>,
>> John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> How about putting this stuff on a web site somewhere. It's not
>>> <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola>
>>>
>>>> something we need to see on the newsgroup every few weeks!
>>> It's standard Usenet practice,
>> "Standard" by whose standard?
>
> Usenet guidelines. You've never read them, have you?
Do you have a link to these "Usenet guidelines"???
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 11:43:50 -0500, "Richard B. Gilbert"
> <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote in
> <btydnYhNUM-gY8XUnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d@giganews.com>:
>
>> How about putting this stuff on a web site somewhere. It's not
>
> <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola>
>
>> something we need to see on the newsgroup every few weeks!
>
> It's standard Usenet practice, and a snap to filter out.
For you, moron, it may be. The rest of us don't give a ****. ¿Comprende?
On 12/29/08 11:23 AM, in article 291220080923154675%rag@nospam.techline.com,
"Mr. Strat" <rag@nospam.techline.com> wrote:
> In article <btydnYhNUM-gY8XUnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Richard B.
> Gilbert <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> How about putting this stuff on a web site somewhere. It's not
>> something we need to see on the newsgroup every few weeks!
>
> He's retarded. He's on a mission.
A mission that has badly gone astray.
On 12/29/08 12:40 PM, in article 9L86l.10026$D32.8473@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com,
"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>
>> How about putting this stuff on a web site somewhere. It's not
>> something we need to see on the newsgroup every few weeks!
>
> LOL, why do you think he does this?
He has to do something between playing with his Special Purpose when he
visits all the gay **** sites, gathering Trojans.
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:12:58 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
> <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in
> <elmop-9BBEE9.12125829122008@mara100-84.onlink.net>:
>
>> In article <qkvhl4ppc6jur05f8p0ue94dle9ku2bjtv@4ax.com>,
>> John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> How about putting this stuff on a web site somewhere. It's not
>>>
>>> <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola>
>>>
>>>> something we need to see on the newsgroup every few weeks!
>>>
>>> It's standard Usenet practice,
>>
>> "Standard" by whose standard?
>
> Usenet guidelines. You've never read them, have you?
>
>> If enough of us say that it's "standard usenet practice" to go beat the
>> **** out of you and leave you for dead in the middle of the road, would
>> you accept that?
>
> I don't pay attention to childish thugs and bullies.
Time you did.
> John Navas wrote:
>> On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:12:58 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
>> <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in
>> <elmop-9BBEE9.12125829122008@mara100-84.onlink.net>:
>>
>>> In article <qkvhl4ppc6jur05f8p0ue94dle9ku2bjtv@4ax.com>,
>>> John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> How about putting this stuff on a web site somewhere. It's not
>>>> <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola>
>>>>
>>>>> something we need to see on the newsgroup every few weeks!
>>>> It's standard Usenet practice,
>>> "Standard" by whose standard?
>>
>> Usenet guidelines. You've never read them, have you?
>
> Do you have a link to these "Usenet guidelines"???
>
> <snip>
No. It's only in his mind: The dog told him to do it...
On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 13:58:56 -0500, "Richard B. Gilbert"
<rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote in
<hfmdnd3nQZN1gMTUnZ2dnUVZ_vWdnZ2d@giganews.com>:
>John Navas wrote:
>> On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:12:58 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
>> <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in
>> <elmop-9BBEE9.12125829122008@mara100-84.onlink.net>:
>>
>>> In article <qkvhl4ppc6jur05f8p0ue94dle9ku2bjtv@4ax.com>,
>>> John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> How about putting this stuff on a web site somewhere. It's not
>>>> <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola>
>>>>
>>>>> something we need to see on the newsgroup every few weeks!
>>>> It's standard Usenet practice,
>>> "Standard" by whose standard?
>>
>> Usenet guidelines. You've never read them, have you?
>
>Do you have a link to these "Usenet guidelines"???
"Google is your friend."
--
Very best wishes for the holiday season and for the coming new year,
John
George Kerby wrote:
>
>
> On 12/29/08 11:23 AM, in article 291220080923154675%rag@nospam.techline.com,
> "Mr. Strat" <rag@nospam.techline.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <btydnYhNUM-gY8XUnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Richard B.
>> Gilbert <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> How about putting this stuff on a web site somewhere. It's not
>>> something we need to see on the newsgroup every few weeks!
>> He's retarded. He's on a mission.
> A mission that has badly gone astray.
>
> A frontal lobotomy may be the only answer.
>
Hmmm! Put the frontal lobe on life support and throw the rest away?? ;-)
In article <df6il4h2qb8u1cvajf8noi3trtcb24inhg@4ax.com>,
John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:12:58 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
> <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in
> <elmop-9BBEE9.12125829122008@mara100-84.onlink.net>:
>
> >In article <qkvhl4ppc6jur05f8p0ue94dle9ku2bjtv@4ax.com>,
> > John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >
> >> >How about putting this stuff on a web site somewhere. It's not
> >>
> >> <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola>
> >>
> >> >something we need to see on the newsgroup every few weeks!
> >>
> >> It's standard Usenet practice,
> >
> >"Standard" by whose standard?
>
> Usenet guidelines. You've never read them, have you?
>
> >If enough of us say that it's "standard usenet practice" to go beat the
> >**** out of you and leave you for dead in the middle of the road, would
> >you accept that?
>
> I don't pay attention to childish thugs and bullies.
hahaaa , almost slide off my chair.... this *** ****ing anus is a moron.
> >> It's standard Usenet practice,
> >
> >"Standard" by whose standard?
>
> Usenet guidelines. You've never read them, have you?
I'll let others dole out the personal abuse WRT to your FAQ. I'll only ask
one question: why do you call it a "FAQ" when Google ("my friend", as you
say) can't find a SINGLE instance of the question being asked even once on
alt.cellular.cingular, other than in your FAQ.
Makes it more of a "NAQ", (Never Asked Question), doesn't it? Therefore,
I'd suggest you should remove the word "FAQ" from the subject to comply
with "standard usenet practice."
In article <9L86l.10026$D32.8473@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com>, SMS
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>
> > How about putting this stuff on a web site somewhere. It's not
> > something we need to see on the newsgroup every few weeks!
>
> LOL, why do you think he does this?
I don't even have a Motorola phone any more, but I continue subscribing
to this group just to laugh at him. I don't know what his motivation
is. He's back posting in some of the photography groups again...trying
to pass off his lack of photographic knowledge and mediocre images.
On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 22:49:14 -0700, Todd Allcock
<elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in
<KLi6l.31225$ly1.25302@newsfe19.iad>:
>At 29 Dec 2008 10:43:02 -0800 John Navas wrote:
>
>> >> It's standard Usenet practice,
>> >
>> >"Standard" by whose standard?
>>
>> Usenet guidelines. You've never read them, have you?
>
>I'll let others dole out the personal abuse WRT to your FAQ. I'll only ask
>one question: why do you call it a "FAQ" when Google ("my friend", as you
>say) can't find a SINGLE instance of the question being asked even once on
>alt.cellular.cingular, other than in your FAQ.
Some of these questions have been asked, and there's nothing wrong with
anticipating questions that haven't been asked. FAQ isn't a literal
threshold.
If you don't want to see this thread, then you can filter it out, as I'm
sure you know how to do. (If not, I'd be happy to help.)
You're making a large tempest in a small teapot. This is a non-issue
except to those with personal axes to grind, and I'm not going to give
in to bullying.
--
Very best wishes for the holiday season and for the coming new year,
John
In article <isdkl459mf6olvckf3lolbioguauef5919@4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> You're making a large tempest in a small teapot. This is a non-issue
> except to those with personal axes to grind, and I'm not going to give
> in to bullying.
No, it *is* an issue. Because you post the same crap about every two
weeks...and the information isn't even accurate. People who frequent
these groups don't want to keep reading your moronic drivel and
shouldn't have to filter you out.
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 13:58:56 -0500, "Richard B. Gilbert"
> <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote in
> <hfmdnd3nQZN1gMTUnZ2dnUVZ_vWdnZ2d@giganews.com>:
>
>>John Navas wrote:
>>> On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:12:58 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
>>> <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in
>>> <elmop-9BBEE9.12125829122008@mara100-84.onlink.net>:
>>>
>>>> In article <qkvhl4ppc6jur05f8p0ue94dle9ku2bjtv@4ax.com>,
>>>> John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> How about putting this stuff on a web site somewhere. It's not
>>>>> <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola>
>>>>>
>>>>>> something we need to see on the newsgroup every few weeks!
>>>>> It's standard Usenet practice,
>>>> "Standard" by whose standard?
>>>
>>> Usenet guidelines. You've never read them, have you?
>>
>>Do you have a link to these "Usenet guidelines"???
>
> "Google is your friend."
>
You the Google that would pull up your precious FAQ's posted in 2006,
thereby eliminating our need to see it every two weeks?
John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> amazed us all with the following
in news:isdkl459mf6olvckf3lolbioguauef5919@4ax.com:
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 22:49:14 -0700, Todd Allcock
> <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in
> <KLi6l.31225$ly1.25302@newsfe19.iad>:
>
>>At 29 Dec 2008 10:43:02 -0800 John Navas wrote:
>>
>>> >> It's standard Usenet practice,
>>> >
>>> >"Standard" by whose standard?
>>>
>>> Usenet guidelines. You've never read them, have you?
>>
>>I'll let others dole out the personal abuse WRT to your FAQ. I'll
>>only ask one question: why do you call it a "FAQ" when Google ("my
>>friend", as you say) can't find a SINGLE instance of the question
>>being asked even once on alt.cellular.cingular, other than in your
>>FAQ.
>
> Some of these questions have been asked,
Where? Not in these forums. That would then make the document useless
and there's nothing wrong
> with anticipating questions that haven't been asked. FAQ isn't a
> literal threshold.
And yet nothing even close to the subjects mentioned have been asked in
these forums. That would mean that in addition to being an idiot, you are
not very good at anticipating anything. Hardly a surprise.
>
> If you don't want to see this thread, then you can filter it out, as
> I'm sure you know how to do. (If not, I'd be happy to help.)
>
> You're making a large tempest in a small teapot. This is a non-issue
> except to those with personal axes to grind, and I'm not going to give
> in to bullying.
>
And so it is said by John Novice, Professional Usenet Buffoon.
"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:isdkl459mf6olvckf3lolbioguauef5919@4ax.com...
>>> >> It's standard Usenet practice,
>>> >
>>> >"Standard" by whose standard?
>>>
>>> Usenet guidelines. You've never read them, have you?
>>
>>I'll let others dole out the personal abuse WRT to your FAQ. I'll only
>>ask
>>one question: why do you call it a "FAQ" when Google ("my friend", as you
>>say) can't find a SINGLE instance of the question being asked even once on
>>alt.cellular.cingular, other than in your FAQ.
>
> Some of these questions have been asked,
I couldn't find them, so even if they've been asked, they certainly haven't
bee n asked "frequently."
> and there's nothing wrong with anticipating questions that haven't been
> asked.
As Motorola's market share crumbles, and they ponder retreating from the
wireless business entirely, perhaps you should anticipate questions like
"What is/was a Motorola Phone?" or "Didn't Motorola, that two-way radio
company, used to manufacture cellular phones?"
> FAQ isn't a literal threshold.
Got a link for that in your Usenet guidelines?
> If you don't want to see this thread, then you can filter it out, as I'm
> sure you know how to do. (If not, I'd be happy to help.)
I know how to filter, but it's not worth the effort. I can ignore it easily
enough when it gets out of hand.
> You're making a large tempest in a small teapot. This is a non-issue
> except to those with personal axes to grind, and I'm not going to give
> in to bullying.
Particularly when you enjoy stirring the "tea," eh?
On 12/30/08 9:42 AM, in article 301220080742581894%rag@nospam.techline.com,
"Mr. Strat" <rag@nospam.techline.com> wrote:
> In article <isdkl459mf6olvckf3lolbioguauef5919@4ax.com>, John Navas
> <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> You're making a large tempest in a small teapot. This is a non-issue
>> except to those with personal axes to grind, and I'm not going to give
>> in to bullying.
>
> No, it *is* an issue. Because you post the same crap about every two
> weeks...and the information isn't even accurate. People who frequent
> these groups don't want to keep reading your moronic drivel and
> shouldn't have to filter you out.
>
> Face it, man - you're a Netard.
And these newsgroups' personal piñata...
The Bob wrote:
> On 29 Dec 2008, you wrote in alt.cellular.attws:
>
>> On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 13:58:56 -0500, "Richard B. Gilbert"
>> <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote in
>> <hfmdnd3nQZN1gMTUnZ2dnUVZ_vWdnZ2d@giganews.com>:
>>
>>> John Navas wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:12:58 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
>>>> <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in
>>>> <elmop-9BBEE9.12125829122008@mara100-84.onlink.net>:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <qkvhl4ppc6jur05f8p0ue94dle9ku2bjtv@4ax.com>,
>>>>> John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> How about putting this stuff on a web site somewhere. It's not
>>>>>> <http://cell.wikia.com/wiki/Motorola>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> something we need to see on the newsgroup every few weeks!
>>>>>> It's standard Usenet practice,
>>>>> "Standard" by whose standard?
>>>> Usenet guidelines. You've never read them, have you?
>>> Do you have a link to these "Usenet guidelines"???
>> "Google is your friend."
>>
>
> You the Google that would pull up your precious FAQ's posted in 2006,
> thereby eliminating our need to see it every two weeks?
I take it you st00pid ****z don't know how to work a kill file?
Motorola cell phones mini FAQ 
Linear Mode
