On Mon, 2009-11-23 at 10:30 +0100, Marcel Holtmann wrote: > Hi Antti, > you can't trust the network name string returned by AT+COPS since there > are so many factors coming into play here. So first of all you have the > names stored in the modem itself, then the names stored on the SIM card > and then the potential updates over the network. Every hardware does > different things to present the result of AT+COPS. AFAIK if there's a name stored in the SIM card it will have precedence over the ones stored inside the modem. And the ones that network sends are probably most reliable. I have to look though the specs if there's any information on this. Anyway the point is that in most situations we should have a correct alphabetical name for the provider, right? > And to make it even more complex, in case of roaming situations some > devices actually to weird concat of home network and current network. In this situation we simply have a miss in database search and user is presented with all the available configuration choices. Can you provide some real life example where the long alphabetical form is misleading and would cause selecting wrong operator? At least the devices I've tested return reliable results, but they are so few that I can't claim anything based on those. -- Antti
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part