 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Country Specific / Australian Group / February 2005Telstra to plug secondary mobile network in CBDs
Anyone know what this is about? <http://afr.com/premium/articles/2005/02/15/1108230003151.html> > Anyone know what this is about? > <http://afr.com/premium/articles/2005/02/15/1108230003151.html> You have to be a subscriber to AFR to access this. Perhaps you can elaborate a bit. >You have to be a subscriber to AFR to access this. Perhaps you can >elaborate a bit. LOL, yes... I was hoping that a subscriber may actually tell us :-) Sometimes articles can be found on Google News by searching for the headline, but not this one. > Anyone know what this is about? > <http://afr.com/premium/articles/2005/02/15/1108230003151.html> Stuffed if I know, the site says I need to be a subscriber to the Australian to read the article!  SignatureThe views I present are my own and NOT of any organisation I belong to. 73 de Simon, VK3XEM. http://www.aca.gov.au/pls/radcom/client_search.client_lookup?pCLIENT_NO=157452 VoIP http://www.TALKonIP.com.au/ Charlie, On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, at 10:29:13 [GMT +1100] (10:29:13 where I live) you wrote: > Anyone know what this is about? All about trying to get people in the cities to use CDMA Telstra to plug secondary mobile network in CBDs Feb 16 Feedback Katrina Nicholas Telstra hopes to attract more metropolitan customers to its secondary mobile-phone network, saying yesterday it was "very close to being empty" in big cities. But the telecommunications giant denied the push to put more mobile customers on its so-called CDMA network was because its main mobile network was becoming too crowded. "No, that's not the case at all," Telstra's head of small business and CDMA, Jenny Roche, said. "Telstra wants to be famous for offering people a range of products and services and CDMA has great coverage, great offers and great data speeds." Although Telstra's CDMA network covers 98.3 per cent of Australia, it has traditionally been seen as a network for rural and regional customers who have no other network choice. The bulk of Telstra's mobile subscribers - about 6.9million of its 8 million customers - are on Telstra's GSM network, which later this year will be upgraded to 3G. Most other Australians with a mobile phone are also on a GSM network, Hutchison Telecommunications' Orange is the only other CDMA network operator. Although a CDMA user can call a GSM customer, it is not possible to "roam" across networks. Regardless, Telstra has spent millions upgrading its CDMA network to allow for faster data speeds, meaning users can download big documents to either their mobile phone or laptop relatively easily. The telco spent about $50 million upgrading its CDMA network to new standard EV-DO and this year plans to spend another $60 million. Ms Roche said $16 million of that would be spent on metropolitan CDMA improvements. She said Telstra's CDMA network did not have many metropolitan customers because Telstra had not really been very efficient in bringing offers to market. Now Telstra planned to market its CDMA network in central business districts strongly, and next month would launch a handset that would allow users to toggle between the two network types, she said. Ms Roche said handset makers such as Nokia, Motorola and Kyocera were making more attractive CDMA phones with extras such as built-in cameras, flash and video capabilities. But the possibility of Telstra forging closer ties with Orange as part of its CDMA marketing push was not on the cards, she said. Hutchison was in talks with Telstra last year to sell its Orange subscribers to the telecommunications giant. Market watchers said Telstra's CDMA push would serve only to confuse consumers even more. "Persuading people to upgrade from GSM to 3G can be done in a massive campaign, but CDMA will just confuse the issue," independent telco analyst Paul Budde said, noting that GSM handsets were by far the most popular. Mr Budde said that apart from in North America, most of the world's mobile-phone operators ran GSM networks. SignatureI know so little, but I know it fluently. >Telstra hopes to attract more metropolitan customers to its secondary >mobile-phone network, saying yesterday it was "very close to being empty" in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >"No, that's not the case at all," Telstra's head of small business and CDMA, Will be interesting to see what happens when Hutchison 3G customers start roaming on the Telstra GSM network from 01/04/2005. Not long now :-) > She said Telstra's CDMA network did not have many metropolitan customers > because Telstra had not really been very efficient in bringing offers to > market. No surprise there. > and next month would launch a handset that would allow > users to toggle between the two network types, she said. I like that bit :-) > Most other Australians with a mobile phone are also on a GSM network, > Hutchison Telecommunications' Orange is the only other CDMA network > operator. Although a CDMA user can call a GSM customer, it is not possible > to "roam" across networks. Strange, I thought Orange CDMA could roam on to Telstra CDMA. > Now Telstra planned to market its CDMA network in central business > districts strongly, and next month would launch a handset that would allow > users to toggle between the two network types, she said. Does this mean CDMA/GSM, now that would be interesting! SignatureThe views I present are my own and NOT of any organisation I belong to. 73 de Simon, VK3XEM. http://www.aca.gov.au/pls/radcom/client_search.client_lookup?pCLIENT_NO=157452 VoIP http://www.TALKonIP.com.au/ >> Now Telstra planned to market its CDMA network in central business >> districts strongly, and next month would launch a handset that would >> allow >> users to toggle between the two network types, she said. > > Does this mean CDMA/GSM, now that would be interesting! Yeah, potentially, if the size and build quality are good. Or it could be a Motorola d160 mashed together with a Motorola SC3160 in one big ugly black casing :/ Will be interesting to see how they unify a removable-SIM technology with a network-programmed technology... Or this Nicholas journo may have mangled the facts of another article. >>>Now Telstra planned to market its CDMA network in central business >>>districts strongly, and next month would launch a handset that would [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Or this Nicholas journo may have mangled the facts of another article. I don't remember where I read it or heard it, but Nokia for one is starting to include provisions for RUIM (I think that's what it's called) cards in CDMA handsets. These are supposedly designed to work like a superset of the existing GSM SIM specifications. If that's the case, in the future, it may well be possible to take your card out of your CDMA phone and place it in a GSM roaming partner when overseas. > > Most other Australians with a mobile phone are also on a GSM network, > > Hutchison Telecommunications' Orange is the only other CDMA network > > operator. Although a CDMA user can call a GSM customer, it is not possible > > to "roam" across networks. > > Strange, I thought Orange CDMA could roam on to Telstra CDMA. You can, the story was implying its not possible to roam CDMA => GSM network, just not stated very clearly > Telstra to plug secondary mobile network in CBDs > Feb 16 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > mobile customers on its so-called CDMA network was because its main mobile > network was becoming too crowded. Perhaps if there was CDMA coverage in cities it would be more popular. I've given up using my CDMA around Brisbane because of the lack of coverage (the maps are not accurate). Indooroopilly shopping centre, St Lucia & New Farm are areas I've had problems getting a signal in the last 2 months. No problems out west of Rocky at all though - the perfect network for out there. Now it's a matter of using Optus around town and CDMA in the countryside if there is no Optus coverage. The Southern Cross deals make it practical to have a CDMA phone sitting in the glovebox for intermittent use. Now if SX would provide GPRS I'd move the GSM to them as well ... > Perhaps if there was CDMA coverage in cities it would be more popular. There is I've > given up using my CDMA around Brisbane because of the lack of coverage (the > maps are not accurate). Indooroopilly shopping centre, St Lucia & New Farm > are areas I've had problems getting a signal in the last 2 months. No carrier guarantees good coverage in every single shopping centre, GSM, CDMA or otherwise If you are having trouble in St Lucia or New Farm have you reported it? Customer feedback is valuable >> I've given up using my CDMA around Brisbane because >> of the lack of coverage (the maps are not accurate). >> Indooroopilly shopping centre, St Lucia & New Farm are >> areas I've had problems getting a signal in the last 2 months. > No carrier guarantees good coverage in every > single shopping centre, GSM, CDMA or otherwise Mindless stuff. > If you are having trouble in St Lucia or New Farm have you reported it? > Customer feedback is valuable Shouldnt have to, the fuckwits should be checking basic stuff like that themselves. > >> I've given up using my CDMA around Brisbane because > >> of the lack of coverage (the maps are not accurate). [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Mindless stuff. So every shopping centre has a DAS, installed by Telstra GSM, Telstra CDMA, Optus GSM, Voda GSM, Orange CDMA, and 3? Mindless stuff, indeed > > If you are having trouble in St Lucia or New Farm have you reported it? > > Customer feedback is valuable > > Shouldnt have to, the fuckwits should be checking basic stuff like that > themselves. Who are "the fuckwits"? >> Michael <michael@yahoo.com> wrote >>>> I've given up using my CDMA around Brisbane because >>>> of the lack of coverage (the maps are not accurate). >>>> Indooroopilly shopping centre, St Lucia & New Farm are >>>> areas I've had problems getting a signal in the last 2 months. >>> No carrier guarantees good coverage in every >>> single shopping centre, GSM, CDMA or otherwise >> Mindless stuff. > So every shopping centre has a DAS, installed by Telstra GSM, > Telstra CDMA, Optus GSM, Voda GSM, Orange CDMA, and 3? Never ever said anything like that, you stupid fuckwit dunny cleaning child. >>> If you are having trouble in St Lucia or New Farm >>> have you reported it?> Customer feedback is valuable >> Shouldnt have to, the fuckwits should be >> checking basic stuff like that themselves. > Who are "the fuckwits"? Even you should be able to work that one out if someone was actually stupid enough to lend you a white cane and a seeing eye dog, fuckwit. > No carrier guarantees good coverage in every single shopping centre, GSM, > CDMA or otherwise > > If you are having trouble in St Lucia or New Farm have you reported it? > Customer feedback is valuable I wonder what the cost would be for Telstra to equip all their GSM base stations with CDMA cells. In Brisbane this is the only reason why Telstra GSM has far better coverage than CDMA, the cell density is so much higher. Indooroopilly and Carindale shopping centres have dedicated Telstra GSM coverage, but nothing in terms of CDMA. Surely it wouldn't cost that much to run some more leaky coax around the same way. And having poor coverage in St. Lucia and New Farm is inexcusable IMO - very high density inner urban areas, if your coverage (and depth of coverage) is up to scratch, you would make a killing there as a carrier. Albinus. > I wonder what the cost would be for Telstra to equip all their > GSM base stations with CDMA cells. In Brisbane this is the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > cost that much to run some more leaky coax around the same > way. I know it's a trivial cost on its own, but don't CDMA cells require a GPS receiver for accurate timekeeping? On a tower near me, Telstra, Voda and Optus all have cells, with a separate building for each carrier's equipment. I've been assuming the Telstra building is the one with the small GPS antenna on the roof. John > > I wonder what the cost would be for Telstra to equip all their > > GSM base stations with CDMA cells. In Brisbane this is the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I know it's a trivial cost on its own, but don't CDMA cells > require a GPS receiver for accurate timekeeping? Yes > > No carrier guarantees good coverage in every single shopping centre, GSM, > > CDMA or otherwise [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I wonder what the cost would be for Telstra to equip all their GSM base > stations with CDMA cells. In Brisbane this is the only reason why Theyve spent $600m already. There is no need to add too many cells, too often. Its a waste of money if the cells in the area are underutilised > Telstra GSM has far better coverage than CDMA, the cell density is so > much higher. Indooroopilly and Carindale shopping centres have dedicated > Telstra GSM coverage, but nothing in terms of CDMA. Surely it wouldn't > cost that much to run some more leaky coax around the same way. Yes it would, otherwise they would have > And having poor coverage in St. Lucia and New Farm is inexcusable IMO > very high density inner urban areas, if your coverage (and depth of > coverage) is up to scratch, you would make a killing there as a carrier. Sorry, but you simply dont understand the nature of a radio based network with such a sweeping statement > Albinus. > Sorry, but you simply dont understand the nature of a radio based network > with such a sweeping statement I sure understand more than you. Other countries have CDMA in very high capacity areas, with no interference whatsoever. If Telstra already has a site which is being utilised for GSM, it makes sense for CDMA serving off the same site. The site rental is already covered, the equipment is a one-off expense in most cases (unless upgraded) and the electricity required to run the site is SFA. Telstra already makes a nice profit, that could be boosted by adding depth to their CDMA coverage in urban areas. Their GSM network in many parts of metropolitan Australia is reaching a higher capacity factor than they would like, which leaves two options; jack call rates up, or install new capacity on CDMA. They can't keep pimping CDMA when its metro performance is so patchy in urban areas, improve it and Telstra might increase that cash cow called mobile subscriber revenue. Oh, and in case you didn't notice, the topic of the thread is "Telstra to plug secondary mobile network in CBD's". Nice try implying coverage is irrelevant in inner urban areas. Albinus. > > Sorry, but you simply dont understand the nature of a radio based network > > with such a sweeping statement [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > a site which is being utilised for GSM, it makes sense for CDMA serving > off the same site. The site rental is already covered, the equipment is It only makes sense if their is demand for it, silly > Telstra already makes a nice profit, that could be boosted by adding > depth to their CDMA coverage in urban areas. Their GSM network in many There is no point adding unnecessary CDMA infrastructure to run at a loss if its underutilised Just because their GSM is well utilised, doesnt make it right > install new capacity on CDMA. They can't keep pimping CDMA when its > metro performance is so patchy in urban areas, improve it and Telstra It aint "so patchy". I dont have any probs in metro Melb > might increase that cash cow called mobile subscriber revenue. No point increasing revenue if youve spent more than the incremental revenue, on unnecessary upgrades. You add the additional capacity if, and when, needed Just like they did with AMPS, GSM etc etc Theyve been there and done that, years ago > Oh, and in case you didn't notice, the topic of the thread is "Telstra > to plug secondary mobile network in CBD's". Nice try implying coverage > is irrelevant in inner urban areas. There is a difference b/w breadth of coverage and depth of coverage. You dont seem to understand how they work together when running a COMMERCIAL radio network > There is a difference b/w breadth of coverage and depth of coverage. You > dont seem to understand how they work together when running a COMMERCIAL > radio network > Just because their GSM is well utilised, doesnt make it right Let's put it another way - do power companies wait until the system can no longer handle demand before new generating plant is constructed? Of course not - if in the future there is going to be demand growth, plan for it! Just because next to nobody uses CDMA in the cities is the same logic, if you are trying to increase usage, cater for demand growth. CDMA will not reach GSM usage figures unless people get decent depth of coverage. > It aint "so patchy". I dont have any probs in metro Melb I can tell you're not qualified in the area of radio telecommunications - Melbourne is a piece of piss to cover compared to Sydney and Brisbane. Ever seen the overview of cellular radio networks in Melbourne? It looks far more like the stereotypical honeycomb pattern than in Brisbane and Melbourne. Telstra is going to experience more of a headache when "3" starts using the 2.5G Telstra GSM network - they are planning ahead by trying to get better utilisation of their CDMA network. Of course, according to you they could always wait until the network is badly congested and wait for the ACA to jump on their backs, but Telstra as a whole seems to have more brains than you. Albinus. > > There is a difference b/w breadth of coverage and depth of coverage. You > > dont seem to understand how they work together when running a COMMERCIAL [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > course not - if in the future there is going to be demand growth, plan > for it! Just because next to nobody uses CDMA in the cities is the same Best practice is to build JIT (just-in-time). Telstra will always put in extra capacity when existing infrastructure is required. Not just because they can, as you are suggesting > logic, if you are trying to increase usage, cater for demand growth. > CDMA will not reach GSM usage figures unless people get decent depth of > coverage. You seem to think that it is necessary for it to reach GSM usage figures? Why have you made that assumption? > > It aint "so patchy". I dont have any probs in metro Melb > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > far more like the stereotypical honeycomb pattern than in Brisbane and > Melbourne. Whats your point? You havent rebutted my point that i dont have any probs in metro melb so your claim of "patchy" is completely false as far as melbourne is concerned. nice attempt to change the subject, fooling absolutely no-one at all > Telstra is going to experience more of a headache when "3" starts using > the 2.5G Telstra GSM network - they are planning ahead by trying to get > better utilisation of their CDMA network. Of course, according to you > they could always wait until the network is badly congested and wait for Telstra dont wait until their network is badly congested, thats how Optus works. Indeed, Optus designs promotions in order to make their network badly congested And it wasnt a claim that I made, liar > the ACA to jump on their backs, but Telstra as a whole seems to have Why would the ACA jump on their backs? Telstra has never had an issues with congestion and CDO, thats Voda and Optus for you instead >> Michael wrote: >>> There is a difference b/w breadth of coverage and depth >>> of coverage. You dont seem to understand how they work >>> together when running a COMMERCIAL radio network You've never ever had a f.cking clue about that basic stuff. >>> Just because their GSM is well utilised, doesnt make it right Not a f.cking clue, as always. >> Let's put it another way - do power companies wait until the system can >> no longer handle demand before new generating plant is constructed? >> Of course not - if in the future there is going to be demand growth, plan >> for it! Just because next to nobody uses CDMA in the cities is the same > Best practice is to build JIT (just-in-time). Not a f.cking clue, as always. Mobile networks aint done like that, you stupid pig ignorant dunny cleaning child. Essentially because, if you cant provide a decent level of service, no one will bother with your f.cked network. > Telstra will always put in extra capacity when existing infrastructure > is required. Not just because they can, as you are suggesting Not a f.cking clue, as always. >> logic, if you are trying to increase usage, cater for >> demand growth. CDMA will not reach GSM usage >> figures unless people get decent depth of coverage. > You seem to think that it is necessary for it to reach GSM > usage figures? Why have you made that assumption? Not a f.cking clue, as always. >>> It aint "so patchy". I dont have any probs in metro Melb >> I can tell you're not qualified in the area of radio telecommunications Yep, never ever had a f.cking clue. >> - Melbourne is a piece of piss to cover compared to >> Sydney and Brisbane. Ever seen the overview of cellular radio >> networks in Melbourne? It looks far more like the stereotypical >> honeycomb pattern than in Brisbane and Melbourne. > Whats your point? Thanks for the completely superfluous proof that you've never ever had a f.cking clue. > You havent rebutted my point that i dont have any > probs in metro melb so your claim of "patchy" is > completely false as far as melbourne is concerned. Pathetic, really. > nice attempt to change the subject, fooling absolutely no-one at all Pathetic, really. >> Telstra is going to experience more of a headache when "3" starts using >> the 2.5G Telstra GSM network - they are planning ahead by trying to get >> better utilisation of their CDMA network. Of course, according to you >> they could always wait until the network is badly congested and wait for > Telstra dont wait until their network is > badly congested, thats how Optus works. Not a f.cking clue, as always. > Indeed, Optus designs promotions in order > to make their network badly congested Not a f.cking clue, as always. > And it wasnt a claim that I made, liar Not a f.cking clue, as always. >> the ACA to jump on their backs, but Telstra as a whole seems to have > Why would the ACA jump on their backs? > Telstra has never had an issues with congestion > and CDO, thats Voda and Optus for you instead Not a f.cking clue, as always. <snip> Just read Rod's reply... I can't be bothered explaining to a brain-dead Telstra shill. You really should stop embarassing your employer here, there are far more capable people in Telstra, including all the other dunny cleaners. I take it you have no formal RF training, otherwise I'll belt your examiner around the head for letting you pass. But then again, you're used to giving "favours" aren't we Mikey? ;) Albinus, Do you have any experience with broadcast transmitters ? Frank > Albinus, > > Do you have any experience with broadcast transmitters ? > > Frank Not much experience with the larger-scale ones, but spent a few of my life studying Telecommunications Engineering (which included broadcast transmitters). Boy do I hate Smith's Charts...:( I take it you are referring to TV/Radio and the like and not mobile phone towers (still transmitters, just not broadcast)? A couple of my lecturers were ex-PMG/Telecom/Telstra which made for interesting stories :) Albinus. >> Albinus, >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Albinus. Thanks for that. Yes, I was referring to Radio/TV transmitters. Frank > Thanks for that. Yes, I was referring to Radio/TV transmitters. The only problem when I was studying was field placement, due to indemnity and security concerns our RF field excercises were severely curtailed in some areas. We weren't even allowed to climb on the roof and install comms equipment, but that didn't stop us! :) Albinus. >>Perhaps if there was CDMA coverage in cities it would be more popular. > There is Yes there is. I intended to say 'better coverage in cities' > No carrier guarantees good coverage in every single shopping centre, GSM, > CDMA or otherwise Well the New Farm and St Lucia (both Brisbane City BTW) are on the street coverage problems. Pretty much no CDMA coverage at the last house we rented. Walking around the shops at New Farm was very patchy. Indooroopilly Shopping Maze I can understand to some degree. Except that Voda and Optus have coverage that works on all floors and the CDMA only works on the top floor (where the Telstra shop is oddly, with Voda & Optus on the ground floor). > If you are having trouble in St Lucia or New Farm have you reported it? > Customer feedback is valuable Several times over a couple of years. I have used the web form and gone into a Telstra Shop to report it personally. My solution in the end was to go GSM. I gave them enough goes. CDMA does have better voice quality -- less 'darth vader' effects. 13kbit does squeeze more quality through than 9.6k. GSM can sound good too, its just that CDMA has never sounded bad. If you're going to post a link to an article you could at least post one that every c.nt can read >If you're going to post a link to an article you could at least post >one that every c.nt can read If I had such a link, I would've posted it. > >If you're going to post a link to an article you could at least post > >one that every c.nt can read > > If I had such a link, I would've posted it. wong, dont be a soft cock. treat his remark with the disdain it deserved All, On 15 Feb 2005, at 22:45:19 [GMT -0800] (17:45:19 where I live) you wrote: > If you're going to post a link to an article you could at least post > one that every c.nt can read Don't be a c.nt then! SignatureIt has recently been discovered that research causes cancer in rats. > Anyone know what this is about? > <http://afr.com/premium/articles/2005/02/15/1108230003151.html> CDMA Nice try to scam a free copy >Nice try to scam a free copy We're all here for the common good of aus.comms.mobile It should be free for us :-) > >Nice try to scam a free copy > > We're all here for the common good of aus.comms.mobile > > It should be free for us :-) I agree > Anyone know what this is about? > <http://afr.com/premium/articles/2005/02/15/1108230003151.html> No fear, Telstra is going to "release" 3G towards November. Reselling 3's network. Of course, Three intend to be using 4G technology by then. So not much of a problem to be selling old product. 4G = live TV streams, faster data rates AFAIK. Installed a massive Three base station a few months back, 12 optic fibre links. 6 in, 6 out... Located in the mezzanine comms room in 20 Bond St - macquarie bank building, CBD. Took up a whole damn cabinet, plus another for the batteries to run it. -mark > > Anyone know what this is about? > > <http://afr.com/premium/articles/2005/02/15/1108230003151.html> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Of course, Three intend to be using 4G technology by then. So not much of a > problem to be selling old product. The network is 50% owned by 3 and 50% owned by Telstra So if Three intend to be using "4G technology" then, so will Telstra, its half theirs > Took up a whole damn cabinet, plus another for the batteries to run it. Is this where were supposed to swoon? >So if Three intend to be using "4G technology" then, so will Telstra, its >half theirs Nope... lots of stuff happens back in the network core which allows for higher speeds. Unless Telstra installs similar sh.t this won't be available to it. There were some press releases by HTA last year sometime if you want to read up on it. > >So if Three intend to be using "4G technology" then, so will Telstra, its > >half theirs [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > available to it. There were some press releases by HTA last year > sometime if you want to read up on it. Wong, get with it. There is no such thing as the 3 network now. Telstra owns half of it. Whats 3's is Telstra's Telstra are not buying airtime off 3. They are not a reseller.3 sold half their net to Telstra >Wong, get with it. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Telstra are not buying airtime off 3. They are not a reseller.3 sold half >their net to Telstra I'm aware of the situation - I've read all publicly released documnets aboiut this - and then some. Go read the press releases and you'll see that what I say is correct. Telstra doesn't have access to the network core. Telstra has a spectrum / infrastructure sharing arrangement through a jointly owned company. It doesn't have access to everything that Hutchison 3G has. > >Wong, get with it. > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Telstra doesn't have access to the network core. Telstra has a They do > spectrum / infrastructure sharing arrangement through a jointly owned Infrastructure can also mean the network "core". mindless silly jargon > company. It doesn't have access to everything that Hutchison 3G has. Wrong >Wrong Wong is not wrong. This is what I'm talking about: "It costs less to deliver a kilobyte via a 3G network, so we are in a better position than GSM and WiFi to pass on savings for the long term," he says. "We will deliver 2Meg downlink speed by 2005-2006 and as much as 10 MPS by 2008." <http://www.zdnet.com.au/reviews/coolgear/wireless/0,39023505,39173207-5,00.htm> "The upgrade will concentrate on the core network and include expansion of IT platforms such as billing, video and voice call systems, and content management platforms. In line with the evolution of the 3G standard, Hutchison would also be offering faster data speeds on its network within about 18 months, with speeds going from the current 384kbps up to 2Mbps, Mr Young said. "Within three or maybe four years, it will be a 10Mbps downlink speed," he said. Consequently, Hutchison's $450 million infrastructure sharing agreement signed with Telstra in August would remain largely unaffected by the upgrade. "If you look at the Telstra deal, it is for the radio access network. What we are doing is the core, and we are not sharing the core between us," Mr Young said. <http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,11175855%5E26559%5E%5Enbv%5E1530 6-15320,00.html> And just in case you missed it: "If you look at the Telstra deal, it is for the radio access network. What we are doing is the core, and we are not sharing the core between us," Mr Young said. >>Wrong > [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > What we are doing is the core, and we are not sharing the core between > us," Mr Young said. Mikey will still disagree. Best leave him to dream that Telstra owns it all, we all know better. >And just in case you missed it: > > "If you look at the Telstra deal, it is for the radio access network. >What we are doing is the core, and we are not sharing the core between >us," Mr Young said. Hello Michael? > >And just in case you missed it: > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Hello Michael? Hi Charlie, Good evening. Upon reviewing said material, I believe you are correct, and I was incorrect Have a pleasant evening :-) >Hi Charlie, >Good evening. >Upon reviewing said material, I believe you are correct, and I was incorrect >Have a pleasant evening :-) Noted. > >Hi Charlie, > >Good evening. > >Upon reviewing said material, I believe you are correct, and I was incorrect > >Have a pleasant evening :-) > > Noted. <nods> >> >Wong, get with it. >> > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Wrong Wrong, according to Whampoa. >>> >Wong, get with it. >>> > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Wrong, according to Whampoa. Corse its to their advantage to try to claim that they can offer something from those bases that Telstra cant. They've lied before... >>>> >Wong, get with it. >>>> > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > They've lied before... of course they lie; any Hong Kong fried rice operation about to go belly up would! |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.