 |
 | 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 / General / GSM / December 2004From CNN - U.S. lags behind much of developed world in wireless
bumped into this today and thought it interesting... http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/12/20/cell.lag.ap/index.html  Signaturejer email reply - I am not a 'ten' > bumped into this today and thought it interesting... > > http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/12/20/cell.lag.ap/index.html Not just interesting but pretty accurate, for a change. Mobile phone service is better even in Eastern Europe than here in the US. R. P. > Not just interesting but pretty accurate, for a change. Mobile phone > service is better even in Eastern Europe than here in the US. Same same in countries such as Bangladesh - still better than USA. SignatureMy mind's made up -- don't confuse me with the facts. [cut] > Not just interesting but pretty accurate, for a change. Mobile > phone service is better even in Eastern Europe than here in the US. Yes, that's right. We have EDGE available in Croatia via VIPnet carrier, and it's working pretty fine. If there would be flat rate of it, I'd take it right away, no matter the cost :) 200 kbps suites my needs for the moment :) SignatureStevica Kuharski, Omikron http://www.omikron-ps.com http://www.omikron-games.com e-mail: infoREMOVE@omikron-ps.com > [cut] > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > it's working pretty fine. If there would be flat rate of it, I'd take it > right away, no matter the cost :) 200 kbps suites my needs for the moment :) ...and you've got great diving there too. Loved it. :) Signaturejer email reply - I am not a 'ten' > ...and you've got great diving there too. Loved it. :) I'm away for a week, and look what happend in this thread :) Yes, the sea is great. If you'll come next time to this part of the world, especially to Zagreb (our capital), feel free to mail, we'll arrange a coffe or smth :) SignatureStevica Kuharski, Omikron http://www.omikron-ps.com http://www.omikron-games.com e-mail: infoREMOVE@omikron-ps.com > [cut] > > Not just interesting but pretty accurate, for a change. Mobile [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > right away, no matter the cost :) 200 kbps suites my needs for the moment :) Erm... Croatia isn't strictly Easter Europe, more like Central. But the point is valid. Here in Baltic states WCDMA is rolling out - talk about 380 kbps, but major cities only so far. EDGE is coming, too. Too bad there are no decent WCDMA phones available - too bulky, lacks Bluetooth, etc. But to give USA it's dues they have much larger territory to cover, and it takes time+money. Not to mention plethora of cellular standards being used all over USA, and idiotic frequency allocation which is incompatible with just about every other country. Ever wonder why they make quad-band GSM phones? Peter As an American who has used seven different European GSM services, I can honestly say that they are generally superior in customer service and coverage as well as in technology. This seems to go for the East as well as the West and in the East the price is right. If suicide bombing were to ever before fashionable in the states all of our mobile telephone companies would be in big trouble. Merry Christmas, Mike H. > > [cut] > > > Not just interesting but pretty accurate, for a change. Mobile [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Peter >If suicide bombing were to ever before fashionable in the states all of our >mobile telephone companies would be in big trouble. How cavalier of you to take suicide bombing so lightly and think that it's a way to get what you want. I'm sure people who know others who have died at the hands of suicide bombers do not think it's quite so humourous. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Erm... Croatia isn't strictly Easter Europe, more like Central. True, and so is Hungary, where I got my experience with cell phones. However, most Westerners consider the former Communist countries as part of Eastern Europe even if it is not correct geographically speaking. R. P. >> Erm... Croatia isn't strictly Easter Europe, more like Central. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > R. P. LOL. Beyond their own borders, most westerners are so geographically challenged they couldn't find their own hynie without a map. A big map. Signaturejer email reply - I am not a 'ten' > LOL. Beyond their own borders, most westerners are so geographically > challenged they couldn't find their own hynie without a map. A big > map. True again. Especially for Americans. R. P. >LOL. Beyond their own borders, most westerners are so geographically >challenged they couldn't find their own hynie without a map. A big map. Not true! I can find my hynie without a map. <sigh> <GRIN >Not to mention plethora of cellular standards being used >all over USA, and idiotic frequency allocation which is incompatible with >just about every other country. Ever wonder why they make quad-band GSM >phones? It's just amazing that Europeans don't bother to find out why North America uses different frequencies and standards and just assume that it's our "arrogance." And they're also the same ones to point out how "superior" their mobile service is to the service in North America. Ya know what? We really don't care! We're not going to change and you can just get used to it. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > >Not to mention plethora of cellular standards being used > >all over USA, and idiotic frequency allocation which is incompatible with [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Ya know what? We really don't care! We're not going to change and > you can just get used to it. Ya know, it reminds me of the same thing what was going on inside Soviet Union - different TV standard (SECAM vs PAL... now what is in US?), different FM radio frequency band (rings a bell, huh?), different this and that. All because Soviet Union was The Greatest Country In The World, and didn't need to follow stupid imperialist standards. Little good it did to them... at least communists didn't go 110V 60Hz route, and I'm grateful to Comrade Lenin for that :) Seriously speaking - of course there are reasons why US didn't adopt, say, 900Mhz GSM which is prevalent all over the rest of the world. Then again, there are reasons why 900Mhz band was already booked when GSM came along. I'm no historician but imagine somebody in US government 100yrs ago decided that "we don't need to follow British rules & standards!", and decided to start brand new standardization scheme. In fact it really would be interesting to find out how all those differences came about. One thing you're certainly right, tho - Americans don't really care, and are not going to change ;) Of course this does not prohibit US from having decent cellular service, but is making things bit more difficult. Peter >Ya know, it reminds me of the same thing what was going on inside Soviet >Union - different TV standard (SECAM vs PAL... now what is in US?), If you're going to bring up SECAM you might first want to lay the "different" claim on France first seeing as how the French developed SECAM (Sequential Couleur Avec Memoir) even though the rest of Europe (save for the former soviet satellites) opted for PAL (Phase Alternate Line.) >different FM radio frequency band (rings a bell, huh?), Not in the US. The US uses the same band of 87.5 Mhz to 108 Mhz. North America divides on the odd (e.g. 98.1 Mhz) rather than the even but any normal receiver should work either in Europe or in North America. North America uses NTSC (National Television Standards Committee) often referred to with derision by Europeans as Never Twice the Same Colour. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > >Ya know, it reminds me of the same thing what was going on inside Soviet > >Union - different TV standard (SECAM vs PAL... now what is in US?), [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > (save for the former soviet satellites) opted for PAL (Phase Alternate > Line.) I know SECAM comes from France originally. Methinks they still use it over there. They do have influental socialist party (or used to have), and that may have been the reason why Soviet Union opted for it. And yes, all former Soviet satellites have switched to PAL now. And AFAIK North America is the only one using NTSC... > >different FM radio frequency band (rings a bell, huh?), > > Not in the US. The US uses the same band of 87.5 Mhz to 108 Mhz. > North America divides on the odd (e.g. 98.1 Mhz) rather than the even > but any normal receiver should work either in Europe or in North > America. Band is the same, but many US receivers will only tune in to odd frequencies (like 90.1, 90.3 etc). De-emphasis (whatever that means) is different, too. Most US FM radios will not be able to receive all radio stations in Europe. However all European FM radios will work just fine other side of the pond. > North America uses NTSC (National Television Standards Committee) > often referred to with derision by Europeans as Never Twice the Same > Colour. Ahh, so it was developed by some National Television Standards Committee (presumably in US) instead of adopting existing standards. I wonder what was their reasoning? From what I've seen on-screen NTSC is not superior to PAL in any way (and vice versa). What a nice discussion we have over here! ;) Peter > And AFAIK North America is the >only one using NTSC... Incorrectamundo. NTSC is used in Japan and some other far eastern countries. Also used throughout Central and South America. >> >different FM radio frequency band (rings a bell, huh?), >> >> Not in the US. The US uses the same band of 87.5 Mhz to 108 Mhz. >> North America divides on the odd (e.g. 98.1 Mhz) rather than the even >> but any normal receiver should work either in Europe or in North >> America. >> North America uses NTSC (National Television Standards Committee) >> often referred to with derision by Europeans as Never Twice the Same >> Colour. > >Ahh, so it was developed by some National Television Standards Committee >(presumably in US) instead of adopting existing standards. NTSC was developed *before* PAL or SECAM were implemented. >I wonder what was >their reasoning? Part of the same reasoning that AT&T Wireless (or their predecessors) and cingular (or their predecessors) opted for TDMA mobile instead of GSM or CDMA as it was *the* digital mobile standard at the time. It turns out it was the wrong choice, but that's what it was. >From what I've seen on-screen NTSC is not superior to PAL >in any way (and vice versa). There are several ways that PAL and SECAM are superior to NTSC, but colour isn't one of them. PAL and SECAM have 625 lines of resolution where NTSC has only 525 which gives a much finer picture than NTSC. PAL and SECAM scan at 50 Hz and NTSC scans at 60 Hz. If you've only watched NTSC and first time view a PAL or SECAM TV you'll notice perceptable flicker til your eyes get used to the scan rate and different refresh rate. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - doesnt japan use NTSC standards as well? australia too? >> >Ya know, it reminds me of the same thing what was going on inside Soviet >> >Union - different TV standard (SECAM vs PAL... now what is in US?), [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > Peter >doesnt japan use NTSC standards as well? Most decidedly yes. >australia too? No. Australia uses PAL. Advantages vs. disadvantages PAL vs. NTSC vs. SECAM http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Contrib/WorldTV/compare.html Standards used by individual country: http://www.execulink.com/~impact/world_television_standards2.htm - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >doesnt japan use NTSC standards as well? > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >> (like 90.1, 90.3 etc). De-emphasis (whatever that means) is different, >> too. Alters the audio response. >> Most US FM radios will not be able to receive all radio stations in >> Europe. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> their reasoning? From what I've seen on-screen NTSC is not superior to PAL >> in any way (and vice versa). You have the timing backward. NTSC predates both SECAM and PAL not by a little, but a lot. I believe the Colour NTSC dates to 1954, the Black and White version went on the air in New York City in 1939! Colour television is on the air in North America before B&W was in parts of Europe. It was the Euorpeans and the french who chose to ignore the one existing colour televsision standard >> What a nice discussion we have over here! ;) >> >> Peter > You have the timing backward. NTSC predates both SECAM and PAL not by > a little, but a lot. I believe the Colour NTSC dates to 1954, the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > parts of Europe. It was the Euorpeans and the french who chose to > ignore the one existing colour televsision standard Dammit Matt, stop trying to confuse these people with the facts. If you don't start behaving, I'm gonna list your toys on eBay. :) Signaturejer email reply - I am not a 'ten' > Ya know what? We really don't care! We're not going to change and > you can just get used to it. We don't care either. Only the USA consumer suffers. Fool! SignatureHave Warp Core, will travel. >> Ya know what? We really don't care! We're not going to change and >> you can just get used to it. > >We don't care either. Only the USA consumer suffers. Fool! Seems more like *you* are the fool since you can't get it through your head that everyone's not just like you. If you don't like the way things are done outside your own country it's really simple... stay where you are and you can be inflexible and do things *your* way and we won't have to suffer from you. And if the USA consumers are "suffering" we're doing it as the country with the highest GDP of any country in the world. It's nice that you're so concerned about us, but we'll do just fine without your pity. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > It's nice that you're so concerned about us, but we'll do just fine > without your pity. If its one thing to get the dingbats in God's Own Country stirred up, it is even the slightest criticism of their great self perceived place in the world. Obviously only the undereducated suffer from this weakness; most of the folks in USA have more brains than "Joseph", praise de Lord. SignatureI'm not talking to myself...I'm talking to Jim Morrison >>>Ya know what? We really don't care! We're not going to change and >>>you can just get used to it. A little arrogant if you ask me. No wonder Americans aren't respected very well compared to, Canadians, for instance. >>We don't care either. Only the USA consumer suffers. Fool! > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > where you are and you can be inflexible and do things *your* way and > we won't have to suffer from you. Yes, but unfortunately, the USA believes the whole world should work like it does. It is going through much trouble to set up the government in Iraq to be a clone copy of the USA. > And if the USA consumers are "suffering" we're doing it as the country > with the highest GDP of any country in the world. Nope, you're wrong. Rome will always be the capitol of the world, and everybody is going to speak latin until the end of the world. Point being -- the USA is going to fall. Americans just won't admit it. > It's nice that you're so concerned about us, but we'll do just fine > without your pity. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >A little arrogant if you ask me. No wonder Americans aren't respected >very well compared to, Canadians, for instance News flash! Canada is in North America and uses the same standards as the US. If you don't like Canada and the US no one's putting a gun to your head to visit. We'd actually prefer that you stay away. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >... If you don't like Canada and the US no one's putting a gun to >your head to visit. We'd actually prefer that you stay away. Speak for yourself. SignatureBest regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES: John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular >>A little arrogant if you ask me. No wonder Americans aren't respected >>very well compared to, Canadians, for instance > > News flash! Canada is in North America and uses the same standards as > the US. If you don't like Canada and the US no one's putting a gun to > your head to visit. We'd actually prefer that you stay away. I wasn't referring that it is inappropriate that Canada and the United States use many of the same standards, including NTSC. I was referring to the fact that many Americans have arrogant attitudes toward people from other countries. But, I'm pretty sure many areas, such as Florida, California, Nevada, Arizona, just to name a few states, would LOVE to have tourists come, especially for several months at a time. > We'd actually prefer that you stay away. Fair is fair, Joseph. You keep your bib out of the world's affairs, and we promise you we won't visit USA! Fool! SignatureHe's dim, Jed. dOn Sat, 25 Dec 2004 13:08:07 +1100, John Phillips<flatulentdingo@deadspam.com> wrote: >Fool! Butthead. Your turn sweetheart. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Butthead. > Your turn sweetheart. Zzzzzzzzzz SignatureConservative: One who admires old, dead liberals. If you don't like Canada and the US no one's putting a gun to | your head to visit. We'd actually prefer that you stay away. | | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - No, they just do that when you arrive in NYC ! > It's just amazing that Europeans don't bother to find out why North > America uses different frequencies and standards and just assume that > it's our "arrogance." And they're also the same ones to point out how > "superior" their mobile service is to the service in North America. > Ya know what? We really don't care! We're not going to change and > you can just get used to it. Talk for yourself, not for all Americans of whom I am one. It's your kind of complacent attitude that keeps us losing in the field of technology. Boeing is learning it now from Airbus, too. R. P. > Talk for yourself, not for all Americans of whom I am one. It's your > kind of complacent attitude that keeps us losing in the field of > technology. Boeing is learning it now from Airbus, too. if we would give boeing the same type of government back subsidies that airbus has gotten they could be selling their products at the same prices airbus does and moving more product. every airbus i have ever been on is cramped ( i guess the lower cost per passgener by stuffing more people in the same amount of space). > every airbus i have ever been on is cramped ( i guess the lower cost per > passgener by stuffing more people in the same amount of space). Strange, my experience the opposite. I have never travelled (in cattle class) on a more uncomfortable plane than in the B767 - (except perhaps in the DC 10 (now the MD30 - thankfully no longer produced)). YMMV of course. As for subsidies, it would appear that both companies (Airbus & Boeing) have their snouts in the trough here. Signature(A)bort, (R)etry, (P)retend this never happened... > > every airbus i have ever been on is cramped ( i guess the lower cost per > > passgener by stuffing more people in the same amount of space). [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > YMMV of course. AFAIK manufacturer (Airbus/Boeing) installs seats according to each airline's specs. Blame American Airlines instead of Boeing! Peter > if we would give boeing the same type of government back subsidies > that airbus has gotten > they could be selling their products at the same prices airbus does > and moving more product. > every airbus i have ever been on is cramped ( i guess the lower cost > per passgener by stuffing more people in the same amount of space). That's true to some extent but does not explain everything. Airbus has a decided edge in the fact that they use standardized cockpit designs, allowing minimal cross-training for the pilots and it also has been using fly-by-wire technology from the very beginning while Boeing is getting into it just now. Of course they use better marketing, too. As to the cramped planes, blame the airlines for that as they are the ones who mandate the manufacturers to install maximum number of seats in the economy sections. R. P. >It's just amazing that Europeans don't bother to find out why North >America uses different frequencies and standards and just assume that >it's our "arrogance." And they're also the same ones to point out how >"superior" their mobile service is to the service in North America. >Ya know what? We really don't care! We're not going to change and >you can just get used to it. There you go! Way to debunk that American's have an arrogant attitude! >[cut] >> Not just interesting but pretty accurate, for a change. Mobile >> phone service is better even in Eastern Europe than here in the US. It's certainly been accurate in the past, but times have changed, and the US has largely caught up with the rest of the world in cellular. The real remaining difference is that US subscribers are mostly interested in voice calls (imagine that), whereas the rest of the world is heavily into text messaging and other non-voice services, chiefly as a result of different pricing structures. >Yes, that's right. We have EDGE available in Croatia via VIPnet carrier, and >it's working pretty fine. If there would be flat rate of it, I'd take it >right away, no matter the cost :) 200 kbps suites my needs for the moment :) GPRS is available on virtually all US cellular networks; EDGE is widely deployed by Cingular-ATTWS; and UMTS (WCDMA) is available from Cingular+ATTWS in a few major metro markets. The CDMA carriers (Verizon and Sprint-Nextel) have deployed similar technology. And all carriers now interoperate well in text messaging and other areas. All in all, considering the much greater geographic area in the US as compared to many other countries, cellular coverage is remarkably good. SignatureBest regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES: John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular [cut] > It's certainly been accurate in the past, but times have changed, and > the US has largely caught up with the rest of the world in cellular. > The real remaining difference is that US subscribers are mostly > interested in voice calls (imagine that), whereas the rest of the > world is heavily into text messaging and other non-voice services, > chiefly as a result of different pricing structures. Right, few days ago I've listened to the news concerning amount of text messages (SMS) sent over the xmass holidays. We sent app. 30 mil. messages!!! Average price of message is 0.40 HRK (around 0.055 EUR, 0.063 USD), which makes a lot of money for a country that lacks of it... But, that's another story of Croatia and its residents :) SignatureStevica Kuharski, Omikron http://www.omikron-ps.com http://www.omikron-games.com e-mail: infoREMOVE@omikron-ps.com >> bumped into this today and thought it interesting... >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >R. P. I've been to some third-world countries where the service is better. :-( >>> bumped into this today and thought it interesting... >>> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >I've been to some third-world countries where the service is better. >:-( But then they don't have our excellent wireline service. SignatureBest regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES: John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular >>I've been to some third-world countries where the service is better. >>:-( > But then they don't have our excellent wireline service. India is a prime example where neither apply, no doubt due to the Indian love of bureaucracy. Every town seems to have own cell phone provider, with no roaming agreement with any other. And as for the landlines - don't ask! The best e-mail download speed I could get recently in Delhi was a princely 262 characters per second. SignatureMicrosoft Windows: A virus with mouse support. |
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.