Signal coverage--truth in advertising

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

For an eye-opener, head to tmobile.com and look at their Personal
Coverage Check.

They make no bones about it: here's what your coverage will look like.

I have to give them credit. That's a great feature. I sure wish
Cingular had it. Funny thing--TMobile's coverage map matches up with
what I experience with my Cingular blue service. Hmmmm.....
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" wrote:
>
> For an eye-opener, head to tmobile.com and look at their Personal
> Coverage Check.
>
> They make no bones about it: here's what your coverage will look like.
>
> I have to give them credit. That's a great feature. I sure wish
> Cingular had it. Funny thing--TMobile's coverage map matches up with
> what I experience with my Cingular blue service. Hmmmm.....

C'mon, Elmo... It's nothing but an "overview."

T-Mobile, like every other carrier, has dead spots all over
their "covered" areas.

Notan
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Now why can't Verizon have features like that? I also like T Mobile's plan
pricing. Verizon needs to be more flexible with there plans and offer more
instead of take away from users ( from what I heard ). More flexible + more
features + better pricing = happy customer.

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-552B82.21264430072005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> For an eye-opener, head to tmobile.com and look at their Personal
> Coverage Check.
>
> They make no bones about it: here's what your coverage will look like.
>
> I have to give them credit. That's a great feature. I sure wish
> Cingular had it. Funny thing--TMobile's coverage map matches up with
> what I experience with my Cingular blue service. Hmmmm.....
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Viper" <user@user.net> wrote in news:65WGe.199564$x96.160011@attbi_s72:

> Now why can't Verizon have features like that?

How could they lie if there was a REAL RF coverage map just sitting there
exposing the truth? Don't hold your breath.

These maps exist. They are filed with the FCC, who does nothing to force
the companies to actually cover the territory they are licensed to provide
real service for. All companies have poor coverage, some poorer than
others. If a broadcast station provided this type of coverage, FCC would
fine them $10,000/day until they complied with filling their coverage area
with a good level of signal.

FCC used to tell us "it's because it's new and they're still in the
buildout phase". It's kind of hard to swallow this BS, now, so far in the
future, any more. FCC needs to provide coverage, one way or the
other....you either put up the towers necessary or you are forced to share
(allow company-paid roaming) on other systems IN MARKET. FCC also needs to
inform cellular what digital modulation scheme they must use, instead of
this hodge-podge of incompatible nonsense invented to prevent churning we
have now.



--
Larry
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Please know that T-Mobile does show a coverage map,that much is true, but
they have serious dead spots all over the place. Even in high populated
metro areas. They do offer some great plans at super prices, it just came
down to having service when I needed it. So I ported over to Sprint. Heres
the plan I had at TM: 3000 anytime mins @ $49.00 (no kidding) that was
awfully hard to give up. So I now have SprintPCS:700 mins @$55.00. What I
have is solid service just about anywhere I go. So when I see the Beauty
Queen on the television solving all those problems with family members
talking to each other I notice they don't even mention how great or even
mediocre the coverage is. But they girl is beautiful so that is what really
matters.
Thanks for listening,
Daniel Cairns

"Viper" <user@user.net> wrote in message
news:65WGe.199564$x96.160011@attbi_s72...
> Now why can't Verizon have features like that? I also like T Mobile's plan
> pricing. Verizon needs to be more flexible with there plans and offer more
> instead of take away from users ( from what I heard ). More flexible +
> more features + better pricing = happy customer.
>
> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
> news:elmop-552B82.21264430072005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
>> For an eye-opener, head to tmobile.com and look at their Personal
>> Coverage Check.
>>
>> They make no bones about it: here's what your coverage will look like.
>>
>> I have to give them credit. That's a great feature. I sure wish
>> Cingular had it. Funny thing--TMobile's coverage map matches up with
>> what I experience with my Cingular blue service. Hmmmm.....
>>
>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

daniel cairns wrote:
> Please know that T-Mobile does show a coverage map,that much is true, but
> they have serious dead spots all over the place. Even in high populated
> metro areas. They do offer some great plans at super prices, it just came
> down to having service when I needed it. So I ported over to Sprint. Heres
> the plan I had at TM: 3000 anytime mins @ $49.00 (no kidding) that was
> awfully hard to give up. So I now have SprintPCS:700 mins @$55.00. What I
> have is solid service just about anywhere I go. So when I see the Beauty
> Queen

Ok, as a guy, would you rather watch Catherine Zeta-Jones or the Sprint PCS
dude? 😛

(of course, in asking that question, I'm assuming you're heterosexual) :)


--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Steve Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
news:dchd1g$r85$1@ratbert.glorb.com...
> daniel cairns wrote:
>> Please know that T-Mobile does show a coverage map,that much is true, but
>> they have serious dead spots all over the place. Even in high populated
>> metro areas. They do offer some great plans at super prices, it just came
>> down to having service when I needed it. So I ported over to Sprint.
>> Heres the plan I had at TM: 3000 anytime mins @ $49.00 (no kidding) that
>> was awfully hard to give up. So I now have SprintPCS:700 mins @$55.00.
>> What I have is solid service just about anywhere I go. So when I see the
>> Beauty Queen
>
> Ok, as a guy, would you rather watch Catherine Zeta-Jones or the Sprint
> PCS dude? 😛
>
> (of course, in asking that question, I'm assuming you're heterosexual) :)
You are correct sir! The "skirt" is attractive fer sure, I honestly see
right through the BS though. There is so much riding on any kind of ad
campaign I guess. It's just that T-Mobile has a ton of phones that work with
their service, they are literally so easy to come by, that I do miss that
company. And I would still be with them and not even be paying any attention
to this group if they had a working cell tower right smack in the heart of
downtown Dearborn Michigan. Am still stumped with all the retoric from the
CSR about trying a different phone(tried 4 different phones) maybe a new SIM
card, or maybe the proverbial Trouble Report would get me a signal. What did
me in was when went to a TM store in Dearborn and within 4 seconds the dude,
after knowing right where I worked, said " you are in a dead spot". I said
good day and within 30 Mins I had new service with Sprint with my # from TM.
Oops, I did not answer your question. I like watching the dude better 'cause
he conveys a smart assey sarcasm that I have not yet mastered.
DC

>
>
> --
> Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
> Company website: http://JustThe.net/
> Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
> E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

daniel cairns wrote:
>
> <snip>

YO, DANIEL!

Check your system clock... You're ~1 day behind!!!

Notan
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

I've been with T-Mobile for ten days. So far the service is great. No
dropped calls. 1000 minute family plan for $69.99.

"daniel cairns" <cutmedan@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:bZOdnUymjf3Ar3HfRVn-sw@comcast.com...
> Please know that T-Mobile does show a coverage map,that much is true, but
> they have serious dead spots all over the place. Even in high populated
> metro areas. They do offer some great plans at super prices, it just came
> down to having service when I needed it. So I ported over to Sprint. Heres
> the plan I had at TM: 3000 anytime mins @ $49.00 (no kidding) that was
> awfully hard to give up. So I now have SprintPCS:700 mins @$55.00. What I
> have is solid service just about anywhere I go. So when I see the Beauty
> Queen on the television solving all those problems with family members
> talking to each other I notice they don't even mention how great or even
> mediocre the coverage is. But they girl is beautiful so that is what
> really matters.
> Thanks for listening,
> Daniel Cairns
>
> "Viper" <user@user.net> wrote in message
> news:65WGe.199564$x96.160011@attbi_s72...
>> Now why can't Verizon have features like that? I also like T Mobile's
>> plan pricing. Verizon needs to be more flexible with there plans and
>> offer more instead of take away from users ( from what I heard ). More
>> flexible + more features + better pricing = happy customer.
>>
>> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
>> news:elmop-552B82.21264430072005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
>>> For an eye-opener, head to tmobile.com and look at their Personal
>>> Coverage Check.
>>>
>>> They make no bones about it: here's what your coverage will look like.
>>>
>>> I have to give them credit. That's a great feature. I sure wish
>>> Cingular had it. Funny thing--TMobile's coverage map matches up with
>>> what I experience with my Cingular blue service. Hmmmm.....
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <bZOdnUymjf3Ar3HfRVn-sw@comcast.com>,
"daniel cairns" <cutmedan@comcast.net> wrote:

> Please know that T-Mobile does show a coverage map,that much is true, but
> they have serious dead spots all over the place.

Absolutely--but notice that they spell it out for you in their coverage
check maps.

Other carriers should be so open about it.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Per daniel cairns:
>Please know that T-Mobile does show a coverage map,that much is true, but
>they have serious dead spots all over the place. Even in high populated
>metro areas. They do offer some great plans at super prices, it just came
>down to having service when I needed it. So I ported over to Sprint.

That's almost exactly where I am right now - but I'm still on T-Mob until the
contract runs out.

It's almost like there are "shadows" in the coverage... Won't work inside of
building "A", won't work immediately outside either.... but when you walk
another 75 feet in a certain direction, there'll be a couple of bars.
--
PeteCresswell
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per daniel cairns:
>
>>Please know that T-Mobile does show a coverage map,that much is true, but
>>they have serious dead spots all over the place. Even in high populated
>>metro areas. They do offer some great plans at super prices, it just came
>>down to having service when I needed it. So I ported over to Sprint.
>
>
> That's almost exactly where I am right now - but I'm still on T-Mob until the
> contract runs out.

Out of curiosity, which area are you in, Daniel?

Also, I'm on a nationwide FamilyTime share plan. I can roam onto other
carriers, including Cingular (at no extra charge!) if I happen to hit a
T-Mobile dead spot or travel somewhere where they don't have coverage, and
apparently that includes the area where I live even though T-Mobile has
native coverage here. Do you have a local or regional plan, or a nationwide
plan?

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <elmop-552B82.21264430072005@nntp1.usenetserver.com> on Sat, 30 Jul 2005
21:26:44 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>For an eye-opener, head to tmobile.com and look at their Personal
>Coverage Check.
>
>They make no bones about it: here's what your coverage will look like.
>
>I have to give them credit. That's a great feature. I sure wish
>Cingular had it. Funny thing--TMobile's coverage map matches up with
>what I experience with my Cingular blue service. Hmmmm.....

T-Mobile and Cingular are using the same infrastructure in some, but not all,
areas; e.g., here in California, Cingular sold its old orange network to
T-Mobile, but is buying back time for the next few years.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Steve Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
news:dcj5fv$8p0$3@ratbert.glorb.com...
> (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>> Per daniel cairns:
>>
>>>Please know that T-Mobile does show a coverage map,that much is true, but
>>>they have serious dead spots all over the place. Even in high populated
>>>metro areas. They do offer some great plans at super prices, it just came
>>>down to having service when I needed it. So I ported over to Sprint.
>>
>>
>> That's almost exactly where I am right now - but I'm still on T-Mob until
>> the
>> contract runs out.
>
> Out of curiosity, which area are you in, Daniel?
Dearborn, Michigan.
DC

>
> Also, I'm on a nationwide FamilyTime share plan. I can roam onto other
> carriers, including Cingular (at no extra charge!) if I happen to hit a
> T-Mobile dead spot or travel somewhere where they don't have coverage, and
> apparently that includes the area where I live even though T-Mobile has
> native coverage here. Do you have a local or regional plan, or a
> nationwide plan?
>
> --
> Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
> Company website: http://JustThe.net/
> Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
> E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

daniel cairns wrote:

>>Out of curiosity, which area are you in, Daniel?
>
> Dearborn, Michigan.
> DC

I have to wonder how Cingular (former Ameritech Cellular) is in your area. I
don't know if T-Mobile lets you switch plans without penalizing you, but if
they do, perhaps you should try switching to a nationwide plan. See if being
able to roam when your T-Mo signal fades will help at all.


--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

daniel cairns wrote:
>
> <snip>

A suggestion, Daniel... Learn to edit and snip your responses,
so your one-liners don't get lost in a mess of top and bottom
posts.

See ya!

Notan
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Because those features must not be sufficiently compelling to subscribers. If
those features were sufficiently compelling, presumably more subscribers would
migrate from Verizon to T-Mobile (aided by number portability), and Verizon
would have to respond. That's how the free market works, and that's not
happening -- Verizon continues to have low churn.

In <65WGe.199564$x96.160011@attbi_s72> on Sun, 31 Jul 2005 01:47:46 GMT,
"Viper" <user@user.net> wrote:

>Now why can't Verizon have features like that? I also like T Mobile's plan
>pricing. Verizon needs to be more flexible with there plans and offer more
>instead of take away from users ( from what I heard ). More flexible + more
>features + better pricing = happy customer.
>
>"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
>news:elmop-552B82.21264430072005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
>> For an eye-opener, head to tmobile.com and look at their Personal
>> Coverage Check.
>>
>> They make no bones about it: here's what your coverage will look like.
>>
>> I have to give them credit. That's a great feature. I sure wish
>> Cingular had it. Funny thing--TMobile's coverage map matches up with
>> what I experience with my Cingular blue service. Hmmmm.....

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <Xns96A3E134CFE54noone@63.223.7.253> on Sat, 30 Jul 2005 22:04:33 -0400,
Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:

>"Viper" <user@user.net> wrote in news:65WGe.199564$x96.160011@attbi_s72:
>
>> Now why can't Verizon have features like that?
>
>How could they lie if there was a REAL RF coverage map just sitting there
>exposing the truth? Don't hold your breath.
>
>These maps exist. They are filed with the FCC,

They are? Then presumably they are available to the public, under Freedom of
Information if nothing else. Form or Docket Number please.

>who does nothing to force
>the companies to actually cover the territory they are licensed to provide
>real service for.

Under what statute or regulation?

>All companies have poor coverage,

Actually pretty good in my experience.

>some poorer than
>others.

True.

>If a broadcast station provided this type of coverage, FCC would
>fine them $10,000/day until they complied with filling their coverage area
>with a good level of signal.

Huh? Then why is broadcast radio and TV coverage so bad here in the East Bay
part of the San Francisco Bay Area? Cellular coverage is better by far!

>FCC used to tell us "it's because it's new and they're still in the
>buildout phase". It's kind of hard to swallow this BS, now, so far in the
>future, any more. FCC needs to provide coverage, one way or the
>other....you either put up the towers necessary or you are forced to share
>(allow company-paid roaming) on other systems IN MARKET.

No need for that -- let the market continue to work.

>FCC also needs to
>inform cellular what digital modulation scheme they must use, instead of
>this hodge-podge of incompatible nonsense invented to prevent churning we
>have now.

Really Bad Idea! The "hodge-podge" has now sorted itself out in the market
into two principal standards, which fosters competition.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 15:35:21 GMT, John Navas wrote:
>In <Xns96A3E134CFE54noone@63.223.7.253> on Sat, 30 Jul 2005 22:04:33 -0400,
>Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>>FCC also needs to
>>inform cellular what digital modulation scheme they must use, instead of
>>this hodge-podge of incompatible nonsense invented to prevent churning we
>>have now.
>
>Really Bad Idea! The "hodge-podge" has now sorted itself out in the market
>into two principal standards, which fosters competition.

In the past, the FCC has adopted and enforced standards. NTSC is a
good example where the different manufacturers in the TV industry
cooperated (eventually, and not without some politics) to come up with
a very elegant broadcast standard that has served the industry well
for 50 years. Why wouldn't such an approach work with the cellular
industry?

Joe Huber
huber.joseph@comcast.net
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in
news:Yh6He.6609$p%3.33070@typhoon.sonic.net:

> Really? What specific (paragraph and section of) law?
>

http://www.fcc.gov/searchtools.html#rules

The rules are rampant with it...

Ever read the FCC rules on wireless?
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_04/47cfr24_04.html
http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/cellular/

"Section 11 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (Communications
Act) requires the FCC to review all of its regulations applicable to
providers of telecommunications service, and to determine whether any rule
is no longer in the public interest as a result of meaningful economic
competition between providers of telecommunications service and whether
such regulations should be deleted or modified. Pursuant to that statutory
standard, the Commission staff completed a report on its comprehensive
review of regulations that affect telecommunications service providers."
From the FCC webpages....

--
Larry
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in
news:Zc6He.6608$p%3.33089@typhoon.sonic.net:

> Under what statute or regulation?
>

Section 11 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (Communications
Act) requires the FCC to review all of its regulations applicable to
providers of telecommunications service, and to determine whether any rule
is no longer in the public interest as a result of meaningful economic
competition between providers of telecommunications service and whether
such regulations should be deleted or modified. Pursuant to that statutory
standard, the Commission staff completed a report on its comprehensive
review of regulations that affect telecommunications service providers.

http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/cellular/
FCC rules, Part 22 is cellular.

Want your own license?
http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/cellular/licensing/index.html





--
Larry
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.z.invalid> wrote in
news:15bqe192egnae8a1q42scajkanaofbhisd@4ax.com:

> It's almost like there are "shadows" in the coverage... Won't work
> inside of building "A", won't work immediately outside either.... but
> when you walk another 75 feet in a certain direction, there'll be a
> couple of bars.
>

A great indication of multipath signals. You walk a few feet and signals
improve, markedly. The signals are weak from lack of cells and what you
are receiving from far off is bouncing off buildings, bridges and other
reflective things like airplanes and mountains, causing many signal paths
to the poorly covered cells.

Take a portable UHF TV to this same area and see how bad the ghosting is on
the little whip antenna. I bet it's awful!

--
Larry
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <jr9qe1hlc7jl6645755k22l1fl1r15q7rl@4ax.com> on Sun, 31 Jul 2005 15:33:27
-0500, Joseph Huber <huber.joseph@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 15:35:21 GMT, John Navas wrote:
>>In <Xns96A3E134CFE54noone@63.223.7.253> on Sat, 30 Jul 2005 22:04:33 -0400,
>>Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>>>FCC also needs to
>>>inform cellular what digital modulation scheme they must use, instead of
>>>this hodge-podge of incompatible nonsense invented to prevent churning we
>>>have now.
>>
>>Really Bad Idea! The "hodge-podge" has now sorted itself out in the market
>>into two principal standards, which fosters competition.
>
>In the past, the FCC has adopted and enforced standards. NTSC is a
>good example where the different manufacturers in the TV industry
>cooperated (eventually, and not without some politics) to come up with
>a very elegant broadcast standard that has served the industry well
>for 50 years. Why wouldn't such an approach work with the cellular
>industry?

NTSC is a painful kludge with mediocre image quality. By that standard we'd
probably still be limping along with IS-136 (D-AMPS), rather than enjoying the
benefits of vigorous competition between GSM and CDMA.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 20:41:51 GMT, John Navas
<spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>NTSC is a painful kludge with mediocre image quality. By that standard we'd
>probably still be limping along with IS-136 (D-AMPS), rather than enjoying the
>benefits of vigorous competition between GSM and CDMA.

NTSC may very well be a painful kludge by today's standards, but for
the technology available in the early 1950's when it was developed, it
was state-of-the art and rather brilliant for what it accomplished.
We could have had the CBS Field Sequential (colorwheel) System. That
was the standard actually approved by the FCC, but covertly derailed
by the rest of the industry because of its many problems. As a
result, the NTSC standard evolved and was adopted by the FCC.

What benefits have we specifically gained from competition between GSM
and CDMA? Aren't the benefits really coming because of what the
providers are doing with any given technology (i.e. Verizion vs.
Sprint on CDMA)?

Joe Huber
huber.joseph@comcast.net
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.sprintpcs,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in
news:jIaHe.6665$p%3.33081@typhoon.sonic.net:

> NTSC is a painful kludge with mediocre image quality. By that
> standard we'd probably still be limping along with IS-136 (D-AMPS),
> rather than enjoying the benefits of vigorous competition between GSM
> and CDMA.
>
>

True....But I bet before this conversion to digital TV is over, the
politicians will wish they'd never heard of digital TV.

I just can't figure out why anyone would want high definition commercials,
which is about all that's left of TV in the USA....

BBC graciously refused my offer to pay their radio tax to support the
servers they provide me for the great BBC radio programmes I'm listening to
as I type this. I'm hoping to see BBC-TV, the home channels, on the
internet in the future and am willing to PAY for the priviledge of watching
it.....spam free.

My friend Werner is from Thun, Switzerland. He buys European TV channels
from Dish Network to get the German TV. Great programs on German TV, too!

--
Larry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom