Community weekly poll: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one?
- 4/4/07 10:36 AM
Choose One?!?!?
by krbuell - 4/4/07 1:56 PM In reply to: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I know there has been a lot of talk of analog disappearing in a few years and being replaced by one of the digital technologies. If they do this, I think they will lose a great deal of customer base and leave 3/4 of the country without any service. I currently live "in-town" and have frequent problems with CDMA reception. There are very few areas in WI (where I am)--a fairly large state--which are covered by digital service. And I may point out that the majority of the States are primarily rural/non-digital coverage, and even patchy so far as analog coverage. However, the few (in comparison) urban centers (mostly coastal) seem to dictate what it is the rest of the country needs and wants. We need our phones too. We don't use them as much to socialize and chit-chat and surf the net, but we do need our phones--for emergency if nothing else. When it's 30 miles to the next closest landline we can't borrow someone else's phone or use the corner phonebooth as one could in the metro areas. Sorry for the rant, but there are people who do not live in N.Y., L.A., etc. And I'd love to get a phone with the new fun features, but, again, they're not available with support for analog, which is the primary service around here and in many states. I say squabble about it when there's actually decent coverage for any of the technologies.
forced digital migration?
by punterjoe - 4/4/07 3:18 PM In reply to: Choose One?!?!? by krbuellI think tthe analog phaseout is pretty much a done deal. I'm pretty sure the feds set a sunset date for analog svc. The upside is that - at least potentially - all those old 850Mhz analog nodes could be replaced with digital transceivers on the same frequency. They should have better coverage for rural areas than the 1900Mhz nodes. Although I recall there are certain physical limits to GSM and I think a phone can't be more than 30Km from the tower. Check wikipedia for the technical explanation. I don't know if CDMA has similar limitations, so maybe in realy sparse areas loss of analog may be a problem, but it might not be too bad if it's replaced with more robust digital service.
If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one?
by nybor - 4/4/07 2:05 PM In reply to: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
CDMA It has way better coverage and call quality with less drop outs. It can be used internationaly also. Since going CDMA I would never look back.
GSM is the only way to go
by azevedob - 4/4/07 2:10 PM In reply to: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
The spread of CDMA is doing nothing but stifling the cellular industry in America.
There will never come a day when the entire world will convert to the technology used by a small group of American carriers.
I consider myself a player in a global market, and GSM is the standard that keeps the vast majority of the world's population in communication. The choice is obvious.
American once again displays its arrogance in going against the grain and trying to force a new standard. It's a waste of resources and time that could be better spent building out better -and more compliant- GSM networks.
Why GSM ?
by nazimrj - 4/4/07 2:13 PM In reply to: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Over the past few years I have been traveling outside North America. The CDMA telephone, which I dearly rely on to stay in touch, has been a brick when abroad. Last week I finally broke down and purchased an unlocked GSM telephone.
Stay with the standard - GSM.
Take the lessons learned from Sony --- Betamax and memory sticks.
DEFINATLEY GSM
by Cody Becker-Pollack - 4/4/07 2:19 PM In reply to: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Why? it is already used world wide! And i have never had a dropped call with it! it rocks!
Forget features..how about a network?
by Rivergal49 - 4/4/07 2:50 PM In reply to: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Whenever I read articles like this one I know for sure that most of you have decent (fast connection ISP) or live in or near cities. I live out in the boonies, and only recently (last year due to disability...I can no longer walk distances and we now have constant power outages where I live) started carrying a cell phone. The only carrier that works (everywhere) is trac-fone (50 cents a minute). When the guys from my phone company came to replace all the wire from the poll to my house(I live in a wooded area near a state forest and am surrounded by marshland which does a number on all the equipment) they borrowed my trac-fone to call their crew cheif because they couldn't get a signal on their "state of the art" company authorized verison cells.
In this country those of living in rural areas are still without service major-league. How about advocating for better service? My phone company (Frontier) has told me that when they ("get around to") laying the line up here in my grid for DSL that those of us who get it at that point will be "subsidizing" everyone that has it for lower fees already ("paying through the nose" the nice customer service lady said)....sucks major league and is totally unfair.
Oswego County, NY
This is not progress
by punterjoe - 4/4/07 3:39 PM In reply to: Forget features..how about a network? by Rivergal49I remember reading about the rural electrification process in the 1930s. It may have been part gvt jobs program, but it was also a way to keep from segregating citizens into urban haves and rural have-nots. Just like electricity & phone service in the late 1800s (the first "guilded age"), private industry & venture capital was eager to service dense areas, where infrastructure was minimized & potential customers were maximized. If not for the federal gvt - who actually lived up to their role as civil SERVANTS... the citizens of many parts of the country would have done without many of the innovations of the 20th century, which depended on reliable electricity and phone service. We need to regain that vision and insist that if companies want to harvest the low-hanging fruit of serving the densely populated areas, they also have to invest in equal - or equivalent access to the less instantly-gratifying customers in sparsely served areas. Or at the very least, they can't be allowed to stifle any entrepreneur who wants to serve underserved markets.
A happy GSM user since 1995
by punterjoe - 4/4/07 3:02 PM In reply to: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I've had more carriers than cellphones in the past dozen years: Omnipoint,Voicestream,T-Mobile,ATTWS, Cingular & back to ATT - and only 3 handsets! GSM may lag in data throughput compared to the CDMA carriers, but I'm sure both camps will continue to improve. My top concern is portability. I can slap my SIM card in any unlocked GSM phone (if it's a 4-band phone) and be good to go. The day a CDMA user doesn't have to get their handset individually registered & activated by navigating their carrier's bureaucratic gauntlet, I may reconsider my decsion. As it stands now, I'm GSM all the way.
I'll be going to GSM
by aka_tripleB - 4/4/07 3:14 PM In reply to: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Last summer, I was working and noticed someone had Cingular for her carrier. So, I ask how good is the coverage in the area from it. Sure, it's only testimony from one person, but with Verizon Wireless, I'm lucky to get 3 bars, and I experience a lot of dropped calls already. I can't really imagine Cingular being any worse, so I'll be giving them a try. Besides, Cingular phones use SIM cards that can store your numbers. And damn it, I'm tired of getting tired of having to put my numbers in a new phone every two years; AND I'm sure as HELL not giving Verizon $10 for something as stupid as that!
CDMA is the best!!
by michael_herc - 4/4/07 3:34 PM In reply to: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I believe CDMA should be a US standard because CDMA call quality is much, much better than GSM. Also, CDMA phones seem easier to use and they are usually a lot nicer. GSM phones interfere with electronics which is really annoying, since electronics are EVERYWHERE. So I would hate to have to use a GSM phone. CDMA is a much better choice. Japan and South Korea only use CDMA and for good reason. They are like the electronic gurus so of course they would pick CDMA.
go with CDMA
by westcat - 4/4/07 8:45 PM In reply to: CDMA is the best!! by michael_hercI'd go with CDMA, better, clearer sound quality. The only reason most of the world is going with GSM is because they are sheep. Japan and South Korea know the best technology, they are the tech leaders.
GSM
by ngirur - 4/4/07 5:59 PM In reply to: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I would go for GSM simply because it would be the most convenient. I don't know much about the differences of speed or performance when other things like data is concerned. I only use my phone to talk and if that's what we're talking about. I've used both GSM and CDMA carriers, and GSMs here in the U.S. aren't bad, and since they're used everywhere else, we should get on to that, since we can't take our phone one place to another, provided the phone can handle it.
GSM
by andrew900ca - 4/4/07 6:15 PM In reply to: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
what i think is that gsm should be chosen because gsm could be used world wide, it could easily be switched if you had a differnt phone for example, cdma phones yould have to call the company and tell them that youd want to transfer your phone to another one, and its very limited. but wiht a gsm phone you could easily just take out the sim card and insert it to almost any phone, considering that the phones in asia and europe use gsm. and most of them are unlocked.
What we have in Australia
by zoszos68 - 4/4/07 8:07 PM In reply to: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
We in Australia have 3 g services (3rd generation) gsm which we still use is 2g (2 generation) There a a couple of 3g systems in place here and the one that is the best technicaly is call "Next G" which is used be the company Telstra. I cant think of the technical name for Next G but I'm sure who can find out here www.telstra.com.au
With the different 3g services here you a;lso have faster internet speeds some about 512Kbs and with Next G its as high as 1500 kbs and can be faster when upgraded at the cell tower (we call them mobile towers and mobile phones).
Also it seems from reading the replies that many dont realise that many phones do more that one type of technology like cdma phones do gsm as well (here cdma is going very soon lots of ads on tv/radio as the next g service is far superior and the only network of it's type in the world).
Maybe gsm is still popular in USA as broadband/internet is not as common on the cell network with pc or phones devices due to other wireless services being available. Anyone with more of an idea please let me know.
Last thing is Next G handsets are not gsm enabled (ok gsm fans you say what but we have a Next g and gsm side by side and both cover about 98 percent of the population).
Zos
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
