Results 16 to 20 of 20
- 05-13-2004, 08:41 AM #16Ronny JulianGuest
Re: GSM1900 and GSM850 - maps?
OK mr Troll. So what? The horse is beaten. Go to some other thread.
"Røbert M" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Ronny Julian" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > You are correct and I would have you read back at my post. There are
always
> > going to be dead spots as RF is always going to have problems. If you
think
> > that there is any system out there that is RF based that will not have
> > problems somewhere at sometime you are living in a dream land sir. It
> > cannot be done.
> >
> > There are no maps that can totally accurately show the exact footprint
of a
> > systems signal. They are in constant change. What you are talking
about is
> > totally impractical and on their best day no carrier can show that kind
of
> > accuracy.
> >
> > "Dead spots" are just that. Somewhere that someone put up a building or
> > nature put up a darn tree that interferes with my cell signal. It
happens
> > and no amount of hardware saturation will fix it and be cost effective.
>
> There are known constant dead spots that carriers ignore with their maps.
>
> Please don't try to pretend otherwise.
› See More: GSM1900 and GSM850 - maps?
- 05-13-2004, 08:54 AM #17Røbert MGuest
Re: GSM1900 and GSM850 - maps?
In article <[email protected]>,
"Ronny Julian" <[email protected]> wrote:
> OK mr Troll. So what? The horse is beaten. Go to some other thread.
Throwing insults does not make the maps any better.
They are drawn by the marketing department
>
> "Røbert M" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "Ronny Julian" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > You are correct and I would have you read back at my post. There are
> always
> > > going to be dead spots as RF is always going to have problems. If you
> think
> > > that there is any system out there that is RF based that will not have
> > > problems somewhere at sometime you are living in a dream land sir. It
> > > cannot be done.
> > >
> > > There are no maps that can totally accurately show the exact footprint
> of a
> > > systems signal. They are in constant change. What you are talking
> about is
> > > totally impractical and on their best day no carrier can show that kind
> of
> > > accuracy.
> > >
> > > "Dead spots" are just that. Somewhere that someone put up a building or
> > > nature put up a darn tree that interferes with my cell signal. It
> happens
> > > and no amount of hardware saturation will fix it and be cost effective.
> >
> > There are known constant dead spots that carriers ignore with their maps.
> >
> > Please don't try to pretend otherwise.
- 05-13-2004, 08:59 AM #18Ronny JulianGuest
Re: GSM1900 and GSM850 - maps?
And your point would be?
"Røbert M" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Ronny Julian" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > OK mr Troll. So what? The horse is beaten. Go to some other thread.
>
> Throwing insults does not make the maps any better.
> They are drawn by the marketing department
>
> >
> > "Røbert M" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > In article <[email protected]>,
> > > "Ronny Julian" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > You are correct and I would have you read back at my post. There
are
> > always
> > > > going to be dead spots as RF is always going to have problems. If
you
> > think
> > > > that there is any system out there that is RF based that will not
have
> > > > problems somewhere at sometime you are living in a dream land sir.
It
> > > > cannot be done.
> > > >
> > > > There are no maps that can totally accurately show the exact
footprint
> > of a
> > > > systems signal. They are in constant change. What you are talking
> > about is
> > > > totally impractical and on their best day no carrier can show that
kind
> > of
> > > > accuracy.
> > > >
> > > > "Dead spots" are just that. Somewhere that someone put up a
building or
> > > > nature put up a darn tree that interferes with my cell signal. It
> > happens
> > > > and no amount of hardware saturation will fix it and be cost
effective.
> > >
> > > There are known constant dead spots that carriers ignore with their
maps.
> > >
> > > Please don't try to pretend otherwise.
- 05-13-2004, 10:11 AM #19Røbert MGuest
Re: GSM1900 and GSM850 - maps?
In article <[email protected]>,
"Ronny Julian" <[email protected]> wrote:
> And your point would be?
That all Carriers have violated their industry designed agreement to
make available maps showing where coverage is generally available.
>
>
>
> "Røbert M" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "Ronny Julian" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > OK mr Troll. So what? The horse is beaten. Go to some other thread.
> >
> > Throwing insults does not make the maps any better.
> > They are drawn by the marketing department
> >
> > >
> > > "Røbert M" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > In article <[email protected]>,
> > > > "Ronny Julian" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > You are correct and I would have you read back at my post. There
> are
> > > always
> > > > > going to be dead spots as RF is always going to have problems. If
> you
> > > think
> > > > > that there is any system out there that is RF based that will not
> have
> > > > > problems somewhere at sometime you are living in a dream land sir.
> It
> > > > > cannot be done.
> > > > >
> > > > > There are no maps that can totally accurately show the exact
> footprint
> > > of a
> > > > > systems signal. They are in constant change. What you are talking
> > > about is
> > > > > totally impractical and on their best day no carrier can show that
> kind
> > > of
> > > > > accuracy.
> > > > >
> > > > > "Dead spots" are just that. Somewhere that someone put up a
> building or
> > > > > nature put up a darn tree that interferes with my cell signal. It
> > > happens
> > > > > and no amount of hardware saturation will fix it and be cost
> effective.
> > > >
> > > > There are known constant dead spots that carriers ignore with their
> maps.
> > > >
> > > > Please don't try to pretend otherwise.
- 05-13-2004, 10:36 PM #20Ronny JulianGuest
Re: GSM1900 and GSM850 - maps?
And that means what to anyone but you?
"Røbert M" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Ronny Julian" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > And your point would be?
>
>
> That all Carriers have violated their industry designed agreement to
> make available maps showing where coverage is generally available.
> >
> >
> >
> > "Røbert M" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > In article <[email protected]>,
> > > "Ronny Julian" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > OK mr Troll. So what? The horse is beaten. Go to some other
thread.
> > >
> > > Throwing insults does not make the maps any better.
> > > They are drawn by the marketing department
> > >
> > > >
> > > > "Røbert M" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > In article <[email protected]>,
> > > > > "Ronny Julian" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > You are correct and I would have you read back at my post.
There
> > are
> > > > always
> > > > > > going to be dead spots as RF is always going to have problems.
If
> > you
> > > > think
> > > > > > that there is any system out there that is RF based that will
not
> > have
> > > > > > problems somewhere at sometime you are living in a dream land
sir.
> > It
> > > > > > cannot be done.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are no maps that can totally accurately show the exact
> > footprint
> > > > of a
> > > > > > systems signal. They are in constant change. What you are
talking
> > > > about is
> > > > > > totally impractical and on their best day no carrier can show
that
> > kind
> > > > of
> > > > > > accuracy.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Dead spots" are just that. Somewhere that someone put up a
> > building or
> > > > > > nature put up a darn tree that interferes with my cell signal.
It
> > > > happens
> > > > > > and no amount of hardware saturation will fix it and be cost
> > effective.
> > > > >
> > > > > There are known constant dead spots that carriers ignore with
their
> > maps.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please don't try to pretend otherwise.
Similar Threads
-
Info: Data and google maps
Apple (iPhone) - Motorola
- LG Voyager
- Nokia
- alt.cellular.nokia
Recover scammed cryptocurrency
in Samsung