Next G covers all CDMA areas: Telstra

On Nov 25, 10:52 pm, "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Spokes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:79b8191e-502b-46d4-b32e-e05e3666eae8@d27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 22, 10:45 pm, "Allan Parkington"
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Fromhttp://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/11/22/2097871.htm
>
> >> Telstra says it's confident all its Territory customers currently using
> >> its
> >> CDMA network will have similar coverage on its new Next G network.
>
> >> The CDMA network will stop working on January 28.
>
> >> Telstra spokesman Geoff Booth says people still using the old network
> >> should
> >> buy their new handsets and other equipment as soon as they can.
>
> >> He says no matter where people live in the Territory, if they had CDMA
> >> coverage, they'll also have coverage under Next G.
>
> >> "We drove 12,000 kilometres testing the CDMA network versus the Next G
> >> network. We've declared to government that we have network equivalence
> >> and
> >> we are very, very confident that that is the case."
>
> > I like to see results by an independent tester before I'm convinced of
> > the network coverage.
>
> then conduct your own independant testing

I'm happy to have my taxes pay for independent scientific testing.
There's no detail on how and where the testing was done.

> > At this stage it looks like Jan 28 is still the cut-off date.
>
> yes...in spite of what Rod tries to make us believe.
>
> > Switch over to GSM/NextG or else you lose your CDMA number. Once its
> > gone, it's gone.

Now you know Michael.
Unless new protocols are put in place to accomodate those who didn't
bother to migrate to NextG/GSM before the CDMA network is closed
down( going by Rod's posts, that may very well happen if they heed his
advice), they will have a hard time migrating or porting (unless the
service is active). Exceptions being of course MSNs not using any CDMA
prefixes - there's a slim chance they'll get out of gaol.

At the end of the day, under the current circumstances, it's wiser to
migrate now to save a lot of hassles in February.

---

› See More: Next G covers all CDMA areas: Telstra

Spokes <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Nov 25, 10:52 pm, "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Spokes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> news:79b8191e-502b-46d4-b32e-e05e3666eae8@d27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 22, 10:45 pm, "Allan Parkington"
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Fromhttp://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/11/22/2097871.htm
>>
>>>> Telstra says it's confident all its Territory customers currently
>>>> using its
>>>> CDMA network will have similar coverage on its new Next G network.
>>
>>>> The CDMA network will stop working on January 28.
>>
>>>> Telstra spokesman Geoff Booth says people still using the old
>>>> network should
>>>> buy their new handsets and other equipment as soon as they can.
>>
>>>> He says no matter where people live in the Territory, if they had
>>>> CDMA coverage, they'll also have coverage under Next G.
>>
>>>> "We drove 12,000 kilometres testing the CDMA network versus the
>>>> Next G network. We've declared to government that we have network
>>>> equivalence and
>>>> we are very, very confident that that is the case."
>>
>>> I like to see results by an independent tester before I'm convinced
>>> of the network coverage.
>>
>> then conduct your own independant testing
>
> I'm happy to have my taxes pay for independent scientific testing.
> There's no detail on how and where the testing was done.
>
>>> At this stage it looks like Jan 28 is still the cut-off date.
>>
>> yes...in spite of what Rod tries to make us believe.
>>
>>> Switch over to GSM/NextG or else you lose your CDMA number. Once its
>>> gone, it's gone.
>
> Now you know Michael.
> Unless new protocols are put in place to accomodate those who didn't
> bother to migrate to NextG/GSM before the CDMA network is closed
> down( going by Rod's posts, that may very well happen if they heed his
> advice), they will have a hard time migrating or porting (unless the
> service is active). Exceptions being of course MSNs not using any CDMA
> prefixes - there's a slim chance they'll get out of gaol.

The TIO aint gunna let that happen, ****wit.

> At the end of the day, under the current circumstances, it's
> wiser to migrate now to save a lot of hassles in February.

No reason why you cant wait till Jan if you want to avoid the
possibility of having to use the TIO when telstra ****s up, ****wit.

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 22:52:25 Michael may have written:
> > I like to see results by an independent tester before I'm convinced of
> > the network coverage.
>
> then conduct your own independant testing

I did: Exhaustive peer-reviewed double-blind trials using my old Nokia
CDMA and my new Nokia NextG in the the areas I care about here in
Victoria. CDMA won.

PD

--
Paul Day
http://www.enigma.id.au/

"Allan Parkington" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
>
> "Kwyjibo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Wrong. It stays on UNTIL the govt says it's okay to switch it off.
>>
>> --
>
>
> No, it goes off unless the govt says so. And more likely to be off now Kev
> is in..
>

...

Allan Parkington wrote...

> Only to "balance up" the anti-telstra diatribe which infects this NG..
> Someone needs to inject a voice of reason in this debate.

All you ever do is to spout Telstra PR. I've yet to see an original thought in
your posts.

That lots of people ****can Telstra must tell you something. Maybe you're blind
to the market power of Telstra and how it abuses it.



--
The only difference between the wingnuts on each end of the
political spectrum is *which* civil rights they think we can do
without

Rod Speed wrote...

> Like I said, telstra gets no say what so ever on the detail of MNP, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

How do you know that "Michael" is a stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child?

He might have another job in Telstra...

Will Kemp wrote...

> you started posting your crap! In fact, some of the people who balance up
> your nonsense were posting much more pro-telstra stuff before. The anti-
> telstra stuff is there to balance your propaganda, not the other way
> round!

Exactly. AP is litle more than a copy/paste for Telstra. Doesn't offer anything
extra to the discussion.

Thing is there used to be this twit in aus.motorcycles who got a hardon whenever
Ducati or any of the Italian motorcycle racers were mentioned, won races or
whatever. I got sick of it and decided to hate Ducati, even though they make
nice bikes.

Then you get the guys on here who gush about Telstra. If Sol and his amigos had
any sense they'd get their tex to set up technology to block their posts to
these NGs.

It's sort of like having Hitler as a spokesman for Amnesty International...

Marts <[email protected]> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>> Like I said, telstra gets no say what so ever on the
>> detail of MNP, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> How do you know that "Michael" is a stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child?

Its obvious from every single one of his posts.

> He might have another job in Telstra...

Not a chance, even telstra aint actually THAT desperate.

>>>> No government should be telling a private business that it has to
>>>> maintain a service (i.e CDMA) that it no longer wishes to maintain.
>
>>> Wrong when its a monopoly that the govt has partially funded.
>
>> 30 or so bases out of 1500(?) is nothing.
>
> You get no say what so ever on that or anything else at all, ever.
>
> You're just some stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child that
> has never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.
>
>> And they werent "govt funded" per se,
>
> Bare faced pig ignorant lie.
>
>> they were Govt projects that the Govt tendered,
>
> Bare faced pig ignorant lie.
>
>> on a basis that the Govt pays the capital cost and Telstra the ongoings.
>
>> Which gave unviable country towns real mobile coverage for the first
>> time.
>
>> A win-win scenario
>
> Irrelevant to that stupid claim at the top.

Nope. Govt funded suggests that the Govt bankrolled the whole thing, which
they didnt

Without Telstra paying the ongoings and getting the ongoing revenue, these
sites would not be viable.

Indeed the tenders were for areas that had no or little coverage AND NO
PLANS FOR ANY CARRIER TO IMPROVE

>>> If telstra didnt like that, it shouldnt have accepted any govt funding.
>
>> It wasnt up to them
>
> Corse it was.
>
>> They tendered and the Govt gets to decide.

They were all tendered Roddles, indeed Telstra lost one to Voda

>>>> Telstra is a private business and has the right to decide to stop
>>>> offering services just like any other private business.
>
>>> Any other private business cant necessarily do that unless they
>>> are prepared to offer a full refund to those who they didnt inform
>>> that they were only going to be providing that particular service
>>> until it suited them to shaft their customers by turning it off.

Crap ****, again.

>> I walk into Coles and they no longer sell the bread I like. I dont have
>> any right to complain.
>
> Corse you do, stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

I get to complain but I have no rights or remedies

>> If I was under a contract to buy my bread there, they would release
>> me from it. just like telstra is doing, voluntarily, in the sense that
>> they will waive your ETC now, even though the network isnt ending today
>
> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you
> have never ever had even the remotest concept of the most
> basic consumer law, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

Disprove me then Roddles

>>>> a retail store should be free to stop carrying any item that it
>>>> currently carries. And, like those other businesses, a mobile phone
>>>> provider should be free to stop supporting any networks, protocols,
>>>> technologies, phones or services that they choose to stop supporting.
>
>>> Not if they didnt make it clear to the suckers they flogged that network
>>> to that it could be turned off at any time on a whim and the customers
>
>> I dont think ~2 years lead time is a whim.

>> When you buy a phone on contract you buy it on the basis that the network
>> must exist ONLY FOR THE LENGTH of the contract.
>
> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you
> have never ever had even the remotest concept of the most
> basic consumer law, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

Disprove me then Roddles. Cite some passages. And not your back passage,
like you do most of the time

>> Thats what will happen with CDMA closure. There is no implied "network
>> lifespan"

>>>> If a private business does not provide services that consumers want,
>>>> someone else will step in and provide it as long as the demand is
>>>> there. e.g. if a shop stops selling eggs, someone else will step in and
>>>> start selling eggs if the market wants eggs.
>
>>> Then there's the real world where the govt chose to hand
>>> great piles of money to telstra to put in cdma bases where
>
>> It was a fart in the bath

"Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Michael <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>> The CDMA network will stop working on January 28.
>
>>> Bare faced lie.

We'll see. Still full steam ahead for Jan 28.

>>>> Telstra spokesman Geoff Booth says people still using the old network
>>>> should buy their new handsets and other equipment as soon as they can.
>
>>> What the **** is the point of not waiting till Jan ?
>
>> Because the last offer may not be the best offer.
>
> And it may be the best offer too, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

Thats what "may not be" means, Roddles.

The $100 credit offer that was on ALL handsets, notice its only on TWO
handsets now?

What does that tell you?

>> Beat the rush.
>
> Changing early in Jan will do that fine, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit
> child.

Ahhhh ;-)

Now its not "last minute" but you are advocating for early Jan ;-)

changing your position ;-)

>> Check the coverage maps
>
> Anyone can put any lie they like on a coverage map, you stupid dunny
> cleaning ****wit child.

conspiracy theory>
>
>

>>>>> No need to do that for months, makes more sense to wait until we see
>>>>> what happens on that date.
>
>>>>>> Once its gone, it's gone.
>
>>>>> Wrong, the number doesnt evaporate when the cdma system is turned off.
>
>>>> No, but Tel$ra - being the bastards they are - will lock it up to
>>>> penalise you.
>
>>> The TIO wont let them do that, and telstra doesnt get any say what so
>>> ever on MNP rules.
>
>> Not exactly.
>
> Yep, exactly.
>
>> Numbers are allocated to Telstra by ACMA, who allocate them to end users.
>
> Irrelevant to what is being discussed, whether they vanish when the cdma
> system is turned off.

They dont vanish, they stay allocated to Telstra. And Telstra does not have
to reconnect you to CDMA as the network is closed.

If you have a port in process at deactivation time, the system cannot
deactivate you. Until the port expires in 28/30 days

>> On 28/1/8 network it switched off, AND ALL REMAINING CUSTOMERS
>> DEACTIVATED SHORTLY AFTER
>
> Irrelevant to what is being discussed, whether they vanish when the cdma
> system is turned off.
>
> Of course they dont.

see above

>> Telstra will not reconnect those customers, as the network no longer
>> exists.
>
> Irrelevant to what is being discussed, whether the NUMBERS vanish when the
> cdma system is turned off.

It IS relevant.

You CANNOT port a number unless it is active.

If your number was active on Telstra and then Telstra deactive it - you
CANNOT port unless Telstra agree to reconnect it for you.

If there is no physical network Telstra could well be unable to connect you
again - they arent offering you a service so how can they reconnect you?

>> You need an ACTIVE number to do a port, and your number will not be
>> active.
>
> Irrelevant to what is being discussed, whether the NUMBERS vanish when the
> cdma system is turned off.

see above f*stick

> Of course they dont.
>
> Like I said, telstra gets no say what so ever on the detail of MNP, you
> stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

Telstra can only follow the MNP rules, which Ive set out above
>
>

>>> CDMA numbers they treat as THEIR property. When I requested (through
>>> Optarse)
>>
>>Thats because they are assigned to Telstra by ACMA.
>>
>>Not a Telstra decision
>>
>>> the currently_not_in_use CDMA number with the same last 6 digits as my
>>> GSM
>>> service, Telst$ra advised Optarse that I could have it for a fee of $75.
>>> So I
>>> tossed that idea and went with a random number instead.
>>
>>Telstra did no such thing.
>
> Farking did. You weren't there, Mikey - I was. But thanks for your usual
> crapola.

You were at an OPTUS dealership trying to connect a TELSTRA CDMA number to
Optus, yet Telstra was there as well?

More like the phone monkey in the OPTUS store was talking to the Optus MAC
(mobiles activation centre), who gave you some bull**** about $75 just to
shut you up

>>Any wholesaler of CDMA can request a particular number through the
>>wholesale
>>activation system LOLM.
>>
>>What Telstra charges to the wholesaler is not the customers business.
>
> It is if the wholesaler is then passing that cost on to the customer.

Thats your problem with Optus. Not a telstra issue.

>> It was very unprofessional for Optus to try to claim Telstra charge them
>> $75.
>
> No, it was truthful. Explain how that is unprofessional. Just because it
> blew
> the lid off another one of Tel$tra's gouging operations?

It wasn't truthful.
If your number was not premium then T dont charge O.

>>I don't believe any such fee applies at all, except to premium numbers
>
> Believe what you like. It was far from a premium number - very ordinary.
> As it
> turned out, the random CDMA number was "better" anyway.

So why would anyone try and charge you $75???

>>> Later enquiry for that requested number found it was listed as
>>> "reserved" -
>>> Tel$tra had indeed locked it up. Still available if I wanted to pay
>>> their
>>> fee
>>> of course.
>>
>>Nope.
>
> Yep.
>
>>Its either available, or the range has never been allocated to active
>>service, reserved by another customer, active, in quarantine or held (by a
>>dealer to activate within 3 days).
>>
>>Your number sounds like its never been allocated to active service.
>
> Certainly hadn't at that stage. Haven't bothered to check since.
>
>>For example, ask Telstra for any number in the range 0429 58%. Theyve
>>never
>>been released for circulation - so you will never get it.
>
> Academic and irrelevant. I asked for either of 0427/0428- abcdef where
> abcdef
> were the last 6 of my GSM. 0428 was in use, 0427 was available (at a
> price).

See above. You are just squirming now.

"Kwyjibo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news%[email protected]...
>>>> The CDMA network will stop working on January 28.
>>>>
>>> Nope, it will stop working when the government tells them they can do
>>> that.
>>
>> It gets turned off on 28/1/8 UNLESS the Govt directly orders them not to.
>>
>
> Wrong. It stays on UNTIL the govt says it's okay to switch it off.

Nope - show me any order from the Govt to the contrary.

The correct statement is - it gets turned off 28/1/8 UNLESS the Govt
directly orders them not to.

If the Govt had ordered them already, you would see it splashed all over
NWAT
>
> --
> Kwyj.
>

"Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Allan Parkington <[email protected]> wrote
>> Kwyjibo <[email protected]> wrote
>
>>> Wrong. It stays on UNTIL the govt says it's okay to switch it off.
>
>> No, it goes off unless the govt says so.
>
> Read the license conditions, ****wit child.

Says that the Govt MAY step in.

MAY.

"thegoons" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:U%[email protected]...
>>
>> "Jonathan Wilson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> No government should be telling a private business that it has to
>>> maintain a service (i.e CDMA) that it no longer wishes to maintain.
>>> Telstra is a private business and has the right to decide to stop
>>> offering services just like any other private business.
>>
>> Agreed
>>
>>> The government should butt out and let the marketplace sort itself out.
>>> If
>>
>> Agreed
>>
>>> if the market wants eggs. If an airline stops flying to a given airport,
>>> another airline will come in and fly to that airport if the market wants
>>> to fly to that airport. And if Telstra stops providing cellphone service
>>> to a given location, another carrier will step in and provide that
>>> service if the market wants cell service in that location.
>>
>> Agreed
>>
>>
>>
> Pity that the Government is still the major shareholder and that Telstra
> must follow ACMA directives/licence conditions

Sorry love. Its 100% privatised. And a chunk being in the future fund DOESNT
make it "Govt owned"

Try getting a FOI request out of Telstra - they refuse because they are no
longer under that legislation as they are not Govt owned.
>
>
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>