Telstra Doesn't know if NextG works in the Bush?

John Phillips wrote...

> Only place Optarse worked was outside the airport, and right in centre
> of town - **** coverage.
>
> If I wasn't paying only 10 cents for 30 seconds (Soul Comms) I would
> dump them like a dirty turd.

I'm not sure that I follow your logic here. If Optus has **** coverage
(and in my experience, it does out where I live and travel), then why
stick with it? Cheap calls are great if the calls can be made in the first
place. But if you can't use it when you want or need to, then what is the
point with persisting with it?

---

› See More: Telstra Doesn't know if NextG works in the Bush?

"Snapper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
..
>
> So, I ask again, mate, what are your thoughts on this?
>
>
>

There are now more than 35 Next G mobile handsets and each has unique
features and performance levels. Telstra recommends that customers living
or travelling in rural areas should consider one of Telstra's seven Blue
Tick handsets, which are designed to maximise handheld coverage.

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:38:14 +1000 Snapper <[email protected]> wrote:

> I'm not sure that I follow your logic here. If Optus has **** coverage
> (and in my experience, it does out where I live and travel), then why
> stick with it? Cheap calls are great if the calls can be made in the
> first place. But if you can't use it when you want or need to, then
> what is the point with persisting with it?

Not in the scrub that much these days, mainly capital cities.

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 04:45:03 GMT "Alan Parkington"
<[email protected]> wrote:

> There are now more than 35 Next G mobile handsets and each has unique
> features and performance levels. Telstra recommends that customers
> living or travelling in rural areas should consider one of Telstra's
> seven Blue Tick handsets, which are designed to maximise handheld
> coverage.

So which handset is the best of the best for performance on 3G?

You should get a job as either a politician or a public servant who has to
answer to one.

Your avoiding of the questions and posting Telstra PR blurb as a response
shows that you'd be good at doing either of the above.

Of course you may well be doing that now...

Alan Parkington wrote...

>
> "Snapper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> .
> >
> > So, I ask again, mate, what are your thoughts on this?
> >
> >
> >
>
> There are now more than 35 Next G mobile handsets and each has unique
> features and performance levels. Telstra recommends that customers living
> or travelling in rural areas should consider one of Telstra's seven Blue
> Tick handsets, which are designed to maximise handheld coverage.

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 04:45:03 GMT, "Alan Parkington"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Snapper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>.
>>
>> So, I ask again, mate, what are your thoughts on this?
>>
>>
>>
>
>There are now more than 35 Next G mobile handsets and each has unique
>features and performance levels. Telstra recommends that customers living
>or travelling in rural areas should consider one of Telstra's seven Blue
>Tick handsets, which are designed to maximise handheld coverage.

and for some inexplicable reason, T-shops are still promoting that ZTE POS.

On Sat, 26 Apr 2008 10:31:52 +0800 rebel <[email protected]> wrote:

> and for some inexplicable reason, T-shops are still promoting that
> ZTE POS.

I asked Parky through this group on 24 April which handset was the best
of the best for 3G in the bush, or wherever, still no reply.

Given that he is either a 'bot of half public servant, and probably
pissed off early Thursday to play golf, etc., it will be interesting
to see the reply, if indeed there is any reply at all.

"Paul Day" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:25:49 Alan Parkington may have written:
>> The Next G network offers a larger mobile coverage footprint than the
>> old CDMA network, covering more than 2 million square kilometres as
>> compared to CDMA which covered more than 1.6 million square
>> kilometres.
>
> ...just not in all the same physical locations CDMA coverred.

Clearly it must cover almost all of the CDMA covered.

And a hell of a lot more, 0.4m sq km.

On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 08:13:37 GMT, "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Paul Day" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:25:49 Alan Parkington may have written:
>>> The Next G network offers a larger mobile coverage footprint than the
>>> old CDMA network, covering more than 2 million square kilometres as
>>> compared to CDMA which covered more than 1.6 million square
>>> kilometres.
>>
>> ...just not in all the same physical locations CDMA coverred.
>
>Clearly it must cover almost all of the CDMA covered.

and it was *supposed to* cover all of it, and more

"rebel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 08:13:37 GMT, "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Paul Day" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:25:49 Alan Parkington may have written:
>>>> The Next G network offers a larger mobile coverage footprint than the
>>>> old CDMA network, covering more than 2 million square kilometres as
>>>> compared to CDMA which covered more than 1.6 million square
>>>> kilometres.
>>>
>>> ...just not in all the same physical locations CDMA coverred.
>>
>>Clearly it must cover almost all of the CDMA covered.
>
> and it was *supposed to* cover all of it, and more

Where does it say that?

On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 04:48:29 GMT, "Alan Parkington"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"rebel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 08:13:37 GMT, "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Paul Day" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>> On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:25:49 Alan Parkington may have written:
>>>>> The Next G network offers a larger mobile coverage footprint than the
>>>>> old CDMA network, covering more than 2 million square kilometres as
>>>>> compared to CDMA which covered more than 1.6 million square
>>>>> kilometres.
>>>>
>>>> ...just not in all the same physical locations CDMA coverred.
>>>
>>>Clearly it must cover almost all of the CDMA covered.
>>
>> and it was *supposed to* cover all of it, and more
>
>Where does it say that?

Geez, you new on the planet? That was discussed at GREAT_LENGTH last year, and
the original commitment was quoted where Telstra or their mouthpiece_du_jour
gave that undertaking.

And your challenging that now shows the lie to all the Telscum claims. You may
have managed to hoodwink Conroy, but you've got a long way to go before you
hoodwink the users.

On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 14:48:29 Alan Parkington may have written:
> > and it was *supposed to* cover all of it, and more
>
> Where does it say that?

Go read the archives Alan... We did this one to death last year. Telstra
have been quoted in media releases and in Senate Estimates meetings
saying they would _match_ CDMA coverage square km for square km.

PD

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

"rebel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 08:13:37 GMT, "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Paul Day" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:25:49 Alan Parkington may have written:
>>>> The Next G network offers a larger mobile coverage footprint than the
>>>> old CDMA network, covering more than 2 million square kilometres as
>>>> compared to CDMA which covered more than 1.6 million square
>>>> kilometres.
>>>
>>> ...just not in all the same physical locations CDMA coverred.
>>
>>Clearly it must cover almost all of the CDMA covered.
>
> and it was *supposed to* cover all of it, and more

that was never the intention

"Paul Day" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 14:48:29 Alan Parkington may have written:
>> > and it was *supposed to* cover all of it, and more
>>
>> Where does it say that?
>
> Go read the archives Alan... We did this one to death last year. Telstra
> have been quoted in media releases and in Senate Estimates meetings
> saying they would _match_ CDMA coverage square km for square km.

they said nothing of the kind, you liar

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

Michael <[email protected]> wrote:
> "rebel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 08:13:37 GMT, "Michael" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> "Paul Day" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:25:49 Alan Parkington may have written:
>>>>> The Next G network offers a larger mobile coverage footprint than
>>>>> the old CDMA network, covering more than 2 million square
>>>>> kilometres as compared to CDMA which covered more than 1.6
>>>>> million square kilometres.
>>>>
>>>> ...just not in all the same physical locations CDMA coverred.
>>>
>>> Clearly it must cover almost all of the CDMA covered.
>>
>> and it was *supposed to* cover all of it, and more
>
> that was never the intention

It was what Telstra claimed to the Senate.