Texting Works When Mobile Coverage Doesn't

John Henderson wrote...

> If you can be bothered going through the technical specs, start
> with GSM 04.04, 04.08, 04.11, and 04.60, and 05.10.

You lost me after "Snapper wrote..."

:-(

In any case, I'll believe you.

---

› See More: Texting Works When Mobile Coverage Doesn't

> In my view, all new 3G phones sold here should cover the 850,
> 900 and 2100 mHz UMTS bands. That's the only way of
> guaranteeing that emergency calls will connect via any
> available carrier. This would also have the consumer advantage

Which is a minor concern to anyone.

You've just driven up the price of phones with your artificial limitation.

Let the market decide

"Snapper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> John Henderson wrote...
>
>> If you can be bothered going through the technical specs, start
>> with GSM 04.04, 04.08, 04.11, and 04.60, and 05.10.
>
> You lost me after "Snapper wrote..."
>
> :-(
>
> In any case, I'll believe you.

Yer, I'll trust what John wrote.
>

"Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>> In my view, all new 3G phones sold here should cover the 850,
>> 900 and 2100 mHz UMTS bands. That's the only way of
>> guaranteeing that emergency calls will connect via any
>> available carrier. This would also have the consumer advantage
>
> Which is a minor concern to anyone.

Until they need to call 000. It tends to increase in importance at that
stage..........

--
Kwyj.

bill_h <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 05:14:27 GMT, "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> In my view, all new 3G phones sold here should cover the 850,
>>> 900 and 2100 mHz UMTS bands. That's the only way of
>>> guaranteeing that emergency calls will connect via any
>>> available carrier. This would also have the consumer advantage
>>
>> Which is a minor concern to anyone.
>
> do you mean a minor concern to you?
>>
>> You've just driven up the price of phones with your artificial
>> limitation.
>>
>> Let the market decide
>>
>
> I'd much prefer to buy a mobile covering all bands. Which would make
> it considerably cheaper if I want to change telcos (even temporarily),
> and actually useful if I travel OS.
>
> Took a while, but mobiles now routinely are quadband GSM. It sounds
> more like an excuse to milk buyers for every cent in the meantime re
> 3G, and anti-comptetive behaviours.

In the case of Telstra, it was just because they already had the
850 MHz band because that was what the cdma system used.

No conspiracy.

On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 05:14:27 GMT, "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:

>> In my view, all new 3G phones sold here should cover the 850,
>> 900 and 2100 mHz UMTS bands. That's the only way of
>> guaranteeing that emergency calls will connect via any
>> available carrier. This would also have the consumer advantage
>
>Which is a minor concern to anyone.

do you mean a minor concern to you?
>
>You've just driven up the price of phones with your artificial limitation.
>
>Let the market decide
>

I'd much prefer to buy a mobile covering all bands. Which would make
it considerably cheaper if I want to change telcos (even temporarily),
and actually useful if I travel OS.

Took a while, but mobiles now routinely are quadband GSM. It sounds
more like an excuse to milk buyers for every cent in the meantime re
3G, and anti-comptetive behaviours.

Bill

"Kwyjibo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>> In my view, all new 3G phones sold here should cover the 850,
>>> 900 and 2100 mHz UMTS bands. That's the only way of
>>> guaranteeing that emergency calls will connect via any
>>> available carrier. This would also have the consumer advantage
>>
>> Which is a minor concern to anyone.
>
> Until they need to call 000. It tends to increase in importance at that
> stage..........

Nope.

I've never seen anyone with a Nokia 5110 complaining that they can't call
000 on Telstra NextG, or someone on a CB complaining they cant speak to the
police on the GSM frequency . . .

> I'd much prefer to buy a mobile covering all bands. Which would make

Then let YOU pay for the priviledge, not everyone else.

I suppose someone wanting to buy a $15,990 buzzbox should get all the same
features as a $40,000 Holden Commodore?

> it considerably cheaper if I want to change telcos (even temporarily),
> and actually useful if I travel OS.

Global roaming works in most civilised countries using 99% of phones
available in Aus. A non issue

> Took a while, but mobiles now routinely are quadband GSM. It sounds
> more like an excuse to milk buyers for every cent in the meantime re
> 3G, and anti-comptetive behaviours.

You're a tool. You and your "anti competitive behaviour"

In fact your FORCED use of particular technology, is anti-competitive
behaviour in itself!

A company cant make a cheap 2G phone under your "rules" - it has to be one
with all bells and whistles!
>
> Bill

>> I'd much prefer to buy a mobile covering all bands. Which would make
>> it considerably cheaper if I want to change telcos (even temporarily),
>> and actually useful if I travel OS.
>>
>> Took a while, but mobiles now routinely are quadband GSM. It sounds
>> more like an excuse to milk buyers for every cent in the meantime re
>> 3G, and anti-comptetive behaviours.
>
> In the case of Telstra, it was just because they already had the
> 850 MHz band because that was what the cdma system used.
>
> No conspiracy.

Cmon Rod, hearts all over Australia have sunk now . . . everyone loves a
good conspiracy. If its not evil Telstra, its the evil Commonwealth Bank . .
..
>
>

On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 07:55:54 bill_h may have written:
> The problem being, is that I don't have the option of buying a mobile
> with all frequencies. Even if I'm happy to pay for the privilege. And
> potentially leaves me in the lurch when I might need it most.

Yes you do. The Nokia 6120c covers all four frequency bands in use in
Australia at the moment (and two bands that aren't).

PD

--
Paul Day

Paul Day wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 07:55:54 bill_h may have written:
>> The problem being, is that I don't have the option of buying
>> a mobile with all frequencies. Even if I'm happy to pay for
>> the privilege. And potentially leaves me in the lurch when I
>> might need it most.
>
> Yes you do. The Nokia 6120c covers all four frequency bands in
> use in Australia at the moment (and two bands that aren't).

I don't see a 6120c on the Nokia Australia site. There's a
"6120 classic" at http://www.nokia.com.au/A4519099 but that
doesn't do 900 mHz UMTS. It covers only 2 of the 3 UMTS
frequencies in use here.

I'm also waiting to buy a "universal" phone which does 900 and
1800 mHz GSM, plus UMTS on 850, 900 and 2100 mHz (ie, all bands
used in Australia).

John

Paul Day <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 07:55:54 bill_h may have written:
>> The problem being, is that I don't have the option of buying a mobile
>> with all frequencies. Even if I'm happy to pay for the privilege. And
>> potentially leaves me in the lurch when I might need it most.
>
> Yes you do. The Nokia 6120c covers all four frequency bands in use in
> Australia at the moment (and two bands that aren't).

But not all the bands that will be available overseas, most obviously the 750MHz band.

And it wont do 900MHz WCDMA/HSDPA either.

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 06:53:10 GMT, "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:

>> I'd much prefer to buy a mobile covering all bands. Which would make
>
>Then let YOU pay for the priviledge, not everyone else.
>
>I suppose someone wanting to buy a $15,990 buzzbox should get all the same
>features as a $40,000 Holden Commodore?

I doubt that's a good example, a 15,990 buzzbox from Korea probably
has all the features of a 40 K Commodore (and probably better resale
after 10 years).

But notwithstanding the above, Where did I say I expected to extra
features at a cheap price? I presumed you would understand that I
would be happy to pay extra for a mobile covering all bands"...

Having said that, I doubt that the extra cost to implement would be
prohibitive, just that resellers/telcos would want their cut. The
example I gave of GSM frequencies still stands. It's only relatively
recently that phones have been routinely quadband.

>
>> it considerably cheaper if I want to change telcos (even temporarily),
>> and actually useful if I travel OS.
>
>Global roaming works in most civilised countries using 99% of phones
>available in Aus. A non issue

Which brings me back to the point that a few years ago, few mobile
phones were quad band, meaning that in parts of the world the phone
would be useless. If I want to use an Australian bought 3G phone, 3G
capabilities will be limited OS. Which brings me back to the point
that I'd like the option to be able to buy one phone, not different
ones for different markets.

>
>> Took a while, but mobiles now routinely are quadband GSM. It sounds
>> more like an excuse to milk buyers for every cent in the meantime re
>> 3G, and anti-comptetive behaviours.
>
>You're a tool. You and your "anti competitive behaviour"
>
>In fact your FORCED use of particular technology, is anti-competitive
>behaviour in itself!
>
>A company cant make a cheap 2G phone under your "rules" - it has to be one
>with all bells and whistles!

Again, where did I demand that a "cheap 2G phone" has to have all the
bells and whistles? I'm happy to pay for what I get, and do so on a
cost/benefit basis. FWIW I went back to Telstra when CDMA shut down,
so that I could reasonable coverage (I travel out of town
periodically).

By antt-competitive behaviour, I mean that Telstra will tell me that I
can't by a NextG phone (1) unless it's from an authorised reselller.
Which means lack of options, lack of competition, ergo,
anti-comptetive. I can only buy phones that they choose to authorise,
limiting choice.

I think you're the tool, Michael.


cheers, Bill

(1) Which is not entirely true, I can choose to import a US 850 mHz
UMTS phone, but then I can't use it on a 900 mHz 3G band.

On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:27:10 -0500, Paul Day <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 07:55:54 bill_h may have written:
>> The problem being, is that I don't have the option of buying a mobile
>> with all frequencies. Even if I'm happy to pay for the privilege. And
>> potentially leaves me in the lurch when I might need it most.
>
>Yes you do. The Nokia 6120c covers all four frequency bands in use in
>Australia at the moment (and two bands that aren't).
>
>PD


?
I looked at
http://www.reconnect.net.au/new/20077134551.htm
and
http://www.whistleout.com/Mobile/Pho...ia/Nokia-6120c

Both sites list it as quadband GSM and 850/2100 UMTS, meaning it
doesn't do all 3G bands (limiting usefulness in Oz and OS).

Interesting bit of dialogue on Whirlpool regarding getting it hooked
to NextG through Telstra

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum...fm/796794.html

cheers, Bill

> By antt-competitive behaviour, I mean that Telstra will tell me that I
> can't by a NextG phone (1) unless it's from an authorised reselller.

Telstra don't tell you that. You can buy a NextG compatible phone from
anywhere you like, even overseas. No different to any 2G or other 3G phone.

> Which means lack of options, lack of competition, ergo,
> anti-comptetive. I can only buy phones that they choose to authorise,
> limiting choice.

And that assumption was completely incorrect, so your argument falls to
pieces