Telstra to turn on 3G marvel next month

Kubalister said....

> Oh well, that's what you get when you combine clueless marketing droids
> with engineers that can't write a single word in English.

How should it be presented, then?

For example, let's pretend that I know **** all about this technology
(which is fairly close to the truth). I need to be able to make an
informed consumer decision as to what I need to do pretty soon. How
would you explain to me how this service works, what phones will work on
the service when they're released, and when doing a search on the
internet, what are the specs that I should be looking for in order to
select the right phone?

A classic example of misleading information is the chap here who was
told that the Razor 3VX (or whatever it's called) phone that he bought
would work on any 3G service.

---

› See More: Telstra to turn on 3G marvel next month

Graeme said....

> I accept everything else you say, but the term 3GSM could cause some
> confusion for some people. Many people know of the distance limitation
> of GSM. Calling it 3GSM will surely cause confusion about its range.
> In rural areas, range would be the main reason many people would want to
> connect to this new network.

Do we know this for sure?

I've asked people what phones they own and why. A lot of GSMs and a lot
own CDMAs. I ask why they have CDMAs. Better coverage, they say. They
aren't all familiar with the technical aspects as to why coverage is
"better".

I'd suggest that it's a pretty long bow to draw to say that people are
familiar with the distances that GSM and CDMA cells respectively cover.

Emjaye wrote:
> Graeme said....
>
>> I accept everything else you say, but the term 3GSM could cause some
>> confusion for some people. Many people know of the distance limitation
>> of GSM. Calling it 3GSM will surely cause confusion about its range.
>> In rural areas, range would be the main reason many people would want to
>> connect to this new network.
>
> Do we know this for sure?
>
> I've asked people what phones they own and why. A lot of GSMs and a lot
> own CDMAs. I ask why they have CDMAs. Better coverage, they say. They
> aren't all familiar with the technical aspects as to why coverage is
> "better".
>
> I'd suggest that it's a pretty long bow to draw to say that people are
> familiar with the distances that GSM and CDMA cells respectively cover.
>

If you go outside of the larger cities, people are very familiar with
coverage distances of CDMA vs GSM. From what I've read in here, the 850
mhz service will exist in urban areas, too, but Telstra only seem to
have promoted the services it will provide to "the bush". After all,
most of the services it will provide can already be found for people
with a 2100 mhz service.

"Emjaye" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Graeme said....
>
>> I accept everything else you say, but the term 3GSM could cause some
>> confusion for some people. Many people know of the distance limitation
>> of GSM. Calling it 3GSM will surely cause confusion about its range.
>> In rural areas, range would be the main reason many people would want to
>> connect to this new network.
>
> Do we know this for sure?
>
> I've asked people what phones they own and why. A lot of GSMs and a lot
> own CDMAs. I ask why they have CDMAs. Better coverage, they say. They
> aren't all familiar with the technical aspects as to why coverage is
> "better".
>
> I'd suggest that it's a pretty long bow to draw to say that people are
> familiar with the distances that GSM and CDMA cells respectively cover.

agreed
>

Graeme said....

> coverage distances of CDMA vs GSM. From what I've read in here, the 850
> mhz service will exist in urban areas, too, but Telstra only seem to

It'd have to. Otherwise, those who rely on the 850 and travel to the Big
Smoke would be ****ed, coverage-wise.

I still don't understand why Telstra can't roll out one standardised
system and be done with it. If 850 is the go at the moment, then roll it
out and close down all other services.

Or are there technical issues that won't allow 850 3G to be viable in
metro areas?

Anyway, after playing around with my daughter's 3G phone (she's with
"3") when visiting her recently, I'm now keen to up-gadget my phone. I
used to say that all I needed was a basic phone that did SMS, and a
little more. But seeing how quick the 'net side of things are, and some
of the features that these phones have, they're looking more attractive.

What I'd love is the ability to check the weather radar when I'm out on
a weekend ride somewhere. Of course, this'd only be of any use if there
is coverage.

Emjaye wrote:
> Graeme said....
>
>> coverage distances of CDMA vs GSM. From what I've read in here, the 850
>> mhz service will exist in urban areas, too, but Telstra only seem to
>
> It'd have to. Otherwise, those who rely on the 850 and travel to the Big
> Smoke would be ****ed, coverage-wise.

Well who knows what Telstra are thinking. It was only fairly recently
(within the last 2 years or so) that Telstra arranged outbound
international roaming on CDMA, apparently because they perceived there
was no demand for it.

> I still don't understand why Telstra can't roll out one standardised
> system and be done with it. If 850 is the go at the moment, then roll it
> out and close down all other services.
>
> Or are there technical issues that won't allow 850 3G to be viable in
> metro areas?

I have no idea. I would hope not. Many people "in the bush" use high
gain antennas to maximise their coverage. Antennas work best on the
frequency they're designed for. If the service runs on 850 mhz in rural
/ remote areas and 2100 mhz in urban / metro areas, I'm not sure those
people will have good coverage in the city unless they buy a new antenna.

Time will tell, I guess.

Graeme Willox <[email protected]> wrote
> Emjaye wrote
>> Graeme Willox <[email protected]> wrote

>>> coverage distances of CDMA vs GSM. From what I've read in here, the 850 mhz service will exist
>>> in urban areas, too,

>> It'd have to. Otherwise, those who rely on the 850 and travel to the Big Smoke would be ****ed,
>> coverage-wise.

> Well who knows what Telstra are thinking.

I doubt even the Mex does, the even the mex isnt actually THAT stupid.

> It was only fairly recently (within the last 2 years or so) that Telstra arranged outbound
> international roaming on CDMA, apparently because they perceived there was no demand for it.

>> I still don't understand why Telstra can't roll out one standardised
>> system and be done with it. If 850 is the go at the moment, then
>> roll it out and close down all other services.

They obviously can, but it would make no sense given
that GSM is so much better choice of handsets wise.

>> Or are there technical issues that won't allow 850 3G to be viable in metro areas?

Nope, tho its not ideal there, GSM is much better suited to those.

> I have no idea. I would hope not. Many people "in the bush" use high gain antennas to maximise
> their coverage. Antennas work best on the frequency they're designed for. If the service runs on
> 850 mhz in rural / remote areas and 2100 mhz in urban / metro areas, I'm not sure those people
> will have good coverage in the city unless they buy a new antenna.

Its more complicated than that antenna wise. And you
dont need high performance antennas in the city anyway.
City services are optimised completely differently.

> Time will tell, I guess.

Yep, remains to be seen if the Mex's all singing and dancing
new alternative will even get widely used. I doubt it myself
given the inevitable poor choice of handsets and it remains
to be seen if Telstra will even shut down the CDMA system
or whether the regulator will even allow that.

Gunna be fascinating to watch what sort of **** fight
eventuates on that in the runup to the next federal election.

Its looking very like the govt has decided
to put the boot into Telstra and the mex.

WAY past time, he should have got the bums rush long ago.

Rod Speed wrote:
> Graeme Willox <[email protected]> wrote
>> Emjaye wrote
>>> Graeme Willox <[email protected]> wrote
>
>>>> coverage distances of CDMA vs GSM. From what I've read in here, the 850 mhz service will exist
>>>> in urban areas, too,
>
>>> It'd have to. Otherwise, those who rely on the 850 and travel to the Big Smoke would be ****ed,
>>> coverage-wise.
>
>> Well who knows what Telstra are thinking.
>
> I doubt even the Mex does, the even the mex isnt actually THAT stupid.
>
>> It was only fairly recently (within the last 2 years or so) that Telstra arranged outbound
>> international roaming on CDMA, apparently because they perceived there was no demand for it.
>
>>> I still don't understand why Telstra can't roll out one standardised
>>> system and be done with it. If 850 is the go at the moment, then
>>> roll it out and close down all other services.
>
> They obviously can, but it would make no sense given
> that GSM is so much better choice of handsets wise.
>
>>> Or are there technical issues that won't allow 850 3G to be viable in metro areas?
>
> Nope, tho its not ideal there, GSM is much better suited to those.
>
>> I have no idea. I would hope not. Many people "in the bush" use high gain antennas to maximise
>> their coverage. Antennas work best on the frequency they're designed for. If the service runs on
>> 850 mhz in rural / remote areas and 2100 mhz in urban / metro areas, I'm not sure those people
>> will have good coverage in the city unless they buy a new antenna.
>
> Its more complicated than that antenna wise. And you
> dont need high performance antennas in the city anyway.
> City services are optimised completely differently.

I realise that. If people already have one attached to their car kit,
I'm just wondering how well or otherwise it will actually work in the
city, given the difference in frequency. Then again, they already have
850 mhz spectrum in the urban areas too. If the handsets they provide
do work on 850 mhz and 2100 mhz 3G bands, maybe they'll set it up like
they have GSM where it registers on 900 mhz and only uses 1800 mhz when
necessary.
>
>> Time will tell, I guess.
>
> Yep, remains to be seen if the Mex's all singing and dancing
> new alternative will even get widely used. I doubt it myself
> given the inevitable poor choice of handsets and it remains
> to be seen if Telstra will even shut down the CDMA system
> or whether the regulator will even allow that.
>
> Gunna be fascinating to watch what sort of **** fight
> eventuates on that in the runup to the next federal election.
>
> Its looking very like the govt has decided
> to put the boot into Telstra and the mex.
>
> WAY past time, he should have got the bums rush long ago.
>
>

It's pretty obscene how the Telstra board justified paying him all those
millions yet the other day they announced a reduction in payments to
rural contractor for installations. Maybe the board needs the boot too.

Rod Speed wrote:
>>> Or are there technical issues that won't allow 850 3G to be viable in metro areas?
>
> Nope, tho its not ideal there, GSM is much better suited to those.

I thought one of the very reasons CDMA and WCDMA is used extensively in
countries such as South Korea and Japan was due to CDMA's ability to
employ technologies such as cell breathing and decreased voice quality
at the gain of network bandwidth, in practice cramming huge call volumes
through a small geographic area?

Graeme Willox <[email protected]> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Graeme Willox <[email protected]> wrote
>>> Emjaye wrote
>>>> Graeme Willox <[email protected]> wrote

>>>>> coverage distances of CDMA vs GSM. From what I've read in here, the 850 mhz service will
>>>>> exist in urban areas, too,

>>>> It'd have to. Otherwise, those who rely on the 850 and travel to the Big Smoke would be ****ed,
>>>> coverage-wise.

>>> Well who knows what Telstra are thinking.

>> I doubt even the Mex does, the even the mex isnt actually THAT stupid.

>>> It was only fairly recently (within the last 2 years or so) that
>>> Telstra arranged outbound international roaming on CDMA, apparently because they perceived there
>>> was no demand for it.

>>>> I still don't understand why Telstra can't roll out one standardised system and be done with
>>>> it. If 850 is the go at the moment, then
>>>> roll it out and close down all other services.

>> They obviously can, but it would make no sense given
>> that GSM is so much better choice of handsets wise.

>>>> Or are there technical issues that won't allow 850 3G to be viable
>>>> in metro areas?

>> Nope, tho its not ideal there, GSM is much better suited to those.

>>> I have no idea. I would hope not. Many people "in the bush" use
>>> high gain antennas to maximise their coverage. Antennas work best
>>> on the frequency they're designed for. If the service runs on 850
>>> mhz in rural / remote areas and 2100 mhz in urban / metro areas,
>>> I'm not sure those people will have good coverage in the city
>>> unless they buy a new antenna.

>> Its more complicated than that antenna wise. And you
>> dont need high performance antennas in the city anyway.
>> City services are optimised completely differently.

> I realise that. If people already have one attached to their car kit, I'm just wondering how well
> or otherwise it will actually work in the city, given the difference in frequency.

Should work fine if its properly designed and
the system does actually use 2100 in the citys.

> Then again, they already have 850 mhz spectrum in the urban areas too.

Precisely.

> If the handsets they provide do work on 850 mhz and 2100 mhz 3G bands,

That isnt clear yet.

> maybe they'll set it up like they have GSM where it registers on 900 mhz and only uses 1800 mhz
> when necessary.

Or maybe they wont bother and they'll just use 850 mhz
for the few hayseeds that need to use them there.

>>> Time will tell, I guess.

>> Yep, remains to be seen if the Mex's all singing and dancing
>> new alternative will even get widely used. I doubt it myself
>> given the inevitable poor choice of handsets and it remains
>> to be seen if Telstra will even shut down the CDMA system
>> or whether the regulator will even allow that.

>> Gunna be fascinating to watch what sort of **** fight
>> eventuates on that in the runup to the next federal election.

>> Its looking very like the govt has decided
>> to put the boot into Telstra and the mex.

>> WAY past time, he should have got the bums rush long ago.

> It's pretty obscene how the Telstra board justified paying him all those millions

Yep, McGauchie is a terminal ****wit. He's on the Hardie's board too.

> yet the other day they announced a reduction in payments to rural contractor for installations.
> Maybe the board needs the boot too.

Sure, but thats quite a bit harder to do without
the **** hitting the fan very spectacularly indeed.

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

>>>> Or are there technical issues that won't allow 850 3G to be viable in metro areas?

>> Nope, tho its not ideal there, GSM is much better suited to those.

> I thought one of the very reasons CDMA and WCDMA is used extensively in countries such as South
> Korea and Japan was due to CDMA's ability to employ technologies such as cell breathing and
> decreased voice quality at the gain of network bandwidth, in practice cramming huge call volumes
> through a small geographic area?

Nope, its much more complicated than that in practice.

I suppose we'll find out tomorrow if they were right...


"Intel Inside" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "TELSTRA is expected to switch on its brand new and national $1.1 billion
> third-generation mobile network as soon as October 6, three months earlier
> than planned as part of an attempt to spruik interest in T3."
>
> in today's issue of www.smh.com.au
>
>

Yep, since the mex is sposed to be doing the spruik today.

Intel Inside <[email protected]> wrote:
> I suppose we'll find out tomorrow if they were right...
>
>
> "Intel Inside" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> "TELSTRA is expected to switch on its brand new and national $1.1
>> billion third-generation mobile network as soon as October 6, three
>> months earlier than planned as part of an attempt to spruik interest
>> in T3." in today's issue of www.smh.com.au

Rod Speed wrote:
> Yep, since the mex is sposed to be doing the spruik today.
>
> Intel Inside <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I suppose we'll find out tomorrow if they were right...
>>
>>
>> "Intel Inside" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> "TELSTRA is expected to switch on its brand new and national $1.1
>>> billion third-generation mobile network as soon as October 6, three
>>> months earlier than planned as part of an attempt to spruik interest
>>> in T3." in today's issue of www.smh.com.au
>
>
Telstra's website shows a promotion for the "Next G" network. It allows
people to register to be notified when it's launched. That doesn't
suggest to me that they're quite ready to officially launch it.

Rod Speed wrote:
> Yep, since the mex is sposed to be doing the spruik today.

Officially announced to the ASX an hour or so ago