Results 31 to 34 of 34
- 01-18-2007, 07:13 PM #31GilesGuest
Re: Telstras Next G
> >> $olstra Shop told me March / April for a Next G Nokia. Should I believe them.??
>
> They use the dates supplied by Nokia, which are usually plucked out of
> Nokia's arse
And the latest plucked from Nokia Australia GM Shaun Colligan is not
until at least the second half of 2007.
http://australianit.news.com.au/arti...nbv%5E,00.html
› See More: Telstras Next G
- 01-20-2007, 06:45 PM #32Tsunami AustraliaGuest
Re: Telstras Next G
On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 20:02:04 +1000, "JimM"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Emjaye" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> thegoons said....
>>
>>> Many independent dealers are now suing Telstra for the delays as Telstra
>>> diverted Brightstar shipments to Telstra Shops. and diverted them from
>>> Telstra Licensed Shops and other dealers.
>>
>> A mate of mine runs a "Telstra shop" here where I live. Around the
>> corner is another "Telstra Shop". However, I think the latter is more of
>> a Telstra shop as you've described, and he (the former) may simply be a
>> licensed dealer.
>>
>> Anyway, I rocked up to his shop the week after NextG opened and enquired
>> about what phones are available. Dunno, said the sales assistant. There
>> was nothing in the shop to indicate that the NextG service had been
>> commissioned.
>>
>> So, I went to the other shop. In it were NextG posters and the then
>> currently available handsets on display. The only one not available was
>> the Samsumg A701.
>>
>> Later on I went back to the other shop and asked someone different about
>> NextG (I prefered to give this shop my business). However, she too knew
>> nothing. I said that The other shop has them available and the shop is
>> decked out in NextG promotional banners, posters, etc.. Oh, was all she
>> said...
>>
>> I dunno how long it was before they started selling NextG products as I
>> ended up getting the phone from the other mob.
>>
>> So, there may well be some truth to Telstra giving selected
>> dealers/resellers preferential treatment. I wonder if Optus and other
>> mobile phone companies do the same.
>>
>
>If these`allegations are true, wouldn't these be of interest to the ACCC..??
>
I know there's been a lot of similar accusations flung around this
area, with the dealers claiming exactly the same.
- 01-20-2007, 07:25 PM #33Tsunami AustraliaGuest
Re: Telstras Next G
On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 12:52:24 +1100, davmel
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Jeremy Quirke wrote:
>>
>> "davmel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> T-Mobile 3G subscribers are the ones that will be stuck with the
>>> greatest limitation in handsets, since they will be required to support
>>> the oddball 1700/2100 Tx/Rx pair with the base stations transmitting in
>>> the 1700 band and receiving in the 2100 band, whereas the most common
>>> UMTS 2100 band has the base station transmit in the 2100 band and
>>> receive in the 1900 MHz allocation.
>>
>> Actually a minor correction - the NodeB/BTS transmits in 2100 and UE in
>> 1700 (which explains why I could see the network on my plain old
>> UMTS2100 handset). But I agree that we're creating the GSM1900/850
>> situation all over again, but T-Mobile is probably the worst example
>> yet of custom frequency use.
>
>OK, good to confirm that since it makes sense that the mobile handset
>transmits with lower power on a lower frequency than the BTS if at all
>possible, however I remember seeing details that the opposite was true
>when the spectrum was auctioned off.
>The silly part is that thanks to T-Mobile and the FCC we will now
>require quad band GSM and quad band UMTS handsets for true roaming
>capability (and that's before the yanks get into the 450 and 700 MHz
>band potential deployments and Europe considers UMTS at 900.)
>If any network will be the odd one out though it will be T-Mobile since
>the frequency pair just won't be used anywhere else. They should have
>waited and saved up for the ex-broadcast TV 700 band spectrum.
450mhz in any country is worth too many $$$ in normal 12.5khz
commercial 2way radio frequencies to be used by wideband services such
as phones. So whilst it is always possible, I highly doubt phones will
get below 700mhz.
- 01-20-2007, 10:03 PM #34davmelGuest
Re: Telstras Next G
Tsunami Australia wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 12:52:24 +1100, davmel
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Jeremy Quirke wrote:
>>> "davmel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> T-Mobile 3G subscribers are the ones that will be stuck with the
>>>> greatest limitation in handsets, since they will be required to support
>>>> the oddball 1700/2100 Tx/Rx pair with the base stations transmitting in
>>>> the 1700 band and receiving in the 2100 band, whereas the most common
>>>> UMTS 2100 band has the base station transmit in the 2100 band and
>>>> receive in the 1900 MHz allocation.
>>> Actually a minor correction - the NodeB/BTS transmits in 2100 and UE in
>>> 1700 (which explains why I could see the network on my plain old
>>> UMTS2100 handset). But I agree that we're creating the GSM1900/850
>>> situation all over again, but T-Mobile is probably the worst example
>>> yet of custom frequency use.
>> OK, good to confirm that since it makes sense that the mobile handset
>> transmits with lower power on a lower frequency than the BTS if at all
>> possible, however I remember seeing details that the opposite was true
>> when the spectrum was auctioned off.
>> The silly part is that thanks to T-Mobile and the FCC we will now
>> require quad band GSM and quad band UMTS handsets for true roaming
>> capability (and that's before the yanks get into the 450 and 700 MHz
>> band potential deployments and Europe considers UMTS at 900.)
>> If any network will be the odd one out though it will be T-Mobile since
>> the frequency pair just won't be used anywhere else. They should have
>> waited and saved up for the ex-broadcast TV 700 band spectrum.
>
> 450mhz in any country is worth too many $$$ in normal 12.5khz
> commercial 2way radio frequencies to be used by wideband services such
> as phones. So whilst it is always possible, I highly doubt phones will
> get below 700mhz.
True, the 400 to 500MHz spectrum is already heavily utilised in many
countries, although a great deal of it is poorly assigned and could
easily be better utilised if more users were on a shared trunking system.
Everyone seems to forget the ridiculous under-utilisation of the
spectrum allocated to the military between 230 and 400MHz. I still can't
believe that after all this time it hasn't been sliced up for more
useful commercial purposes.
Similar Threads
- Telstra
- General Service Provider Forum
- aus.comms.mobile
- aus.comms.mobile
- aus.comms.mobile
Seamless Hosting Solutions for Creative Professionals
in Chit Chat