Results 31 to 45 of 48
- 11-17-2007, 11:04 PM #31MichaelGuest
Re: Telstra warns on CDMA
"Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Alan Parkington <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Listen Roddles.. Telstra will close CDMA on 28-Jan.
>
> Even Telstra aint actually THAT stupid.
Everything is still in the pipeline for Jan 28
› See More: Telstra warns on CDMA
- 11-17-2007, 11:04 PM #32MichaelGuest
Re: Telstra warns on CDMA
"Marts" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:8na9j3l0d1r0j93kd5ks9nmqc7tblv32mp@martz_57.com...
> Alan Parkington wrote...
>
>> They have a right of refusal, but if they do nothing Telstra can close it
>> on
>> their own accord. The rule change was to allow them to stop it, not to
>> give
>> themselves the power to allow it. It's an important disctinction.
>
> Well, it seems to be pre-empting the government on this. At least one
> district
> in SE Victoria has had its CDMA service shut down as of Nov 1.
load of crap. youve got a fault
> I wonder how many other areas have also had their CDMA services terminated
> before the Jan 08 deadline.
precisely none
- 11-18-2007, 12:32 AM #33who whereGuest
Re: Telstra warns on CDMA
On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 05:04:14 GMT, "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> Alan Parkington <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Listen Roddles.. Telstra will close CDMA on 28-Jan.
>>
>> Even Telstra aint actually THAT stupid.
>
>Everything is still in the pipeline for Jan 28
It may well be in the pipeline, but the "equivalence verifcation" program which
was due to complete on Dec 18 *should-have* shown up the numerous holes in the
"equivalence".
If it didn't, the process is flawed.
If it did, the NextG rollout isn't complete and won't be by Jan 28.
- 11-18-2007, 12:33 AM #34MichaelGuest
Re: Telstra warns on CDMA
"who where" <not [email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 05:04:14 GMT, "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> Alan Parkington <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Listen Roddles.. Telstra will close CDMA on 28-Jan.
>>>
>>> Even Telstra aint actually THAT stupid.
>>
>>Everything is still in the pipeline for Jan 28
>
> It may well be in the pipeline, but the "equivalence verifcation" program
> which
> was due to complete on Dec 18 *should-have* shown up the numerous holes in
> the
> "equivalence".
Telstra's already announced equivalence has been reached. Yet to see whether
the ACCC agrees
- 11-18-2007, 03:00 AM #35Rod SpeedGuest
Re: Telstra warns on CDMA
Michael <[email protected]> wrote
> Rod Speed <[email protected]> wrote
>> Alan Parkington <[email protected]> wrote
>>> Listen Roddles.. Telstra will close CDMA on 28-Jan.
>> Even Telstra aint actually THAT stupid.
> Everything is still in the pipeline for Jan 28
There is no pipeline, and even telstra aint actually stupid enough to shut it down on that day, you watch.
- 11-18-2007, 03:01 AM #36Rod SpeedGuest
Re: Telstra warns on CDMA
Michael <[email protected]> wrote:
> "who where" <not [email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 05:04:14 GMT, "Michael" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> "Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> Alan Parkington <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Listen Roddles.. Telstra will close CDMA on 28-Jan.
>>>>
>>>> Even Telstra aint actually THAT stupid.
>>>
>>> Everything is still in the pipeline for Jan 28
>>
>> It may well be in the pipeline, but the "equivalence verifcation"
>> program which
>> was due to complete on Dec 18 *should-have* shown up the numerous
>> holes in the
>> "equivalence".
> Telstra's already announced equivalence has been reached.
And no one believes that lie.
> Yet to see whether the ACCC agrees
It aint up to the ACCC, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.
- 11-18-2007, 06:13 AM #37who whereGuest
Re: Telstra warns on CDMA
On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 06:33:43 GMT, "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"who where" <not [email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 05:04:14 GMT, "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>> Alan Parkington <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Listen Roddles.. Telstra will close CDMA on 28-Jan.
>>>>
>>>> Even Telstra aint actually THAT stupid.
>>>
>>>Everything is still in the pipeline for Jan 28
>>
>> It may well be in the pipeline, but the "equivalence verifcation" program
>> which
>> was due to complete on Dec 18 *should-have* shown up the numerous holes in
>> the
>> "equivalence".
>
>Telstra's already announced equivalence has been reached. Yet to see whether
>the ACCC agrees
Tel$tra's stated concept of equivalence - based on sheer area coverage - is
different to everybody else's expectation that ALL the CDMA territory will be
covered by NextG, which it ain't. The "equivalence verification" program was
intended to demonstrate the latter. Maybe they've realised it isn't covering
the CDMA territory
- 11-25-2007, 04:26 AM #38MichaelGuest
Re: Telstra warns on CDMA
>>>>>> Listen Roddles.. Telstra will close CDMA on 28-Jan.
>>>>>
>>>>> Even Telstra aint actually THAT stupid.
>>>>
>>>>Everything is still in the pipeline for Jan 28
>>>
>>> It may well be in the pipeline, but the "equivalence verifcation"
>>> program
>>> which
>>> was due to complete on Dec 18 *should-have* shown up the numerous holes
>>> in
>>> the
>>> "equivalence".
>>
>>Telstra's already announced equivalence has been reached. Yet to see
>>whether
>>the ACCC agrees
>
> Tel$tra's stated concept of equivalence - based on sheer area coverage -
> is
> different to everybody else's expectation that ALL the CDMA territory will
> be
> covered by NextG, which it ain't. The "equivalence verification" program
> was
Which is a borked concept.
Take a look at the GSM, then the CDMA, and then the 3G maps, for the same
area, at ground level, and you will understand why
> intended to demonstrate the latter. Maybe they've realised it isn't
> covering
> the CDMA territory
It covers much more than the CDMA territory.
- 11-25-2007, 06:48 PM #39Paul DayGuest
Re: Telstra warns on CDMA
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 21:26:29 in aus.comms.mobile Michael may have written:
> > Tel$tra's stated concept of equivalence - based on sheer area
> > coverage - is different to everybody else's expectation that ALL the
> > CDMA territory will be covered by NextG, which it ain't. The
> > "equivalence verification" program was
>
> Which is a borked concept.
Not if you're a consumer.
> > intended to demonstrate the latter. Maybe they've realised it isn't
> > covering the CDMA territory
>
> It covers much more than the CDMA territory.
In raw coverage area, sure. But does it cover every square km of the
country that CDMA currently provides coverage to when using similar
MS equipment?
PD
--
Paul Day
http://www.enigma.id.au/
- 11-25-2007, 07:12 PM #40who whereGuest
Re: Telstra warns on CDMA
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 10:26:29 GMT, "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> Listen Roddles.. Telstra will close CDMA on 28-Jan.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Even Telstra aint actually THAT stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>>Everything is still in the pipeline for Jan 28
>>>>
>>>> It may well be in the pipeline, but the "equivalence verifcation"
>>>> program
>>>> which
>>>> was due to complete on Dec 18 *should-have* shown up the numerous holes
>>>> in
>>>> the
>>>> "equivalence".
>>>
>>>Telstra's already announced equivalence has been reached. Yet to see
>>>whether
>>>the ACCC agrees
>>
>> Tel$tra's stated concept of equivalence - based on sheer area coverage -
>> is
>> different to everybody else's expectation that ALL the CDMA territory will
>> be
>> covered by NextG, which it ain't. The "equivalence verification" program
>> was
>
>Which is a borked concept.
I think everyone except the mouths at Tel$tra agrees on that.
>Take a look at the GSM, then the CDMA, and then the 3G maps, for the same
>area, at ground level, and you will understand why
I know why. I know what their VP was supposed to do.
>> intended to demonstrate the latter. Maybe they've realised it isn't
>> covering
>> the CDMA territory
>
>It covers much more than the CDMA territory.
But it still doesn't cover ALL of the CDMA territory ....
- 11-28-2007, 02:54 PM #41MichaelGuest
Re: Telstra warns on CDMA
>> > Tel$tra's stated concept of equivalence - based on sheer area
>> > coverage - is different to everybody else's expectation that ALL the
>> > CDMA territory will be covered by NextG, which it ain't. The
>> > "equivalence verification" program was
>>
>> Which is a borked concept.
>
> Not if you're a consumer.
Which I am, and its the only relevant demonstration of equivalence for me as
a consumer
>> > intended to demonstrate the latter. Maybe they've realised it isn't
>> > covering the CDMA territory
>>
>> It covers much more than the CDMA territory.
>
> In raw coverage area, sure. But does it cover every square km of the
> country that CDMA currently provides coverage to when using similar
> MS equipment?
Nope, which is what I said in the other post when I told others to look at a
coverage map
And GSM doesnt cover everything that AMPS did, nor did CDMA cover everything
that AMPS did.
- 11-28-2007, 02:55 PM #42MichaelGuest
Re: Telstra warns on CDMA
>>> Tel$tra's stated concept of equivalence - based on sheer area coverage -
>>> is
>>> different to everybody else's expectation that ALL the CDMA territory
>>> will
>>> be
>>> covered by NextG, which it ain't. The "equivalence verification"
>>> program
>>> was
>>
>>Which is a borked concept.
>
> I think everyone except the mouths at Tel$tra agrees on that.
>
>>Take a look at the GSM, then the CDMA, and then the 3G maps, for the same
>>area, at ground level, and you will understand why
>
> I know why. I know what their VP was supposed to do.
>
>>> intended to demonstrate the latter. Maybe they've realised it isn't
>>> covering
>>> the CDMA territory
>>
>>It covers much more than the CDMA territory.
>
> But it still doesn't cover ALL of the CDMA territory ....
Which is irrelevant.
And due to the sheer amount of coverage of NextG over CDMA, there are more
places covered by NextG (but not by CDMA) than the reverse./
- 11-28-2007, 06:17 PM #43Paul DayGuest
Re: Telstra warns on CDMA
On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 07:54:25 in aus.comms.mobile Michael may have written:
> And GSM doesnt cover everything that AMPS did, nor did CDMA cover
> everything that AMPS did.
Which is why a large number of AMPS BSs were left on for long after CDMA
was activated and why the handsets were dual AMPS/CDMA-95, no?
PD
--
Paul Day
http://www.enigma.id.au/
- 11-28-2007, 06:18 PM #44Paul DayGuest
Re: Telstra warns on CDMA
On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 07:55:11 in aus.comms.mobile Michael may have written:
> >>It covers much more than the CDMA territory.
> >
> > But it still doesn't cover ALL of the CDMA territory ....
>
> Which is irrelevant.
....not if you're about to lose your one source of mobile coverage.
PD
--
Paul Day
http://www.enigma.id.au/
- 12-02-2007, 01:20 AM #45MichaelGuest
Re: Telstra warns on CDMA
"Paul Day" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 07:54:25 in aus.comms.mobile Michael may have written:
>> And GSM doesnt cover everything that AMPS did, nor did CDMA cover
>> everything that AMPS did.
>
> Which is why a large number of AMPS BSs were left on for long after CDMA
> was activated and why the handsets were dual AMPS/CDMA-95, no?
Sorry, you've become a bit forgetful in your old age.
AMPS was switched off on a regional basis, not everything went at once.
there was no "piecemeal" closure of individual bases.
and when AMPS was completely closed this sentence STILL applied ">> And GSM
doesnt cover everything that AMPS did, nor did CDMA cover
>> everything that AMPS did."
Similar Threads
- alt.cellular.verizon
- Audiovox
- aus.comms.mobile
- Nokia
- alt.cellular.verizon
Immerse Yourself in Sensual Massage on rubpage
in Chit Chat