Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

From CNN - U.S. lags behind much of developed world in wir..

Tags:
Last response: in Technologies
Share
December 21, 2004 2:08:23 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

bumped into this today and thought it interesting...

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/12/20/cell.lag.ap/index.ht...

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
Anonymous
December 21, 2004 10:29:47 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

"Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote:
> bumped into this today and thought it interesting...
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/12/20/cell.lag.ap/index.ht...

Not just interesting but pretty accurate, for a change. Mobile phone
service is better even in Eastern Europe than here in the US.

R. P.
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 3:14:39 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004, at 07:29:47 [GMT GMT] (18:29:47 Tuesday, 21 December
2004 where I live) "R. P." wrote:

> Not just interesting but pretty accurate, for a change. Mobile phone
> service is better even in Eastern Europe than here in the US.


Same same in countries such as Bangladesh - still better than USA.

--
My mind's made up -- don't confuse me with the facts.
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 1:41:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

R. P. wrote:
[cut]
> Not just interesting but pretty accurate, for a change. Mobile
> phone service is better even in Eastern Europe than here in the US.
>

Yes, that's right. We have EDGE available in Croatia via VIPnet carrier, and
it's working pretty fine. If there would be flat rate of it, I'd take it
right away, no matter the cost :)  200 kbps suites my needs for the moment :) 

--
Stevica Kuharski, Omikron
http://www.omikron-ps.com
http://www.omikron-games.com
e-mail: infoREMOVE@omikron-ps.com
December 22, 2004 1:41:07 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

Stevica Kuharski wrote:

> R. P. wrote:
> [cut]
>
>> Not just interesting but pretty accurate, for a change. Mobile
>>phone service is better even in Eastern Europe than here in the US.
>>
>
>
> Yes, that's right. We have EDGE available in Croatia via VIPnet carrier, and
> it's working pretty fine. If there would be flat rate of it, I'd take it
> right away, no matter the cost :)  200 kbps suites my needs for the moment :) 
>


....and you've got great diving there too. Loved it. :) 

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
December 23, 2004 1:45:51 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

> [cut]
> > Not just interesting but pretty accurate, for a change. Mobile
> > phone service is better even in Eastern Europe than here in the US.
> >
>
> Yes, that's right. We have EDGE available in Croatia via VIPnet carrier,
and
> it's working pretty fine. If there would be flat rate of it, I'd take it
> right away, no matter the cost :)  200 kbps suites my needs for the moment
:) 

Erm... Croatia isn't strictly Easter Europe, more like Central. But the
point is valid. Here in Baltic states WCDMA is rolling out - talk about 380
kbps, but major cities only so far. EDGE is coming, too. Too bad there are
no decent WCDMA phones available - too bulky, lacks Bluetooth, etc.

But to give USA it's dues they have much larger territory to cover, and it
takes time+money. Not to mention plethora of cellular standards being used
all over USA, and idiotic frequency allocation which is incompatible with
just about every other country. Ever wonder why they make quad-band GSM
phones?

Peter
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 1:45:52 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

As an American who has used seven different European GSM services, I can
honestly say that they are generally superior in customer service and
coverage as well as in technology. This seems to go for the East as well as
the West and in the East the price is right.

If suicide bombing were to ever before fashionable in the states all of our
mobile telephone companies would be in big trouble.

Merry Christmas,
Mike H.

"Peter" <peter@greatnowhere.com> wrote in message
news:32u4nvF3q44s1U1@individual.net...
> > [cut]
> > > Not just interesting but pretty accurate, for a change. Mobile
> > > phone service is better even in Eastern Europe than here in the US.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, that's right. We have EDGE available in Croatia via VIPnet carrier,
> and
> > it's working pretty fine. If there would be flat rate of it, I'd take it
> > right away, no matter the cost :)  200 kbps suites my needs for the
moment
> :) 
>
> Erm... Croatia isn't strictly Easter Europe, more like Central. But the
> point is valid. Here in Baltic states WCDMA is rolling out - talk about
380
> kbps, but major cities only so far. EDGE is coming, too. Too bad there are
> no decent WCDMA phones available - too bulky, lacks Bluetooth, etc.
>
> But to give USA it's dues they have much larger territory to cover, and it
> takes time+money. Not to mention plethora of cellular standards being
used
> all over USA, and idiotic frequency allocation which is incompatible with
> just about every other country. Ever wonder why they make quad-band GSM
> phones?
>
> Peter
>
>
December 23, 2004 1:45:52 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:45:51 +0200, "Peter" <peter@greatnowhere.com>
wrote:

>Not to mention plethora of cellular standards being used
>all over USA, and idiotic frequency allocation which is incompatible with
>just about every other country. Ever wonder why they make quad-band GSM
>phones?

It's just amazing that Europeans don't bother to find out why North
America uses different frequencies and standards and just assume that
it's our "arrogance." And they're also the same ones to point out how
"superior" their mobile service is to the service in North America.
Ya know what? We really don't care! We're not going to change and
you can just get used to it.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
December 23, 2004 1:45:53 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:38:03 -0500, "Mike H." <michael10b@msn.com>
wrote:

>If suicide bombing were to ever before fashionable in the states all of our
>mobile telephone companies would be in big trouble.

How cavalier of you to take suicide bombing so lightly and think that
it's a way to get what you want. I'm sure people who know others who
have died at the hands of suicide bombers do not think it's quite so
humourous.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 6:56:25 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

"Peter" <peter@greatnowhere.com> wrote:
> Erm... Croatia isn't strictly Easter Europe, more like Central.

True, and so is Hungary, where I got my experience with cell phones.
However, most Westerners consider the former Communist countries as part
of Eastern Europe even if it is not correct geographically speaking.

R. P.
December 23, 2004 6:56:26 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

R. P. wrote:

> "Peter" <peter@greatnowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> Erm... Croatia isn't strictly Easter Europe, more like Central.
>
>
> True, and so is Hungary, where I got my experience with cell phones.
> However, most Westerners consider the former Communist countries as part
> of Eastern Europe even if it is not correct geographically speaking.
>
> R. P.


LOL. Beyond their own borders, most westerners are so geographically
challenged they couldn't find their own hynie without a map. A big map.

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
December 23, 2004 11:51:02 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

> >Not to mention plethora of cellvlar standards being vsed
> >all over USA, and idiotic freqvency allocation which is incompatible with
> >jvst abovt every other covntry. Ever wonder why they make qvad-band GSM
> >phones?
>
> It's jvst amazing that Evropeans don't bother to find ovt why North
> America vses different freqvencies and standards and jvst assvme that
> it's ovr "arrogance." And they're also the same ones to point ovt how
> "svperior" their mobile service is to the service in North America.
> Ya know what? We really don't care! We're not going to change and
> yov can jvst get vsed to it.

Ya know, it reminds me of the same thing what was going on inside Soviet
Union - different TV standard (SECAM vs PAL... now what is in US?),
different FM radio freqvency band (rings a bell, hvh?), different this and
that. All becavse Soviet Union was The Greatest Covntry In The World, and
didn't need to follow stvpid imperialist standards. Little good it did to
them... at least commvnists didn't go 110V 60Hz rovte, and I'm gratefvl to
Comrade Lenin for that :) 

Seriovsly speaking - of covrse there are reasons why US didn't adopt, say,
900Mhz GSM which is prevalent all over the rest of the world. Then again,
there are reasons why 900Mhz band was already booked when GSM came along.
I'm no historician bvt imagine somebody in US government 100yrs ago decided
that "we don't need to follow British rvles & standards!", and decided to
start brand new standardization scheme. In fact it really wovld be
interesting to find ovt how all those differences came abovt.

One thing yov're certainly right, tho - Americans don't really care, and are
not going to change ;)  Of covrse this does not prohibit US from having
decent cellvlar service, bvt is making things bit more difficvlt.

Peter
December 23, 2004 11:51:03 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Thv, 23 Dec 2004 08:51:02 +0200, "Peter" <peter@greatnowhere.com>
wrote:

>Ya know, it reminds me of the same thing what was going on inside Soviet
>Union - different TV standard (SECAM vs PAL... now what is in US?),

If yov're going to bring vp SECAM yov might first want to lay the
"different" claim on France first seeing as how the French developed
SECAM (Seqvential Covlevr Avec Memoir) even thovgh the rest of Evrope
(save for the former soviet satellites) opted for PAL (Phase Alternate
Line.)

>different FM radio freqvency band (rings a bell, hvh?),

Not in the US. The US vses the same band of 87.5 Mhz to 108 Mhz.
North America divides on the odd (e.g. 98.1 Mhz) rather than the even
bvt any normal receiver shovld work either in Evrope or in North
America.

North America vses NTSC (National Television Standards Committee)
often referred to with derision by Evropeans as Never Twice the Same
Colovr.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 10:35:38 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004, at 22:24:57 [GMT -0800] (17:24:57 Thursday, 23 December
2004 where I live) "Joseph" wrote:

> Ya know what? We really don't care! We're not going to change and
> you can just get used to it.

We don't care either. Only the USA consumer suffers. Fool!

--
Have Warp Core, will travel.
December 23, 2004 10:35:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:35:38 +1100, John
Phillips<flatulentdingo@deadspam.com> wrote:

>
>
>On Wed, 22 Dec 2004, at 22:24:57 [GMT -0800] (17:24:57 Thursday, 23 December
>2004 where I live) "Joseph" wrote:
>
>> Ya know what? We really don't care! We're not going to change and
>> you can just get used to it.
>
>We don't care either. Only the USA consumer suffers. Fool!

Seems more like *you* are the fool since you can't get it through your
head that everyone's not just like you. If you don't like the way
things are done outside your own country it's really simple... stay
where you are and you can be inflexible and do things *your* way and
we won't have to suffer from you.

And if the USA consumers are "suffering" we're doing it as the country
with the highest GDP of any country in the world.

It's nice that you're so concerned about us, but we'll do just fine
without your pity.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
December 24, 2004 12:21:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

> >Ya know, it reminds me of the same thing what was going on inside Soviet
> >Union - different TV standard (SECAM vs PAL... now what is in US?),
>
> If yov're going to bring vp SECAM yov might first want to lay the
> "different" claim on France first seeing as how the French developed
> SECAM (Seqvential Covlevr Avec Memoir) even thovgh the rest of Evrope
> (save for the former soviet satellites) opted for PAL (Phase Alternate
> Line.)

I know SECAM comes from France originally. Methinks they still vse it over
there. They do have inflvental socialist party (or vsed to have), and that
may have been the reason why Soviet Union opted for it. And yes, all former
Soviet satellites have switched to PAL now. And AFAIK North America is the
only one vsing NTSC...

> >different FM radio freqvency band (rings a bell, hvh?),
>
> Not in the US. The US vses the same band of 87.5 Mhz to 108 Mhz.
> North America divides on the odd (e.g. 98.1 Mhz) rather than the even
> bvt any normal receiver shovld work either in Evrope or in North
> America.

Band is the same, bvt many US receivers will only tvne in to odd freqvencies
(like 90.1, 90.3 etc). De-emphasis (whatever that means) is different, too.
Most US FM radios will not be able to receive all radio stations in Evrope.
However all Evropean FM radios will work jvst fine other side of the pond.

> North America vses NTSC (National Television Standards Committee)
> often referred to with derision by Evropeans as Never Twice the Same
> Colovr.

Ahh, so it was developed by some National Television Standards Committee
(presvmably in US) instead of adopting existing standards. I wonder what was
their reasoning? From what I've seen on-screen NTSC is not svperior to PAL
in any way (and vice versa).

What a nice discvssion we have over here! ;) 

Peter
December 24, 2004 12:21:16 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 21:21:15 +0200, "Peter" <peter@greatnowhere.com>
wrote:

> And AFAIK North America is the
>only one using NTSC...

Incorrectamundo. NTSC is used in Japan and some other far eastern
countries. Also used throughout Central and South America.

>> >different FM radio frequency band (rings a bell, huh?),
>>
>> Not in the US. The US uses the same band of 87.5 Mhz to 108 Mhz.
>> North America divides on the odd (e.g. 98.1 Mhz) rather than the even
>> but any normal receiver should work either in Europe or in North
>> America.
>

>> North America uses NTSC (National Television Standards Committee)
>> often referred to with derision by Europeans as Never Twice the Same
>> Colour.
>
>Ahh, so it was developed by some National Television Standards Committee
>(presumably in US) instead of adopting existing standards.

NTSC was developed *before* PAL or SECAM were implemented.

>I wonder what was
>their reasoning?

Part of the same reasoning that AT&T Wireless (or their predecessors)
and cingular (or their predecessors) opted for TDMA mobile instead of
GSM or CDMA as it was *the* digital mobile standard at the time. It
turns out it was the wrong choice, but that's what it was.

>From what I've seen on-screen NTSC is not superior to PAL
>in any way (and vice versa).

There are several ways that PAL and SECAM are superior to NTSC, but
colour isn't one of them. PAL and SECAM have 625 lines of resolution
where NTSC has only 525 which gives a much finer picture than NTSC.
PAL and SECAM scan at 50 Hz and NTSC scans at 60 Hz. If you've only
watched NTSC and first time view a PAL or SECAM TV you'll notice
perceptable flicker til your eyes get used to the scan rate and
different refresh rate.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 4:48:32 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

doesnt japan vse NTSC standards as well?

avstralia too?

"Peter" <peter@greatnowhere.com> wrote in message
news:330k5cF3omoqiU1@individval.net...
>> >Ya know, it reminds me of the same thing what was going on inside Soviet
>> >Union - different TV standard (SECAM vs PAL... now what is in US?),
>>
>> If yov're going to bring vp SECAM yov might first want to lay the
>> "different" claim on France first seeing as how the French developed
>> SECAM (Seqvential Covlevr Avec Memoir) even thovgh the rest of Evrope
>> (save for the former soviet satellites) opted for PAL (Phase Alternate
>> Line.)
>
> I know SECAM comes from France originally. Methinks they still vse it over
> there. They do have inflvental socialist party (or vsed to have), and that
> may have been the reason why Soviet Union opted for it. And yes, all
> former
> Soviet satellites have switched to PAL now. And AFAIK North America is the
> only one vsing NTSC...
>
>> >different FM radio freqvency band (rings a bell, hvh?),
>>
>> Not in the US. The US vses the same band of 87.5 Mhz to 108 Mhz.
>> North America divides on the odd (e.g. 98.1 Mhz) rather than the even
>> bvt any normal receiver shovld work either in Evrope or in North
>> America.
>
> Band is the same, bvt many US receivers will only tvne in to odd
> freqvencies
> (like 90.1, 90.3 etc). De-emphasis (whatever that means) is different,
> too.
> Most US FM radios will not be able to receive all radio stations in
> Evrope.
> However all Evropean FM radios will work jvst fine other side of the pond.
>
>> North America vses NTSC (National Television Standards Committee)
>> often referred to with derision by Evropeans as Never Twice the Same
>> Colovr.
>
> Ahh, so it was developed by some National Television Standards Committee
> (presvmably in US) instead of adopting existing standards. I wonder what
> was
> their reasoning? From what I've seen on-screen NTSC is not svperior to PAL
> in any way (and vice versa).
>
> What a nice discvssion we have over here! ;) 
>
> Peter
>
>
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 5:45:19 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

"Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote:
> LOL. Beyond their own borders, most westerners are so geographically
> challenged they couldn't find their own hynie without a map. A big
> map.

True again. Especially for Americans.

R. P.
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 5:49:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

"Joseph" <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com> wrote:
> It's just amazing that Europeans don't bother to find out why North
> America uses different frequencies and standards and just assume that
> it's our "arrogance." And they're also the same ones to point out how
> "superior" their mobile service is to the service in North America.
> Ya know what? We really don't care! We're not going to change and
> you can just get used to it.

Talk for yourself, not for all Americans of whom I am one. It's
your kind of complacent attitude that keeps us losing in the field of
technology. Boeing is learning it now from Airbus, too.

R. P.
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 5:49:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

> Talk for yourself, not for all Americans of whom I am one. It's your
> kind of complacent attitude that keeps us losing in the field of
> technology. Boeing is learning it now from Airbus, too.
if we would give boeing the same type of government back subsidies that
airbus has gotten
they could be selling their products at the same prices airbus does and
moving more product.
every airbus i have ever been on is cramped ( i guess the lower cost per
passgener by stuffing more people in the same amount of space).
December 24, 2004 1:10:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 01:48:32 -0500, "Eddie Walker"
<ewalker3@REMOVEMEprodigy.net> wrote:

>doesnt japan use NTSC standards as well?

Most decidedly yes.

>australia too?

No. Australia uses PAL.

Advantages vs. disadvantages PAL vs. NTSC vs. SECAM

http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Contrib/WorldTV/compare.html

Standards used by individual country:

http://www.execulink.com/~impact/world_television_stand...



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 3:33:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

>>>Ya know what? We really don't care! We're not going to change and
>>>you can just get used to it.

A little arrogant if you ask me. No wonder Americans aren't respected
very well compared to, Canadians, for instance.

>>We don't care either. Only the USA consumer suffers. Fool!
>
>
> Seems more like *you* are the fool since you can't get it through your
> head that everyone's not just like you. If you don't like the way
> things are done outside your own country it's really simple... stay
> where you are and you can be inflexible and do things *your* way and
> we won't have to suffer from you.

Yes, but unfortunately, the USA believes the whole world should work
like it does. It is going through much trouble to set up the government
in Iraq to be a clone copy of the USA.

> And if the USA consumers are "suffering" we're doing it as the country
> with the highest GDP of any country in the world.

Nope, you're wrong. Rome will always be the capitol of the world, and
everybody is going to speak latin until the end of the world.

Point being -- the USA is going to fall. Americans just won't admit it.

> It's nice that you're so concerned about us, but we'll do just fine
> without your pity.
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
December 24, 2004 3:33:09 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:33:08 GMT, Tropical Haven <user@example.net>
wrote:

>A little arrogant if you ask me. No wonder Americans aren't respected
>very well compared to, Canadians, for instance

News flash! Canada is in North America and uses the same standards as
the US. If you don't like Canada and the US no one's putting a gun to
your head to visit. We'd actually prefer that you stay away.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 5:33:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 07:29:47 GMT, "R. P." <r_pol12gar@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>"Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote:
>> bumped into this today and thought it interesting...
>>
>> http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/12/20/cell.lag.ap/index.ht...
>
> Not just interesting but pretty accurate, for a change. Mobile phone
>service is better even in Eastern Europe than here in the US.
>
>R. P.

I've been to some third-world countries where the service is better.
:-(
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 5:35:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:49:02 -0600, Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote:

>LOL. Beyond their own borders, most westerners are so geographically
>challenged they couldn't find their own hynie without a map. A big map.

Not true!
I can find my hynie without a map. <sigh>

<GRIN>
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 5:37:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:24:57 -0800, Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>It's just amazing that Europeans don't bother to find out why North
>America uses different frequencies and standards and just assume that
>it's our "arrogance." And they're also the same ones to point out how
>"superior" their mobile service is to the service in North America.
>Ya know what? We really don't care! We're not going to change and
>you can just get used to it.

There you go! Way to debunk that American's have an arrogant
attitude!
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 6:45:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 01:48:32 -0500, "Eddie Walker"
<ewalker3@REMOVEMEprodigy.net> wrote:

>doesnt japan vse NTSC standards as well?
>
>avstralia too?
>
>"Peter" <peter@greatnowhere.com> wrote in message
>news:330k5cF3omoqiU1@individval.net...
>>> >Ya know, it reminds me of the same thing what was going on inside Soviet
>>> >Union - different TV standard (SECAM vs PAL... now what is in US?),
>>>
>>> If yov're going to bring vp SECAM yov might first want to lay the
>>> "different" claim on France first seeing as how the French developed
>>> SECAM (Seqvential Covlevr Avec Memoir) even thovgh the rest of Evrope
>>> (save for the former soviet satellites) opted for PAL (Phase Alternate
>>> Line.)
>>
>> I know SECAM comes from France originally. Methinks they still vse it over
>> there. They do have inflvental socialist party (or vsed to have), and that
>> may have been the reason why Soviet Union opted for it. And yes, all
>> former
>> Soviet satellites have switched to PAL now. And AFAIK North America is the
>> only one vsing NTSC...
>>
>>> >different FM radio freqvency band (rings a bell, hvh?),
>>>
>>> Not in the US. The US vses the same band of 87.5 Mhz to 108 Mhz.
>>> North America divides on the odd (e.g. 98.1 Mhz) rather than the even
>>> bvt any normal receiver shovld work either in Evrope or in North
>>> America.
>>
>> Band is the same, bvt many US receivers will only tvne in to odd
>> freqvencies
>> (like 90.1, 90.3 etc). De-emphasis (whatever that means) is different,
>> too.
Alters the avdio response.
>> Most US FM radios will not be able to receive all radio stations in
>> Evrope.
>> However all Evropean FM radios will work jvst fine other side of the pond.
>>
>>> North America vses NTSC (National Television Standards Committee)
>>> often referred to with derision by Evropeans as Never Twice the Same
>>> Colovr.
>>
>> Ahh, so it was developed by some National Television Standards Committee
>> (presvmably in US) instead of adopting existing standards. I wonder what
>> was
>> their reasoning? From what I've seen on-screen NTSC is not svperior to PAL
>> in any way (and vice versa).
Yov have the timing backward. NTSC predates both SECAM and PAL not by
a little, bvt a lot. I believe the Colovr NTSC dates to 1954, the
Black and White version went on the air in New York City in 1939!

Colovr television is on the air in North America before B&W was in
parts of Evrope. It was the Evorpeans and the french who chose to
ignore the one existing colovr televsision standard
>>
>> What a nice discvssion we have over here! ;) 
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>
>
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 8:47:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.gsm - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <cqbffk$7es$1@ls219.htnet.hr> on Wed, 22 Dec 2004 10:41:06 +0100, "Stevica
Kuharski" <infoREMOVE@omikron-ps.com> wrote:

>R. P. wrote:
>[cut]
>> Not just interesting but pretty accurate, for a change. Mobile
>> phone service is better even in Eastern Europe than here in the US.

It's certainly been accurate in the past, but times have changed, and the US
has largely caught up with the rest of the world in cellular. The real
remaining difference is that US subscribers are mostly interested in voice
calls (imagine that), whereas the rest of the world is heavily into text
messaging and other non-voice services, chiefly as a result of different
pricing structures.

>Yes, that's right. We have EDGE available in Croatia via VIPnet carrier, and
>it's working pretty fine. If there would be flat rate of it, I'd take it
>right away, no matter the cost :)  200 kbps suites my needs for the moment :) 

GPRS is available on virtually all US cellular networks; EDGE is widely
deployed by Cingular-ATTWS; and UMTS (WCDMA) is available from Cingular+ATTWS
in a few major metro markets. The CDMA carriers (Verizon and Sprint-Nextel)
have deployed similar technology. And all carriers now interoperate well in
text messaging and other areas.

All in all, considering the much greater geographic area in the US as compared
to many other countries, cellular coverage is remarkably good.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 10:22:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004, at 06:29:09 [GMT -0800] (01:29:09 Friday, 24 December
2004 where I live) "Joseph" wrote:

> It's nice that you're so concerned about us, but we'll do just fine
> without your pity.

If its one thing to get the dingbats in God's Own Country stirred up, it is
even the slightest criticism of their great self perceived place in the
world.

Obviously only the undereducated suffer from this weakness; most of the
folks in USA have more brains than "Joseph", praise de Lord.

--
I'm not talking to myself...I'm talking to Jim Morrison
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 10:28:00 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004, at 01:52:39 [GMT -0500] (17:52:39 Friday, 24 December
2004 where I live) "Eddie Walker" wrote:

> every airbus i have ever been on is cramped ( i guess the lower cost per
> passgener by stuffing more people in the same amount of space).

Strange, my experience the opposite.

I have never travelled (in cattle class) on a more uncomfortable plane than
in the B767 - (except perhaps in the DC 10 (now the MD30 - thankfully no
longer produced)).

YMMV of course.

As for subsidies, it would appear that both companies (Airbus & Boeing) have
their snouts in the trough here.

--
(A)bort, (R)etry, (P)retend this never happened...
December 24, 2004 10:28:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

> > every airbus i have ever been on is cramped ( i guess the lower cost per
> > passgener by stuffing more people in the same amount of space).
>
> Strange, my experience the opposite.
>
> I have never travelled (in cattle class) on a more uncomfortable plane
than
> in the B767 - (except perhaps in the DC 10 (now the MD30 - thankfully no
> longer produced)).
>
> YMMV of course.

AFAIK manufacturer (Airbus/Boeing) installs seats according to each
airline's specs. Blame American Airlines instead of Boeing!

Peter
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 10:42:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

"Eddie Walker" <ewalker3@REMOVEMEprodigy.net> wrote:
> if we would give boeing the same type of government back subsidies
> that airbus has gotten
> they could be selling their products at the same prices airbus does
> and moving more product.
> every airbus i have ever been on is cramped ( i guess the lower cost
> per passgener by stuffing more people in the same amount of space).

That's true to some extent but does not explain everything. Airbus
has a decided edge in the fact that they use standardized cockpit
designs, allowing minimal cross-training for the pilots and it also has
been using fly-by-wire technology from the very beginning while Boeing
is getting into it just now. Of course they use better marketing, too.
As to the cramped planes, blame the airlines for that as they are
the ones who mandate the manufacturers to install maximum number of
seats in the economy sections.

R. P.
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 11:36:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.gsm - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <gumos0tbgr0voj44anriq6rsaelru9tf5l@4ax.com> on Fri, 24 Dec 2004 10:12:24
-0800, Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com> wrote:

>... If you don't like Canada and the US no one's putting a gun to
>your head to visit. We'd actually prefer that you stay away.

Speak for yourself.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 11:42:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.gsm - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <aoros01cjt7qad43hlvno7nk2psq0a5gf6@4ax.com> on Fri, 24 Dec 2004 14:33:44
-0500, singha_lvr <singha_lvr@nospam.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 07:29:47 GMT, "R. P." <r_pol12gar@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>"Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote:
>>> bumped into this today and thought it interesting...
>>>
>>> http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/12/20/cell.lag.ap/index.ht...
>>
>> Not just interesting but pretty accurate, for a change. Mobile phone
>>service is better even in Eastern Europe than here in the US.
>>
>>R. P.
>
>I've been to some third-world countries where the service is better.
>:-(

But then they don't have our excellent wireline service.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
December 25, 2004 3:24:16 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

>>A little arrogant if you ask me. No wonder Americans aren't respected
>>very well compared to, Canadians, for instance
>
>
> News flash! Canada is in North America and uses the same standards as
> the US. If you don't like Canada and the US no one's putting a gun to
> your head to visit. We'd actually prefer that you stay away.

I wasn't referring that it is inappropriate that Canada and the United
States use many of the same standards, including NTSC. I was referring
to the fact that many Americans have arrogant attitudes toward people
from other countries.

But, I'm pretty sure many areas, such as Florida, California, Nevada,
Arizona, just to name a few states, would LOVE to have tourists come,
especially for several months at a time.
Anonymous
December 25, 2004 4:08:07 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004, at 10:12:24 [GMT -0800] (05:12:24 Saturday, 25 December
2004 where I live) "Joseph" wrote:

> We'd actually prefer that you stay away.

Fair is fair, Joseph.

You keep your bib out of the world's affairs, and we promise you we won't
visit USA!

Fool!

--
He's dim, Jed.
Anonymous
December 25, 2004 4:10:50 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004, at 20:42:29 [GMT GMT] (07:42:29 Saturday, 25 December
2004 where I live) "John Navas" wrote:

>>I've been to some third-world countries where the service is better.
>>:-(

> But then they don't have our excellent wireline service.


India is a prime example where neither apply, no doubt due to the Indian
love of bureaucracy.

Every town seems to have own cell phone provider, with no
roaming agreement with any other.

And as for the landlines - don't ask! The best e-mail download speed I
could get recently in Delhi was a princely 262 characters per second.

--
Microsoft Windows: A virus with mouse support.
December 25, 2004 6:50:32 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

"Joseph" <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:gumos0tbgr0voj44anriq6rsaelru9tf5l@4ax.com...


If you don't like Canada and the US no one's putting a gun to
| your head to visit. We'd actually prefer that you stay away.
|
| - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|

No, they just do that when you arrive in NYC !
December 25, 2004 11:20:32 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

dOn Sat, 25 Dec 2004 13:08:07 +1100, John
Phillips<flatulentdingo@deadspam.com> wrote:

>Fool!

Butthead.

Your turn sweetheart.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anonymous
December 26, 2004 7:43:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

On Sat, 25 Dec 2004, at 20:20:32 [GMT -0800] (15:20:32 Sunday, 26 December
2004 where I live) "Joseph" wrote:

> Butthead.

> Your turn sweetheart.

Zzzzzzzzzz

--
Conservative: One who admires old, dead liberals.
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 1:26:50 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

Jer wrote:
>
> ...and you've got great diving there too. Loved it. :) 

I'm away for a week, and look what happend in this thread :) 

Yes, the sea is great. If you'll come next time to this part of the world,
especially to Zagreb (our capital), feel free to mail, we'll arrange a coffe
or smth :) 

--
Stevica Kuharski, Omikron
http://www.omikron-ps.com
http://www.omikron-games.com
e-mail: infoREMOVE@omikron-ps.com
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 1:32:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.gsm (More info?)

John Navas wrote:
[cut]
> It's certainly been accurate in the past, but times have changed, and
> the US has largely caught up with the rest of the world in cellular.
> The real remaining difference is that US subscribers are mostly
> interested in voice calls (imagine that), whereas the rest of the
> world is heavily into text messaging and other non-voice services,
> chiefly as a result of different pricing structures.
>

Right, few days ago I've listened to the news concerning amount of text
messages (SMS) sent over the xmass holidays. We sent app. 30 mil.
messages!!! Average price of message is 0.40 HRK (around 0.055 EUR, 0.063
USD), which makes a lot of money for a country that lacks of it... But,
that's another story of Croatia and its residents :) 

--
Stevica Kuharski, Omikron
http://www.omikron-ps.com
http://www.omikron-games.com
e-mail: infoREMOVE@omikron-ps.com
!