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

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.html

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
42 answers Last reply
More about from lags developed world
  1. 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.html

    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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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
  4. 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'
  5. 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
  6. 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
    >
    >
  7. 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.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  8. 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.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  9. 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.
  10. 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'
  11. 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
  12. 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.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  13. 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.
  14. 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.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  15. 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
  16. 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.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  17. 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
    >
    >
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. 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).
  21. 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_standards2.htm


    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  22. 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.
    >
    > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  23. 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.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  24. 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.html
    >
    > 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.
    :-(
  25. 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>
  26. 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!
  27. 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
    >>
    >>
    >
  28. 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>
  29. 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
  30. 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...
  31. 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
  32. 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.
  33. 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>
  34. 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.html
    >>
    >> 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>
  35. 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.
  36. 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.
  37. 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.
  38. 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 !
  39. 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.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  40. 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.
  41. 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
  42. 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
Ask a new question

Read More

GSM Email