Page 3 of 10 12 3 45 Last »
Reply
Thread Tools
quipper8 is offline quipper8
2009-10-23 , 01:26
Posts: 1,096 | Thanked: 760 times | Joined on Dec 2008
#21
Originally Posted by Bruce View Post
Perhaps they will pass AT&T in 3G coverage but it would take a huge network expansion to pass AT&T in voice coverage.
I guess t-mobile and other carriers and even ISPs have decided that it is better to cover the highest number of people and not necessarily the largest square area.
 
Bratag is offline Bratag
2009-10-23 , 01:39
Posts: 2,014 | Thanked: 1,581 times | Joined on Sep 2009
#22
Originally Posted by toratoko View Post
Like the metric system? But I believe Fargus is right to the point with this one, these frequencies have been set as standards around the world to make life easier for consumers, I feel like it's only appropriate that they not waste extra money to customize it for a select few countries out of many.

That said, I do understand the AT&T dilemma because they are beautiful when it comes to voice coverage but anyone could have foreseen this problem a long time ago when they decided to stick with the 850 frequency route. You win some and you lose some...in the case of the N900, AT&T loses it's 3G compatibility since Nokia just didn't want to spend the extra cash.
The people suffering upwards of 30% call droppage on the iphone would beg to differ about at&t's voice coverage
__________________
Class .. : Power Poster, Potential Coder
Humor .. : [*********] Alignment: Chaotic Evil
Patience : [***-------] Weapon(s): +2 Logic Mace
Agro ... : |*****-----] Relic(s) : G1, N900
 
ohwut is offline ohwut
2009-10-23 , 04:16
Posts: 76 | Thanked: 33 times | Joined on Oct 2009 @ Portland, Or
#23
The iPhone has lead to a increase in AT&T's Networks data traffic by 5x in since it's release, as well as not being prepared this has turned into outages and a 30% dropped call rate being considered well within normal.

If AT&T users want to complain about not having 3g on a network that put bluntly can't handle it. Whats to stop the Verizon users to demand one, they have a larger user base, more coverage both 3g and voice with FREE roaming on Sprints network, and arguably faster 3g, and the phone could be built with GSM 3g and CDMA if they really wanted.

They chose 1700mhz for a reason obviously, lets find out why.
 
giodelgado is offline giodelgado
2009-10-23 , 05:27
Posts: 25 | Thanked: 4 times | Joined on Sep 2009 @ California, USA
#24
Originally Posted by ohwut View Post
The iPhone has lead to a increase in AT&T's Networks data traffic by 5x in since it's release, as well as not being prepared this has turned into outages and a 30% dropped call rate being considered well within normal.

If AT&T users want to complain about not having 3g on a network that put bluntly can't handle it. Whats to stop the Verizon users to demand one, they have a larger user base, more coverage both 3g and voice with FREE roaming on Sprints network, and arguably faster 3g, and the phone could be built with GSM 3g and CDMA if they really wanted.

They chose 1700mhz for a reason obviously, lets find out why.
I could understand that they want a network that doesn't have the limitations that the Apple phone has gotten lately with the user traffic jams, but Tmo coverage isn't the best in comparison to ATT and others, installing more towers would be the best move.
 
ohwut is offline ohwut
2009-10-23 , 05:57
Posts: 76 | Thanked: 33 times | Joined on Oct 2009 @ Portland, Or
#25
Originally Posted by giodelgado View Post
I could understand that they want a network that doesn't have the limitations that the Apple phone has gotten lately with the user traffic jams, but Tmo coverage isn't the best in comparison to ATT and others, installing more towers would be the best move.
Of course the other national carriers have better coverage, but of course they also have twice as many subscribers so it makes pretty good sense. Personally I love my T-Mobile 3g coverage, I actually have one phone on every national carrier other than Sprint at the moment and generally get AT&T and T-Mobile 3g everywhere I go, the only variation I ever see is in highly rural areas where occasionally AT&T has 3g(rarely) and T-Mobile only has EDGE, as well as maybe 1-2bars difference in certain areas.

But I also love my T-Mobile 3g, I have a MyTouch 3g on T-Mobile, a BlackBerry Bold on AT&T with a Touch Pro 2 on Verizon(Who blows away AT&T in coverage). My MyTouch consistently has lower pings and faster network speed than the others when I do have 3g, this is of course just my opinion though I did some pretty specific testing. I've just always feel More isn't always Better. Toyota Pickup's go everywhere and always work vs BMW M3, can't go off-road, but where and when it runs you never look back.
 
ordxpres is offline ordxpres
2009-10-23 , 06:16
Posts: 17 | Thanked: 0 times | Joined on Mar 2008 @ Chicago
#26
Originally Posted by kryptoniankid17 View Post
the same question could be asked in reverse for my n95, n97 and e71 why didnt they make those work for tmobile? why did i have to suffer?
HIGH FIVE... Suffering T-Mobile user here
 
Fargus's Avatar
Fargus is offline Fargus
2009-10-23 , 06:29
Posts: 1,217 | Thanked: 446 times | Joined on Oct 2009 @ Bedfordshire, UK
#27
Originally Posted by ohwut View Post
The iPhone has lead to a increase in AT&T's Networks data traffic by 5x in since it's release, as well as not being prepared this has turned into outages and a 30% dropped call rate being considered well within normal.

If AT&T users want to complain about not having 3g on a network that put bluntly can't handle it. Whats to stop the Verizon users to demand one, they have a larger user base, more coverage both 3g and voice with FREE roaming on Sprints network, and arguably faster 3g, and the phone could be built with GSM 3g and CDMA if they really wanted.

They chose 1700mhz for a reason obviously, lets find out why.
I'd echo the increased data usage relating to iPhone usage. Anyone in the UK on O2 will notice a huge difference in data rates when entering London and it seems to be since the iPhone arrived. Look out Orange users in the UK: apparently you're neta lol.

Regarding the frequencies, Wikipedia seems to show the allocation of frequencies around the world with a few comments stating that certain frequencies were already allocated. I suspect for true global assignment it would take a lot of disruption so hence the continued divergance.

If it's any consolation to our US conterparts, we find it annoying too across the board for lots of things coming back the other way so probably levels out in the end. Sure if enough people wanted them to do so AT&T would start using other frequencies too. Maybe time to get the other carriers to increase coverage? Easier in europe to make the case I suppose with higher population density.
 
aroca1978 is offline aroca1978
2009-10-27 , 03:07
Posts: 1 | Thanked: 1 time | Joined on Oct 2009
#28
Well the problem is not limited only to US and AT&T.... please don't be so blind as a lot of countries are using the same 3G frequencies (850 and 1900). In example, almost all Latin America, which is (and has been for years) one of the most important market shares for Nokia, Australia and Canada are other examples of countries using 850 and 1900 for 3G.

So, I really don't understand why they (Nokia) suddenly decided to launch such a great device, excluding a lot of countries from using 3.5G on it.

Could somebody explain me?

Thank you
 

The Following User Says Thank You to aroca1978 For This Useful Post:
les_garten is offline les_garten
2009-10-27 , 03:12
Posts: 1,283 | Thanked: 370 times | Joined on Sep 2009 @ South Florida
#29
Originally Posted by aroca1978 View Post
Well the problem is not limited only to US and AT&T.... please don't be so blind as a lot of countries are using the same 3G frequencies (850 and 1900). In example, almost all Latin America, which is (and has been for years) one of the most important market shares for Nokia, Australia and Canada are other examples of countries using 850 and 1900 for 3G.

So, I really don't understand why they (Nokia) suddenly decided to launch such a great device, excluding a lot of countries from using 3.5G on it.

Could somebody explain me?

Thank you
Do you think T-Mobile could offer that good a deal?
 
Johnx's Avatar
Johnx is offline Johnx
2009-10-27 , 04:14
Posts: 643 | Thanked: 628 times | Joined on Mar 2007 @ Seattle (or thereabouts)
#30
@Bruce: Out of curiosity, how long ago do you think they made the decision to support T-Mobile USA's 3G bands? and how long do you think almost entirely finished N900 hardware has existed? I'm just saying, this stuff was almost certainly pretty set in stone (for this device at least) months (or maybe even a year or more) ago. And also, whether you like their reasoning or not, and even disregarding whether it's the right choice or not, do you really think they made the decision lightly? I'm coming off a bit harsh, and that's not my intention. But, just try to put yourself in Peter's shoes: Would you suggest at the last minute that you want to delay the device 6 months or a year, spending millions of dollars reengineering and retesting based on the advice of someone on an internet forum? (Yup, re-reading this it does sound a lot sharper than I intended it, but I don't really know how else to word this, and I think it does help to think about things from this perspective...)


-John
 

The Following User Says Thank You to Johnx For This Useful Post:
Reply
Page 3 of 10 12 3 45 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:13.

Contact Us - Home - Archive - Top