| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 78767 | 2007-04-27 23:52:00 | Telecom Cell Phone Selection (Hopeless) | Marshman (7857) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 544815 | 2007-04-29 14:28:00 | Jams, read the post above. Telecom have no choice in the matter of the phones available for CDMA. The major manufacturers will not build a CDMA phone for small volumes world-wide, there are major differences in the hardware between the two networks. They backed the wrong horse several years ago. To suddenly change now has significant operational and financial ramifications, such as a complete new network. This Jim Beam is giving only allowing me to see what i want to see. |
Jams (1051) | ||
| 544816 | 2007-04-29 21:23:00 | No reputable manufacturer wishes to be associated with Telecon, due to laws about consorting with known miscreants. And, for dividing up Telescum, how about introducing the board members to Madam Guillotine? ;) |
R2x1 (4628) | ||
| 544817 | 2007-04-29 22:02:00 | The "Government" never required two different network types . Telecom opted to run a CDMA system when they upgraded their AMPs system, Bell South saw the opportunity to use GSM and compete when telecom still used AMPS . The "Government" wouldn't let Telecom aquire both the AMPs bands and the frequencies that BellSouth later used for GSM . The American influence in Telecom saw more future in the AMPs CDMA upgrade path than GSM . The development of the GSM standard started in the early 80s so by 2000 it was looking old . Unfortunately one company holds the majority of the CDMA patents and charges substantial license fees . This probably slowed the uptake of CDMA around the world . |
PaulD (232) | ||
| 544818 | 2007-04-30 02:04:00 | The "Government" never required two different network types. Telecom opted to run a CDMA system when they upgraded their AMPs system, Bell South saw the opportunity to use GSM and compete when telecom still used AMPS. It is a pity Telecom never opted for GSM as well, then we would have real competition as we could in many cases use the same handset and just a different SIM card. H You most likely would have had locked handsets like overseas.. |
paulw (1826) | ||
| 544819 | 2007-04-30 02:07:00 | Hence I mentioned "many" cases and not "all" cases, as any subsidised handset would be service provider locked. But you would have been able to buy the "handset only" then choose the provider. But it never happened. |
godfather (25) | ||
| 544820 | 2007-04-30 02:19:00 | The "Government" never required two different network types. Telecom opted to run a CDMA system when they upgraded their AMPs system, Bell South saw the opportunity to use GSM and compete when telecom still used AMPS. From a recent Domainion Post article, Telecom actually quoted that the government required telecom to setup a different mobile infrastructure from Bellsouths GSM network. Nevertheless, the doubling of the infrastructure has led to a lack of competition and more costs for the end user. Really there should just be one infrastructure that is shared, like it is in other countries. |
robbyp (2751) | ||
| 544821 | 2007-04-30 02:23:00 | They backed the wrong horse several years ago. To suddenly change now has significant operational and financial ramifications, such as a complete new network. Well if that is the case, then NZ will unlikely see any further major investment from telecom in the ADSL infrastructure. Instead telecom will invest their Yellow pages funds in something that will see a decent return on their investment, such as their mobile network. |
robbyp (2751) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||