Over 2.5 Billion Cellular Connections Now Active

An anonymous reader writes "It appears that humankind has managed to spread cellular technology like a virus. About 2.5 billion cellular connections exist in the world today, according to an estimate from the GSM Association. It took 20 years to reach 1 billion connections, three years to reach 2 billion connections and the market is moving to reach its third billion in a period of just over two years. Not surprisingly, the countries with fastest growth are the 'emerging nations.'"

Comments

Some more facts:

[tanveer1979]

I spent a small amount of time in the US, and surprisingly the tarrif structure and the talk time etc., plans available in India are far better than in the US. In broadband access developed nations have lot of lead over developing ones, maybe because to have good connectivity you require undersea cables as most of the servers are in west, but in case of cellular connections countries like India are way ahead of the US/Europe, and very soon 3G deployment will be mainstream.

Re:Some more facts:

[pimpimpim]

Why are all the people lauding the european cell network here? I agree the quality is ok, but the pricing is ridiculous. Calling to a mobile phone can be up to 20 cent or more, say 20 times more than a normal phone call. Also, since there are so many small countries in europe, providers earn a shitload of money on 'roaming' costs, even when the same companies are present in almost all countries by now. It has nothing to do with actual costs anymore, but only with how much they can get away with to ask. The fact that there is 'competition' isn't helping much out here, as they silently make sure not to underbid their competitors too much.

Re:similar

[jkburges]

Actually, I think it might be exponential - since for each extra person talking on a phone, each individual feels the need to speak a bit louder, and hence total volume goes up exponentially.

Re:Lack of infrastructure

[MichaelSmith]

Part of the reason mobile phone ownership growing so fast in 3rd world countries is the lack of infrastructure

About ten years ago I was shown a factory here in Melbourne where analog cellular phones were being built into bulky units for sale in Chile. The idea is that it is cheaper to put a cellular phone in every house and a base station every 10km or so, than to trench all the way to every house.

Re:Fact:Metcalfe's Law Explains Cell-Phone Popular

[cowbutt]

Metcalfe's Law explains well why a cellular network grows rapidly.

Not really, as you can dial into and out of the cellular network from/to an existing landline network.

People buy mobile phones because they see value in them; whether that's witnessing first hand the usefulness of being able to be contacted (nearly) anywhere on the planet, or simply being seen to be important enough to have a mobile phone. The value isn't really brought from the network itself, though.

Bollocks

[EnglishTim]

That makes no sense at all. Huge numbers are already connected to the phone network via their landlines. The reason mobiles are so popular in emerging nations is that it's much cheaper to set up a cell in an area and sell people mobiles than it is to lay cable to everybody's house.

Re:Fact:Metcalfe's Law Explains Cell-Phone Popular

[thesandtiger]

Not only is what you're saying not a fact, it's a complete misapplication of Metcalfe's idea.

People who had a landline were already connected to the network - getting a cell gives no value from the viewpoint of giving access to the network.

The primary reason cell use has spread so much - specifically in "emerging" nations - is because it is MUCH cheaper to set up a cellular system and spread access than it is to do with landlines.

Another big reason would be the mix of convenience and quality of service. In my case, I ditched my landline 2 years ago because it was pointless. I like having a phone with me all the time. If I want to be unavailable, I can put it on silent mode. A phone that sits at home - a place where I spend maybe 4 waking hours a day - just seemed pointless. I don't think I'm the only person who thinks that way.

My hope is that since cells are now virtually everywhere, people who used to feel the need to talk at the top of their lungs to let everyone know they had one will now see it as a sign of class to speak softly on them. I am doing my best to encourage people to do just that - when I am on the bus or train and someone is having a LOUD conversation on their phone, I will look at them raptly, and, if they ever fall silent, I will say "Oooh, what's he saying now?" When they inevitably say something along the lines of "this is a private conversation" I explain that, at the volume they were speaking, it was anything but. Of course, I say it with a great deal of charm, so I have yet to be bopped in the nose.