If you are unhappy about the cellphone situation in the USA, created by a mess of incompatible standards, complain to your representatives: assuming you have the right to vote here, and that you did vote, then write to them and tell them why you think they should have acted differently about regulating the wireless/cellphone market.
If you only complain on/., it won't help much. Not that writing them will change the current situation, but maybe they'll act differently in the future. Maybe.
I assume the same goes for Canada? How's the cellphone market there? Is the entire North-American continent incompatible with the rest of the world?
Which reminds me, how come most of the time GSM/GPRS is mentioned in US press, it's referred to as the standard mostly used in Europe and Asia or something similar? AFAIK, most of Africa uses it too, and Australia &c. So it's everyone but North-America - or is South American wireless market just as messed up?
this is likely; anywhere except in the North-American market: unlike anywhere else in the world, the US &c. cellphone companies (even those owned or controlled by European companies, like VoiceStream and Verizon), offer either:
1-year contracts (high penalties if you quit earlier), or
too high per-minute charges and expiration periods too shorton pre-paid cards
there is, therefore, very little incentive to just have a couple of SIM chips around, as it can be conveniently done in other countries.
I was hoping for the non-US companies to change things once they start buying the scattered North-American ones, but apparently it has not happened yet. Oh well, a few years to catch up with more mature markets...
Another preview dated Sept 16. of the 3650 is to be found at GSMBOX and of course at all their other sites, including the original one.
They english translation says that it's targeted at European, Asian and North American markets however, being a 3-band GSM it means that it'll work quite everywhere in the world except in Japan: all across Africa for example, and in South America too.
As in the original article it'll be initially marketed in those 3 continents, but nothing prevents it from being sold and used anywhere else.
Curiously enough, non-GSM users are left out for now. Hopefully, at least in the North-American continent, the (late) conversion to GSM by AT&T will speed up the conversion of the last 30% of the world maket to the dominant global standard.
not only that: Macs just work - and most of the time they work the way you expect them to work. How many years did it take to M$ to standardize edit-keys on their products? And to close a window there you still use alt-F4... WTF?
Macs:
just work
work intuitively (most of the time)
work consistently
.I don't know any other GUI which would do the same.
The only other comparable attitude by a consumer population that I can think of exists in the motorcyle world. Harley Davidson riders are passionate about their bikes and The Motor Company, even if they own bikes by other manufacturers. *Most* other bikers really couldn't care if their bikes were Hondas/Suzuki/Yamahas/Triumphs/BMW.
On this one, I must disagree: I think that someone who buys a BMW motorbike (maybe not in the US of A, but certainly in EU and elsewhere) wants a BMW. The only reason I had a Suzi and not a BMW was money (a K-750 was more than twice the dough than the Katana). I would not have bought a HD in Europe even if I could have spent the money - but that's a matter not only of taste but also of suitability: HD are probably designed for highways in the USA, certainly not for German, Italian, etc. highways where people drive 150-200km/h, i.e. more than twice as fast as people in the USA.
With your Dude, never had to sign a contract, you are a fool, Anyone who shops around, and sadly out of date, it seems to me you are trolling.
If you can show me one cellular phone I could use in the USA without signign a contract - e.g. a prepaid service, which has comparable rates to yearly subscription plans, and does not expire its minutes montly (something like Omnitel's prepaid cards) I would really like to know about it, to use it myself.
But if you can provide no link, no pointer, no real information, sorry, you're just trolling, AC.
the landline system in the usa/canada is far more reliable and inexpensive than in most other countries
I've heared this argument from other USians before, and I honestly do not understand whether they've never been to other similar countries (other G7 countries for example) or what else makes them think that landline systems are less reliable elsewhere.
I also do not understand what landline has to do with cellphones: I never used my cellphone to call while at home or in the office (while in Europe that is). The cellphone is for when you're outside, obviously. And for other people to reach you no matter where you are.
Cellphones are not used instead of fixed-landline-phones. They are simply another thing which complements the previous one. You don't use the TV instead of your radio, right? The 2 complement each other.
I don't buy it.
What is it that you don't want to buy, my opinions or a cellphone in the U S of A?:-)
I don't think you use a cell phone in the US,
OK, I can't give you my phone numbers here, sorry, but if you are curious, I have 2 cellphones which I can use here - a 3-band 7389P with a sim@ctiva prepaid - which has 0 monthly fee and allows me to send/receive email through SMS gateways, only what I use on it gets charged on a credit card - no bills etc. And the cheapest GSM combo in the USA - A VoiceStream $20 plan with the Nokia 5190, for local calls etc. So I know what I am talking about: I travel quite a bit around the world...and about GSM in the USA, I can tell you all you want to know about the annoying unusable AT&T GSM signal which is interfering with VoiceStream's one, problem about which neither company claims to be able to do much at the moment, and is extremely annoying expecially for people who'd roam on either network anyway.
but rather are just spouting BS you read in some European paper (especially when you spell "Myths" as "Mythes."
Sorry, I am not a native English speaker, and I had posted that msg from my PBG4 using Omniweb, which gives me spell checking for free, and it suggested it that way - try it out for yourself if you don't believe me. BTW, how much do you know about cellphone access/prices/plans/coverage etc. outside the USA, kid?
Damn near everyone in the country already has a land line and most people have access to a computer online (if they don't already one at least one or two.)
Damn or not, I don't see what this has to do with the cellphone use. I have landline, home and work fast internet access, and GSM, in both countries/continents. So?
I forgot the 4th reason (IMHO again) why the cellphone market is so much behind here (USA is my here at the moment): in the USA people tend to be either indoors or in a car most of the time: and much less time spent outdoors/socializing/etc than in other countries (in my own personal statistic which includes only about 30 countries in the 4 continents where I've been sofar).
Here are, IMHO, the reasons for the cellphone/wireless phone/mobile phone situation in the USA being so far behind in technology, widespread use, acceptance and cost, compared to pretty much anywhere else in the world:
In USA there are 4-5 competing standards: that means that if you switch provider, you likely have to change your phone - anywhere else (curiously, except in Japan) there is GSM. In EU each country had its own standard so when you had to travel, your phone did not work anymore (I remember still in 1992 using an analog phone while sailing... nice, except when you reached another coast of the Mediterranean, you had no coverage anymore) . Since mobile phones are obviously useful when traveling, in 1987, GSM standard was defined and cellphone providers never looked back. BY 1993 it began to be implemented.
Anywhere else, except in the USA, you don't pay to receive calls - you don't have to choose a monthly-fee-based plan if you don't want to, and prepaid cards have similar cost to plans (and expire in 1 year, not in 1 month!). In brief, you pay only what you use!
In the USA you have to subscribe to a plan for a year, and if you unsubscribe, you pay huge penalties.
There are several mythes about why in the USA things "have to" work this way, but these are, indeed, just mythes. Size, density of the population, etc etc etc. are just excuses for a market which, unlike other markets, in the USA has succumbed to wrong strategies.
In any other market, similar threatening conditions would not be tolerated:
would you agree to have your home phone service subject to a 1-yr min. contract, effectively preventing you from switching providers?
would you like to have a TV market where you have to buy an new TV set (with a different video standard) if you move from NY to LA?
would you like to have to pay for incoming long-distance phone calls at home?
strangely enough, people who use wireless phones in the USA are subject to such rules, unlike anywhere else in the world.
With such conditions, it's not strange that the cellular phone market is in such a bad shape. It's surprising it's not in a worse one!
I spent about the same for a used Merc 200E and a used Honda Civic (in different countries, before you ask, and in very different circumstances).
The 200E is slightly older, with less mileage. The difference between the two is... well, no: the difference between my PBG4 running Mac OS X and a Sony Vaio running Windows is bigger:
Although I obviously prefer driving the Mercedes over the Honda (the 200E feels, drives, looks, etc so much better than the Civic), everytime I have to use the Windows laptop I - well, I just prefer not to do it.
Slashdot Mirror
If you only complain on /., it won't help much. Not that writing them will change the current situation, but maybe they'll act differently in the future. Maybe.
I assume the same goes for Canada? How's the cellphone market there? Is the entire North-American continent incompatible with the rest of the world?
Which reminds me, how come most of the time GSM/GPRS is mentioned in US press, it's referred to as the standard mostly used in Europe and Asia or something similar? AFAIK, most of Africa uses it too, and Australia &c. So it's everyone but North-America - or is South American wireless market just as messed up?
-
1-year contracts (high penalties if you quit earlier), or
- too high per-minute charges and expiration periods too shorton pre-paid cards
there is, therefore, very little incentive to just have a couple of SIM chips around, as it can be conveniently done in other countries.I was hoping for the non-US companies to change things once they start buying the scattered North-American ones, but apparently it has not happened yet. Oh well, a few years to catch up with more mature markets...
They english translation says that it's targeted at European, Asian and North American markets however, being a 3-band GSM it means that it'll work quite everywhere in the world except in Japan: all across Africa for example, and in South America too.
As in the original article it'll be initially marketed in those 3 continents, but nothing prevents it from being sold and used anywhere else.
Curiously enough, non-GSM users are left out for now. Hopefully, at least in the North-American continent, the (late) conversion to GSM by AT&T will speed up the conversion of the last 30% of the world maket to the dominant global standard.
However the next day, on the 21st, it appeared again with the same name; I reinstalled it and rebooted the machine again. Now it seems to be fine.
Anyone else experienced this?
not only that: Macs just work - and most of the time they work the way you expect them to work. How many years did it take to M$ to standardize edit-keys on their products? And to close a window there you still use alt-F4 ... WTF?
Macs:
The only other comparable attitude by a consumer population that I can think of exists in the motorcyle world. Harley Davidson riders are passionate about their bikes and The Motor Company, even if they own bikes by other manufacturers. *Most* other bikers really couldn't care if their bikes were Hondas/Suzuki/Yamahas/Triumphs/BMW.
On this one, I must disagree: I think that someone who buys a BMW motorbike (maybe not in the US of A, but certainly in EU and elsewhere) wants a BMW. The only reason I had a Suzi and not a BMW was money (a K-750 was more than twice the dough than the Katana). I would not have bought a HD in Europe even if I could have spent the money - but that's a matter not only of taste but also of suitability: HD are probably designed for highways in the USA, certainly not for German, Italian, etc. highways where people drive 150-200km/h, i.e. more than twice as fast as people in the USA.
And what about another wireless communication inventor
Memories from Xinu days make me think that such a name for another OS would upset Dr.Comer.
Or they can steal a little bit of Apple history and go with: Mac OS XIa aIX.
In this case it's IBM who'd get upset. Were you thinking of another Apple OS?
If you can show me one cellular phone I could use in the USA without signign a contract - e.g. a prepaid service, which has comparable rates to yearly subscription plans, and does not expire its minutes montly (something like Omnitel's prepaid cards) I would really like to know about it, to use it myself.
But if you can provide no link, no pointer, no real information, sorry, you're just trolling, AC.
I've heared this argument from other USians before, and I honestly do not understand whether they've never been to other similar countries (other G7 countries for example) or what else makes them think that landline systems are less reliable elsewhere.
I also do not understand what landline has to do with cellphones: I never used my cellphone to call while at home or in the office (while in Europe that is). The cellphone is for when you're outside, obviously. And for other people to reach you no matter where you are.
Cellphones are not used instead of fixed-landline-phones. They are simply another thing which complements the previous one. You don't use the TV instead of your radio, right? The 2 complement each other.
What is it that you don't want to buy, my opinions or a cellphone in the U S of A?
I don't think you use a cell phone in the US, ...and about GSM in the USA, I can tell you all you want to know about the annoying unusable AT&T GSM signal which is interfering with VoiceStream's one, problem about which neither company claims to be able to do much at the moment, and is extremely annoying expecially for people who'd roam on either network anyway.
OK, I can't give you my phone numbers here, sorry, but if you are curious, I have 2 cellphones which I can use here - a 3-band 7389P with a sim@ctiva prepaid - which has 0 monthly fee and allows me to send/receive email through SMS gateways, only what I use on it gets charged on a credit card - no bills etc. And the cheapest GSM combo in the USA - A VoiceStream $20 plan with the Nokia 5190, for local calls etc. So I know what I am talking about: I travel quite a bit around the world
but rather are just spouting BS you read in some European paper (especially when you spell "Myths" as "Mythes."
Sorry, I am not a native English speaker, and I had posted that msg from my PBG4 using Omniweb, which gives me spell checking for free, and it suggested it that way - try it out for yourself if you don't believe me. BTW, how much do you know about cellphone access/prices/plans/coverage etc. outside the USA, kid?
Damn near everyone in the country already has a land line and most people have access to a computer online (if they don't already one at least one or two.)
Damn or not, I don't see what this has to do with the cellphone use. I have landline, home and work fast internet access, and GSM, in both countries/continents. So?
I forgot the 4th reason (IMHO again) why the cellphone market is so much behind here (USA is my here at the moment): in the USA people tend to be either indoors or in a car most of the time: and much less time spent outdoors/socializing/etc than in other countries (in my own personal statistic which includes only about 30 countries in the 4 continents where I've been sofar).
see my other reply to this topic.
- In USA there are 4-5 competing standards: that means that if you switch provider, you likely have to change your phone - anywhere else (curiously, except in Japan) there is GSM.
- Anywhere else, except in the USA, you don't pay to receive calls - you don't have to choose a monthly-fee-based plan if you don't want to, and prepaid cards have similar cost to plans (and expire in 1 year, not in 1 month!). In brief, you pay only what you use!
- In the USA you have to subscribe to a plan for a year, and if you unsubscribe, you pay huge penalties.
There are several mythes about why in the USA things "have to" work this way, but these are, indeed, just mythes. Size, density of the population, etc etc etc. are just excuses for a market which, unlike other markets, in the USA has succumbed to wrong strategies.In EU each country had its own standard so when you had to travel, your phone did not work anymore (I remember still in 1992 using an analog phone while sailing... nice, except when you reached another coast of the Mediterranean, you had no coverage anymore) . Since mobile phones are obviously useful when traveling, in 1987, GSM standard was defined and cellphone providers never looked back. BY 1993 it began to be implemented.
In any other market, similar threatening conditions would not be tolerated:
- would you agree to have your home phone service subject to a 1-yr min. contract, effectively preventing you from switching providers?
- would you like to have a TV market where you have to buy an new TV set (with a different video standard) if you move from NY to LA?
- would you like to have to pay for incoming long-distance phone calls at home?
strangely enough, people who use wireless phones in the USA are subject to such rules, unlike anywhere else in the world.With such conditions, it's not strange that the cellular phone market is in such a bad shape. It's surprising it's not in a worse one!
The 200E is slightly older, with less mileage. The difference between the two is ... well, no: the difference between my PBG4 running Mac OS X and a Sony Vaio running Windows is bigger:
Although I obviously prefer driving the Mercedes over the Honda (the 200E feels, drives, looks, etc so much better than the Civic), everytime I have to use the Windows laptop I - well, I just prefer not to do it.
Wrong: as posted elsewhere, QuickTime relies on much more than the UNIX APIs of Mac OS X.
There's even QuickTime for Java, but that does not mean that you can use QuickTime on any platform which runs Java...
You mean "less" than just another unix.
No: more. Why would the choice of more APIs mean less than another UNIX?
Choice is good:
Fink
GNU-Darwin
Cocoa(AKA NeXTStep 5.0)
Carbon
Java
alternatives like Tcl/Tk, Qt, raw X11R6...