Why someone would develop a product with GSM/GPRS that doesn't have a tri-band (900/1800/1900Mhz) radio chipset is beyond me. For sure, it costs a little more but mean less hardware localization. And when carriers actually get their shit, together...it gives you potenitally global roaming.
I'm sorry, but the Treo just seems to make the Blackberry range look pretty lame.
I'm not doubting the technical quality of the article (actually, I did...but that's for a different post). But the English (general grammer and syntax) seem pretty poor.
Why do website publications think they can get away with a poorer reading experience than a print rag could?
Microcell launched their GPRS service last year in Canada...first with a GPRS PCcard and then late last year with two Motorola GPRS handsets. So Verizon's achievement isn't all that stella...
Secondly, this isn't true 3G! It's 2.5G by the very nature that it's merely access to multiple channels for data transfer -- no other 3G call features or technology.
How come Rogers @Home service (for those of us up heere in Canada, eh) managed to transition all of their customers before November 30th? (They even gave away prizes between 22nd and 30th to encourage you to switch over your DNS and email settings).
Now, Rogers don't even have the reputation as the smartest cookies on the planet...so it really scares me that a supposed telco giant like AT&T find themselves in this mess.
Slashdot Mirror
Why someone would develop a product with GSM/GPRS that doesn't have a tri-band (900/1800/1900Mhz) radio chipset is beyond me. For sure, it costs a little more but mean less hardware localization. And when carriers actually get their shit, together...it gives you potenitally global roaming.
I'm sorry, but the Treo just seems to make the Blackberry range look pretty lame.
Just my $0.2.
My grocery store (Grocerygateway.com) tracks the fifty things I purchase most...let's me create multiple "favorites" shopping lists...etc...etc.
I hope you'll be happier than me playing Grand Theft Audo 3 on my PS2 (i.e. VERY happy!) :-)
I'm not doubting the technical quality of the article (actually, I did...but that's for a different post). But the English (general grammer and syntax) seem pretty poor.
Why do website publications think they can get away with a poorer reading experience than a print rag could?
Wouldn't it be cool if they played Stairway to Heaven on a tape loop in this thing...
Microcell launched their GPRS service last year in Canada...first with a GPRS PCcard and then late last year with two Motorola GPRS handsets. So Verizon's achievement isn't all that stella...
Secondly, this isn't true 3G! It's 2.5G by the very nature that it's merely access to multiple channels for data transfer -- no other 3G call features or technology.
How come Rogers @Home service (for those of us up heere in Canada, eh) managed to transition all of their customers before November 30th? (They even gave away prizes between 22nd and 30th to encourage you to switch over your DNS and email settings).
Now, Rogers don't even have the reputation as the smartest cookies on the planet...so it really scares me that a supposed telco giant like AT&T find themselves in this mess.
If chips were clockless, I'm sure that Intel and the various PeeCee manufacturers would have to re-think their marketing strategies.
(It was nice to see AMD trying to break away).
Dunno about the rest of you, but this link breaks for me...perhaps the TI/99 they're running the site on is overloaded? ;-)
-psyconaut