A mobile phone forum. Mobile-Forum

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Mobile-Forum forum » General mobile phone forums » GSM
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

USA are at least 2 to 3 years behind Europe cell phone

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 12th 04, 12:28 AM
R. P.
external usenet poster
Posts: n/a

"John S." wrote:
Because the frequencies that the rest of the world uses were already
in use for
other purposes here in the USA.

The carriers have to use what is available to them.

Well, that's a good reason, I admit.

Thanks for the explanation,

Old October 12th 04, 12:33 AM
R. P.
external usenet poster
Posts: n/a

"Simon Templar" wrote:
I reckon the reason for this is the STUPIDITY of the the US for going
GSM800/GSM850 (one and the same) instead of the WORLD standard of
GSM900. This is typical of the US having to do things their way!

As someone explained already, the reason was that the GSM 900 frequency
was already taken for other use in the US.

This is more than likely the reason for them not adopting GSM for many
years, simply because they did not invent it.

Well they have cut their noses off to spite their faces this time and
they are paying for it.

Hm, that's an un-Saint-like talk, IMHO. ;-)

R. P.

Old October 12th 04, 12:35 AM
matt weber
external usenet poster
Posts: n/a

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 02:30:06 GMT, "R. P."

"John Phillips" wrote:
Not correct. What do you base this on?

It is quite evident to any American who travels extensively in
Europe. The biggest barrier to cellphone penetration in the US are the
stupid plans, with expiration dates of unused units, all the extra
charges, etc. It's also not clear to me why the US GSM carrier
frequencies have to be different from the rest of the world unless the
purpose is to make it harder for Americans to buy their handsets in
Europe or other places where they are cheaper. True, one can buy
tri-band or quad phones, too, but they tend to be more expensive than
dual band phones with similar feature sets.


Stupid plans yes. Hidden charges yes (I count 11 different charges,
taxes and surchrages on a bill).

The problem with the bands in use is the USA had allocated most of the
900 Mhz and 1800 Mhz spectrum for other uses long before the
development of GSM, and that fact is well documents in the ITU
proceedings,(it isn't any secret at all). The secondary problem is
that we also have things called the Constitution (in spite of Mr.
Ashcrofts efforts to ignore large portions of it) that prohibits
taking without compensation. We the US carrier prepared to compensate
the existing the 900 Mhz users and replace their equipment to take
over that spectrum? The secondary problem is that there is a several
Mhz block that is unlicensed, and as a practical matter, it is almost
impossible to satisfactory recover unlicensed spectrum in less than a
decade. You cannot find the users, and it is next to impossible to
force them to move if you cannot find them.
Old October 12th 04, 12:48 AM
R. P.
external usenet poster
Posts: n/a

"John Navas" wrote:
* Wide deployment of EDGE (EGPRS) by two of three national GSM

Which one is not having it?

In addition, CDMA is a strong alternative to GSM.

But that's not the world standard.

R. P.

Old October 12th 04, 01:54 AM
John S.
external usenet poster
Posts: n/a

Roaming at
that time was conceived as putting your, say, French or German SIM
into a US phone when travelling to North America.

Actually that wasn't a consideration at all. GSM wasn't a technology used in
the USA at all (minor exception of Sprint Spectrum in DC). So there were no
concerns about roaming overseas.

My first trip back many years was to rent a GSM phone AND SIM from AT&T
corporate services who re-directed my cellular number to that SIM in Thailand.

John S.
e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net
Old October 12th 04, 08:17 AM
Michael Pronay
external usenet poster
Posts: n/a

(Steve Grauman) wrote:

A UMTS handset
would work, however.

What's UMTS?


Old October 12th 04, 09:00 AM
John Phillips
external usenet poster
Posts: n/a

On 11 Oct 2004, at 23:03:25 [GMT GMT] (09:03:25 Tuesday, 12 October 2004
where I live) "Steve Grauman" wrote:

So if I took the SIM out of my SE T616 and put it into a Japanese phone once I
get there, my AT&T service will then work in Japan?



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hello Virgin? DogTired Fido 32 April 27th 05 09:24 PM
Energy Cells? Rev. 11D Meow! General 1 November 16th 03 08:07 PM
Have been using cell phone battery for 2 years James Ramaley GSM 2 September 18th 03 03:16 AM
Call for improved cell phone service during emergencies 8888 Fido 1 August 26th 03 04:07 PM
US cell phones in Europe and elsewhere. John S. General 1 July 25th 03 06:59 PM

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:48 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 Mobile-Forum.
The comments are property of their posters.