"jneiberger@ not discuss cell coverage in the US because this is a global newsgroup?
That is precisely the problem, there *isn't* anything in the original text to indicate that the country being discussed was the US. It was assumed that everyone would know, which I for one find arrogant.
Ivor (in the UK)
Ivor,
I would agree with you if that had been the only clue. We certainly can't expect everyone to know the names of all of our telcos here, even just the big ones. However, several posts mentioned the USA; America; Houston, TX; Dallas, TX; Chapel Hill, NC; Raleigh, NC. I think one can reasonably infer that we're discussing the United States at that point. :-)
Perhaps it's just the way my newsreader chose to present the order of the posts but they had been plainly discussing the US for several posts before David Floyd's post.
Oh well, that's Usenet for you. Let's shake hands and move on...
Oh please. The original post in the thread indicated he had service from SBC. a few posts further down pacbell is discussed. That meanswe are discussing the USA. If the thread had started out with someone mentining he had service from BT, i'd assume we were dicussing the UK.
This assumes everyone in the world is familiar with the names of every telco in the world. As it happens I have heard of Pacbell, having spent a long time in California over the years, but not everyone is so don't assume, please. I have never heard of SBC for example and I wouldn't expect a US reader who maybe has never been to the UK to have heard of BT (who isn't the only UK telco BTW).
Ivor
Yes. The vastly different tax (read government policy), social, and development structures make for very different development paths. If nothing else WWI and WWII had vastly different impacts on the opposite sides of the Atlantic when it comes to utility and public service type operations.
"jneiberger@ just the big ones. However, several posts mentioned the USA; America;
True, but the *original* post in this thread didn't.
Fair enough.
Ivor
jneiberger@ just the big ones.
In a VOIP news group I sure as hell WOULD expect that. At least for folks to know the MAJOR ones in the more common countries. If I see a company I don't know referred to I Google it. A quick google on SBC would tell anyone what country was being dealt with.
Yes, l;ack of standards, and lack of regulation in part. It's all market driven. Why would private companies invest in the more rural areas when it will be decades before they get an return on that investment? More populated areas odder immediate profits.
sometimes capitalism sucks.
Well, I guess the European telecompanies don't do it for charity, either. The GSM international standard with roaming agreements across the borders has been quite a financial success - paid by the customers. The cell phone penetration in Europe would never get as high as it is without decent coverage. It is a kind of chicken and egg issue really - you won't reach a critical mass until coverage makes it attractive.
So the market mechanisms, or capitalism if you prefer, should definitely not be blamed for the lack of cell coverage in Northern America. I think it is a combination of very favorably priced landline telephone system as mentioned earlier in this thread, and a pricing model for cell phones that makes it less attractive to private customers. (I guess you still have to pay to RECEIVE calls in the US?) In addition to that, the European / international GSM systems have introduced SMS - the "killer" application that the technocrats invented by accident. SMS is the primary communication form between millions of young people in Europe today. Everybody is expected to be available at any time - if you're a teenager and do not answer your friends' SMSes within minutes you are totally out. (all this according to my 14 y old daughter, who found it extremely frustrating to be out of reach most of the time last year when we were in Florida for a few days...)
Svein .... still apologizing for keeping this off-topic thread alive, but I could not resist...
Well, I guess the European telecompanies don't do it for charity, either. The GSM international standard with roaming agreements across the borders has been quite a financial success - paid by the customers. The cell phone penetration in Europe would never get as high as it is without decent coverage. It is a kind of chicken and egg issue really - you won't reach a critical mass until coverage makes it attractive.
So the market mechanisms, or capitalism if you prefer, should definitely not be blamed for the lack of cell coverage in Northern America. I think it is a combination of very favorably priced landline telephone system as mentioned earlier in this thread, and a pricing model for cell phones that makes it less attractive to private customers. (I guess you still have to pay to RECEIVE calls in the US?) In addition to that, the European / international GSM systems have introduced SMS - the "killer" application that the technocrats invented by accident. SMS is the primary communication form between millions of young people in Europe today. Everybody is expected to be available at any time - if you're a teenager and do not answer your friends' SMSes within minutes you are totally out. (all this according to my 14 y old daughter, who found it extremely frustrating to be out of reach most of the time last year when we were in Florida for a few days...)
Svein .... apologizing for still keeping this off-topic thread alive, just couldn't resist...
Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.