CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33600
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:24 am
 


Brenda wrote:
"No people living outside those orange area's". REALLY??? Where do the other 2 million people live that do not live in the lower mainland?
You don't think that a highway like highway 3 should be covered? It is not. Yet, it is (other than the Cocquihalla) the only way to get from the west to the east. Highway 1 is not covered either. You think that's ok?

I don't.


Not many. As to whether it's OK or not - it's private enterprise. If there was a profit to be made by servicing the white areas, they would be there. So unless you want the govt to set up the cells and lease them out, that's just the way it is. But certainly Alberta, Sask and Manitoba are all not covered in glaciers and mountains the way BC is. That probably is a factor too.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 51388
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:29 am
 


andyt wrote:
Brenda wrote:
"No people living outside those orange area's". REALLY??? Where do the other 2 million people live that do not live in the lower mainland?
You don't think that a highway like highway 3 should be covered? It is not. Yet, it is (other than the Cocquihalla) the only way to get from the west to the east. Highway 1 is not covered either. You think that's ok?

I don't.


Not many. As to whether it's OK or not - it's private enterprise. If there was a profit to be made by servicing the white areas, they would be there. So unless you want the govt to set up the cells and lease them out, that's just the way it is. But certainly Alberta, Sask and Manitoba are all not covered in glaciers and mountains the way BC is. That probably is a factor too.

Quote:
cell phone regulation is federal


Also, the US does not seem to have the same problem, yet they have the same mountain ranges.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Ottawa Senators
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 7706
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:30 am
 


BartSimpson wrote:
And then there's Canada:

Image

Canada still has analog coverage! Analog was decertified in the USA around 2007 or so and it was decertified in Europe around 2002.

I don't know about Europe, but in the USA we've got multiple layers of coverage in most areas and you're hard put to find a place anymore where you can't get a signal of some kind.

Here in Sacramento I can get on Interstate 80 and drive to New York City and have 4G the entire distance.

Why the same thing can't be done up your way escapes me. Frankly, I'm surprised to see you folks behind us on this. I would have expected you to be well ahead of us in this kind of thing.


This map is crap. See the big gap between Winnipeg and Thunder Bay, where it says no coverage exists. I live there.

We do have 4G service here.

Image


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33600
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:31 am
 


They have less regulation, and way more people. Again, if a profit was to be made giving better coverage to BC, we would get the coverage. The cell phone companies didn't just scheme together to piss you off.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 51388
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:32 am
 


Funny thing is, I can see the towers from here. Yet, the minute I drive out of town, "no service". I can still SEE the tower that gave me service 3 meters back.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 51388
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:35 am
 


andyt wrote:
They have less regulation, and way more people. Again, if a profit was to be made giving better coverage to BC, we would get the coverage. The cell phone companies didn't just scheme together to piss you off.

I think you are wrong there. I think the only thing big companies do, is try to piss people off. And since there is no competition, they can.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33600
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:40 am
 


Brenda wrote:
Funny thing is, I can see the towers from here. Yet, the minute I drive out of town, "no service". I can still SEE the tower that gave me service 3 meters back.


Presumably your line of sight is longer than the diameter of a cell.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 51388
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:41 am
 


andyt wrote:
Brenda wrote:
Funny thing is, I can see the towers from here. Yet, the minute I drive out of town, "no service". I can still SEE the tower that gave me service 3 meters back.


Presumably your line of sight is longer than the diameter of a cell.

I'm surprised you condone it and tell me to suck it up.

"The rest of BC is beyond Hope..."


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33600
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:43 am
 


Brenda wrote:
andyt wrote:
They have less regulation, and way more people. Again, if a profit was to be made giving better coverage to BC, we would get the coverage. The cell phone companies didn't just scheme together to piss you off.

I think you are wrong there. I think the only thing big companies do, is try to piss people off. And since there is no competition, they can.


They told me they're specifically out to get you, Brenda.

Lack of competition keeps the prices we pay higher than they should be. Possibly our regulations keep other players from starting their own cell network, but it's an expensive proposition. That's why the small players wan the govt to allow foreing investment in the industry - to attract the big bucks needed. And, we'll still have way spottier service than the US, since we have so many fewer people.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33600
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:44 am
 


Brenda wrote:
andyt wrote:
Brenda wrote:
Funny thing is, I can see the towers from here. Yet, the minute I drive out of town, "no service". I can still SEE the tower that gave me service 3 meters back.


Presumably your line of sight is longer than the diameter of a cell.

I'm surprised you condone it and tell me to suck it up.

"The rest of BC is beyond Hope..."


What do you mean condone it? You have no choice but to suck it up, since there's no money in it for anybody. Again, unless you want the govt to get into the cell business.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 51388
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:46 am
 


andyt wrote:
Brenda wrote:
andyt wrote:
They have less regulation, and way more people. Again, if a profit was to be made giving better coverage to BC, we would get the coverage. The cell phone companies didn't just scheme together to piss you off.

I think you are wrong there. I think the only thing big companies do, is try to piss people off. And since there is no competition, they can.


They told me they're specifically out to get you, Brenda.
You really can't go without personal attacks, can you. Did I mention "they are out to piss me (as in Brenda) off"? Nope.
Quote:
Lack of competition keeps the prices we pay higher than they should be. Possibly our regulations keep other players from starting their own cell network, but it's an expensive proposition. That's why the small players wan the govt to allow foreing investment in the industry - to attract the big bucks needed. And, we'll still have way spottier service than the US, since we have so many fewer people.

And that lack of competition, and the way the government keeps it that way, is ok with you?
Oh wait, you are in the big city, you have more choice than Bell, Rogers, Virgin or Telus.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 51388
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:51 am
 


andyt wrote:
Brenda wrote:
andyt wrote:

Presumably your line of sight is longer than the diameter of a cell.

I'm surprised you condone it and tell me to suck it up.

"The rest of BC is beyond Hope..."


What do you mean condone it? You have no choice but to suck it up, since there's no money in it for anybody. Again, unless you want the govt to get into the cell business.

When you have a huge landmass, and so little people, you have to. They can make sure we have power too, can't they?
And if you can't make sure people have cell service on the road (the highway YOU built), you might as well make sure, that when something happens, there is a way to contact 9-11, by putting up phones that automatically connect you to the nearest EMT station or 9-11 operator or what have you, every 500 meters.

Hell, even in dense populated Holland, it is like that.


Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
Profile
Posts: 32562
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:51 am
 


Brenda wrote:
Funny thing is, I can see the towers from here. Yet, the minute I drive out of town, "no service". I can still SEE the tower that gave me service 3 meters back.

Range
The working range of a cell site - the range within which mobile devices can connect to it reliably - is not a fixed figure. It will depend on a number of factors, including

The frequency of signal in use (i.e. the underlying technology).
The transmitter's rated power.
The required uplink/downlink data rate of the subscriber's device [2]
The transmitter's size.
The array setup of panels may cause the transmitter to be directional or omni-directional.
It may also be limited by local geographical or regulatory factors and weather conditions.
Generally, in areas where there are enough cell sites to cover a wide area, the range of each one will be set to:

Ensure there is enough overlap for "handover" to/from other sites (moving the signal for a mobile device from one cell site to another, for those technologies that can handle it - e.g. making a GSM phone call while in a car or train).
Ensure that the overlap area is not too large, to minimize interference problems with other sites.
In practice, cell sites are grouped in areas of high population density, with the most potential users. Cell phone traffic through a single cell mast is limited by the mast's capacity; there is a finite number of calls or data traffic that a mast can handle at once. This limitation is another factor affecting the spacing of cell mast sites. In suburban areas, masts are commonly spaced 1–2 miles (2-3 km) apart and in dense urban areas, masts may be as close as ¼-½ mile (400-800 m) apart. Cell masts always reserve part of their available bandwidth for emergency calls.

The maximum range of a mast (where it is not limited by interference with other masts nearby) depends on the same circumstances. Some technologies, such as GSM, normally have a fixed maximum range of 35 kilometres (22 mi), which is imposed by technical limitations. CDMA and IDEN have no built-in limit, but the limiting factor is the ability of a low-powered personal cell phone to transmit back to the mast. As a rough guide, based on a tall mast and flat terrain, it is possible to get between 50 to 70 km (30–45 miles). When the terrain is hilly, the maximum distance can vary from as little as 5 kilometres (3.1 mi) to 8 kilometres (5.0 mi) due to encroachment of intermediate objects into the wide center fresnel zone of the signal.[3] Depending on terrain and other circumstances, a GSM Tower can replace between 2 and 50 miles (80 km) of cabling for fixed wireless networks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_site


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33600
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:52 am
 


Brenda wrote:
andyt wrote:
Brenda wrote:
I think you are wrong there. I think the only thing big companies do, is try to piss people off. And since there is no competition, they can.


They told me they're specifically out to get you, Brenda.
You really can't go without personal attacks, can you. Did I mention "they are out to piss me (as in Brenda) off"? Nope.
Quote:
Lack of competition keeps the prices we pay higher than they should be. Possibly our regulations keep other players from starting their own cell network, but it's an expensive proposition. That's why the small players wan the govt to allow foreing investment in the industry - to attract the big bucks needed. And, we'll still have way spottier service than the US, since we have so many fewer people.

And that lack of competition, and the way the government keeps it that way, is ok with you?
Oh wait, you are in the big city, you have more choice than Bell, Rogers, Virgin or Telus.


Are you not people? You said they are out to piss people off - you're pissed off, you seem to think they care enough about you one way or another. I know you're just being silly.

The govt, in it's wisdom has decided to keep foreign investment out of the cell phone buis, presumably because it's considered part of the same system as land lines, Tv and radio etc. I'm not familiar enough with the issues to have an opinion on that.

Wind, Moblicity, etc are cheap but have crap service. You're not missing anything there. Just part of living in a small town - your choice. What can I say.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33600
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:53 am
 


Brenda wrote:
andyt wrote:

What do you mean condone it? You have no choice but to suck it up, since there's no money in it for anybody. Again, unless you want the govt to get into the cell business.

When you have a huge landmass, and so little people, you have to. They can make sure we have power too, can't they?
And if you can't make sure people have cell service on the road (the highway YOU built), you might as well make sure, that when something happens, there is a way to contact 9-11, by putting up phones that automatically connect you to the nearest EMT station or 9-11 operator or what have you, every 500 meters.

Hell, even in dense populated Holland, it is like that.


Well, this sure ain't Holland, as you've likely found out. Be sure to vote left next time, and even then, doubt if this is on the radar as a priority for the NDP - provincial or federal.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 80 posts ]  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.