iPhone Climbs Past Entire NA Windows Mobile Market

"Ray Goldenberg" <ray@lighthousetravel.com> wrote in message
news:ray-C59F9C.19042216122007@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> In article <Xns9A08AFD2C218Cnoonehomecom@208.49.80.253>,
> Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>
>> Nope. SELLular doesn't have that kind of signal in Kansas wheat
>> fields, either. Hell, ATT has NO signal in rural SC.
>
> How the hell would YOU know? All you know is Verizon. You don't know
> ANY other provider.
>
> SELL that.
>

Larry is on Altel. Not Verizon.

"Kevin Weaver" <kevinkeithweaver@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:EDk9j.5689$NY.885@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com...
> "Ray Goldenberg" <ray@lighthousetravel.com> wrote in message
> news:ray-C59F9C.19042216122007@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
>> In article <Xns9A08AFD2C218Cnoonehomecom@208.49.80.253>,
>> Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Nope. SELLular doesn't have that kind of signal in Kansas wheat
>>> fields, either. Hell, ATT has NO signal in rural SC.
>>
>> How the hell would YOU know? All you know is Verizon. You don't know
>> ANY other provider.
>>
>> SELL that.
>>
>
> Larry is on Altel. Not Verizon.
>

Make that Alltel

Larry wrote:
> DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote in news:qgc9j.6130$Dt4.2398
>> Do you really think the public is going to pay for the foot print
> of a
>> 24 dB fade margin deployment within the same foot print that
> cellular
>> companies provide?
>>
>> Roughly 25 towers per square mile in the middle of a Kansas wheat
> field.
>
> Nope. SELLular doesn't have that kind of signal in Kansas wheat
> fields, either. Hell, ATT has NO signal in rural SC.

Doesn't have what? 24 dB fade margin or 25 towers per square mile?

Which cellular provider employed you to engineer out a tower site for
that required less than a 24 dB fade margin?

Given the power level limits for unlicensed WiFi, you would need a tower
about every mile - that somes out to 25 towers per square mile.

> Your extreme argument, is absurd. MUNICIPLE wifi will go in where
> the voters want it.

Could you point out where my argument is extreme and absurd?

If they want it, they should be willing to pay for it.

George <george@nospam.invalid> wrote in
news:r9qdnZbblKUvXvjanZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@comcast.com:

> it wouldn't be "free".
>
>

I never said it would be free. It never is. But, there are many things a
controlled government, especially a LOCAL government CAN do quite well. My
house has "corporate power" from SCANA, Inc. aka South Carolina Electric
and Gouge. THEY charge FAR more than the CITY power company 70 miles up
the road in Orangeburg, SC...many times more for the same power.
Orangeburg's COST to run and maintain the system TO the customer is many
times HIGHER than here in the dense city. Orangeburg's Dept of Public
Utilities works for the PEOPLE, not the stockholders. The PEOPLE are the
stockholders. It shows on every bill....a total lack of local bogus taxes,
access fees, franchise fees....a lack of paying $3.50 for the street lights
even though you don't HAVE a street light....The price is the price.

Ok, so let's install and PRICE public wifi. Why not? FCC works for
telecom corps, not the public. That's why not. The roadblocks are in the
way.

Larry
--
Merry Christmas!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Qi_NhFS4xEE

On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 04:30:21 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:

>George <george@nospam.invalid> wrote in
>news:r9qdnZbblKUvXvjanZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@comcast.com :
>
>> it wouldn't be "free".
>>
>>
>
>I never said it would be free. It never is. But, there are many things a
>controlled government, especially a LOCAL government CAN do quite well. My
>house has "corporate power" from SCANA, Inc. aka South Carolina Electric
>and Gouge. THEY charge FAR more than the CITY power company 70 miles up
>the road in Orangeburg, SC...many times more for the same power.
>Orangeburg's COST to run and maintain the system TO the customer is many
>times HIGHER than here in the dense city. Orangeburg's Dept of Public
>Utilities works for the PEOPLE, not the stockholders. The PEOPLE are the
>stockholders. It shows on every bill....a total lack of local bogus taxes,
>access fees, franchise fees....a lack of paying $3.50 for the street lights
>even though you don't HAVE a street light....The price is the price.
>
>Ok, so let's install and PRICE public wifi. Why not? FCC works for
>telecom corps, not the public. That's why not. The roadblocks are in the
>way.

Solution: Larry moves to Orangeburg, SC.

DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote in news:ptl9j.8099$AR7.7382
@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com:

> Given the power level limits for unlicensed WiFi, you would need a
tower
> about every mile - that somes out to 25 towers per square mile.
>

See...there's ANOTHER very good reason why telecom doesn't want
governments to usurp their little scam. Governments determine what's
allowable, power level limits. If GOVERNMENT wants to run 100 watts at
1000', it can do so. Government determines what goes where on what
frequencies.....not for long, but still as of tonight. Government
doesn't need a license...they ARE the license with the power from the
people to do it right.

It's so sad to see the young who have been brainwashed into thinking that
CORPORATIONS are good....Government is bad. Where the hell did we get
that idea from? NONE of these corporations give a shit what you want!
They only provide a level of service necessary to prevent you from
stopping that check every month. Doesn't make any difference whether
it's Apple or Nokia or Verizon or ATT or GM or Alltel or Bubba's Tire and
Towers, Inc. You'll always get MINIMUM service at MAXIMUM price the
market will tolerate. That's how corporations operate....the cheapest
crap as high as we dare mark it up. Anyone telling you differently is a
total liar.

Corporations are the biggest threat to you and everyone you love,
including the one you're probably working for. Think "Pack of Wolves".
Your loyalty is demanded. Their loyalty to you is simply NOT. The only
ones more of a threat than corporations are international bankers. They
make corporations look like Santa Claus.

Larry
--
Merry Christmas!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Qi_NhFS4xEE

Larry wrote:
> DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote in news:ptl9j.8099$AR7.7382
> @nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com:
>
>> Given the power level limits for unlicensed WiFi, you would need a
> tower
>> about every mile - that somes out to 25 towers per square mile.
>>
>
> See...there's ANOTHER very good reason why telecom doesn't want
> governments to usurp their little scam. Governments determine what's
> allowable, power level limits. If GOVERNMENT wants to run 100 watts at
> 1000', it can do so. Government determines what goes where on what
> frequencies.....not for long, but still as of tonight. Government
> doesn't need a license...they ARE the license with the power from the
> people to do it right.

Government radio transmitters indeed do have assigned licenses when
applicable, not counting military use.

Obviously you don't understand the concept of unlicensed and licensed
spectrum usage, and subsequent power level restrictions. Further
continuation of this discourse would be pointless.

Larry wrote:
> George <george@nospam.invalid> wrote in
> news:r9qdnZbblKUvXvjanZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@comcast.com:
>
>> it wouldn't be "free".
>>
>>
>
> I never said it would be free. It never is. But, there are many things a
> controlled government, especially a LOCAL government CAN do quite well. My
> house has "corporate power" from SCANA, Inc. aka South Carolina Electric
> and Gouge. THEY charge FAR more than the CITY power company 70 miles up
> the road in Orangeburg, SC...many times more for the same power.
> Orangeburg's COST to run and maintain the system TO the customer is many
> times HIGHER than here in the dense city. Orangeburg's Dept of Public
> Utilities works for the PEOPLE, not the stockholders. The PEOPLE are the
> stockholders. It shows on every bill....a total lack of local bogus taxes,
> access fees, franchise fees....a lack of paying $3.50 for the street lights
> even though you don't HAVE a street light....The price is the price.

Which tells us absolutely nothing unless you present the entire economic
picture for that city. Lots of areas have certain services that are
cheaper because other services/taxes/fees/whatever artificially suppress
them.


>
> Ok, so let's install and PRICE public wifi. Why not? FCC works for
> telecom corps, not the public. That's why not. The roadblocks are in the
> way.
>
> Larry

I will guarantee that if public WiFi were installed by the government no
one could afford it if the honest actual costs were charged.