You can also go to some of the links provided by Solipsism to try to understand what a contract is if you refuse to understand what I'm saying.
That's the thing, EVERYONE understands what your saying, EVERYONE understands the different definitions of a contract, EVERYONE gets this because it is common sense. What you do NOT get is the fact that the people in the thread were talking about traditional cell phone contracts, and not some basic bare definition of the word contract.
That's the thing, EVERYONE understands what your saying, EVERYONE understands the different definitions of a contract, EVERYONE gets this because it is common sense. What you do NOT get is the fact that the people in the thread were talking about traditional cell phone contracts, and not some basic bare definition of the word contract.
Reread the thread. This thread was hijacked by a poster claiming that prepaid contract was an oxymoron. The rest of it has been people correcting that and others disputing the meaning of the word contract.
Reread the thread. This thread was hijacked by a poster claiming that prepaid contract was an oxymoron. The rest of it has been people correcting that and others disputing the meaning of the word contract.
I did re-read the thread before I posted and in post #8 is where this nonsense starts. Anyone with basic common sense and a 3rd grade education can decipher what the guy in post #5 was trying to say
I did re-read the thread before I posted and in post #8 is where this nonsense starts. Anyone with basic common sense and a 3rd grade education can decipher what the guy in post #5 was trying to say
Sure, everybody knows what #5 was saying. And just about everybody knows that technically he was incorrect. Any purchase is a kind of contract--even if people do not think of it that way in their everyday lives.
Mel is not going to be convinced to drop something just because the argument has become tiresome--if he is right (or believes he is right) he will persevere. If you don't believe that a purchase is a kind of contract, do the research and come back with some hard hitting information. If you believe that the contract semantics are pointless to the original discussion then just drop it and it will go away.
Unless some other knucklehead keeps it going.
.
.
.
(Yes, I know. I am a knucklehead my my own definition. But I did try to stay out of this, so I am a reluctant knucklehead)
I do not even think a single carrier is present all over western Europe (unless I am wrong), but at least carriers within Germany do roaming agreements for areas where they have no own coverage and there is no additional charge for the user. I can go to any location within the country without worrying about coverage or extra charges. An iPhone user in the US cannot.
Depends on the network agreements.
Quote:
I know that a 100% coverage in the US may be unaffordable. But I did experience extremely poor coverage in quite a few areas where the population was significantly more dense than in your typical desert. And absolutely every friend from the US visiting me in Germany is singing highest praises about the call quality here, and they all come from bigger cities. Heck, I lived next door to two IBM consultants from Texas when I was working in Thailand - they wished to have Thailands mobile network at home.
The testimonials are nice, but I never pay attention to them. I prefer more objective statements.
While I do not know the exact numbers myself, this is certainly close enough. We partially compensate for that by using kilometers instead of miles Seriously, nobody can expect a 100% coverage in all parts of the US, when I am doing long tours through a huge national park in the US taking pictures and filming, I rent a satellite phone - no problem. What is quite obvious though is that carriers - even in rural areas - tend to delay investments to the degree possible and that is a situation we do not have here (yet). There are several areas (like DSL coverage) where we do have the same problem, just mobile networks are doing pretty well here until now.
Building out coverage in the US is much more expensive. There are also rules about rural coverage the carriers have to obey.
That's the thing, EVERYONE understands what your saying, EVERYONE understands the different definitions of a contract, EVERYONE gets this because it is common sense. What you do NOT get is the fact that the people in the thread were talking about traditional cell phone contracts, and not some basic bare definition of the word contract.
I know what we're talking about. I also know that when someone says something that's not correct, we feel free to correct them.
I did re-read the thread before I posted and in post #8 is where this nonsense starts. Anyone with basic common sense and a 3rd grade education can decipher what the guy in post #5 was trying to say
The three biggest carriers cover virtually the entire country. How many German carriers cover all of western Europe, including the British Isles, and parts of Eastern Europe as well? This is without roaming and extra fees of course.
Germany is a small country. It can't be compared to the US in coverage.
Why do you think GSM was even developed? To have a homogeneous network where interoperablity between countries and networks would not be as fragmented as in the US. I can take my one phone and move throughout most of the world and get connectivity with one standard, while in the US this is not so. Te same 3G phones that work in Europe and the rest of the world will not work in the US. It is not necessarily about size but about interopearbility.
The DC area (and basically the whole north east side of the US) is Verizon's territory. A European going to the US will bring their GSM phone --- which will not get a good reception.
Why do you say this? I travel frequently to the US, DC area, NJ/NY area and the reception is quite okay.
Quote:
Sure incoming calls are counted --- but if you get more than 1.5 times the minutes as European plans for the same price --- then Americans are still ahead. Don't ask why 1.5 times, but that's what it said in some of the literature I read.
The average American talks 700-800 minutes per month --- so it doesn't matter for us if prepaid tarriff is more expensive. The average German talks somthing like 150-250 minutes per month. The bad effect for the US --- they deploy amr half rate codec which lowers the quality of the voice call.
but the rates are pretty much the same across the board. For an additional 9.95 Euro a month, I get a unlimited data plan. So for 30 Euro, I get unlimited data, 500 voice mins and 100 SMS. On average I would guess the plan rates are about the same.
Why do you say this? I travel frequently to the US, DC area, NJ/NY area and the reception is quite okay.
If you want any cell phone signals in the underground subway in Washington DC and NYC, then the only choice is Verizon Wireless.
Verizon is the landline provider in the northern states. SBC and BellSouth (which merged into the now AT&T) are the landline providers in the southern states. And that translates into their strengths in the cell phone world.
This is why the tv show "American Idol" has always turned out a bunch of country music winners (cingular is the old AT&T wireless).
Why do you think GSM was even developed? To have a homogeneous network where interoperablity between countries and networks would not be as fragmented as in the US. I can take my one phone and move throughout most of the world and get connectivity with one standard, while in the US this is not so. Te same 3G phones that work in Europe and the rest of the world will not work in the US. It is not necessarily about size but about interopearbility.
The post I was responding to was a about coverage in the US vs Germany.
More phones have world coverage. It's not a big deal for world travelers. You can get a cheaper phone to take on vacation if you really need to.
The post I was responding to was a about coverage in the US vs Germany.
More phones have world coverage. It's not a big deal for world travelers. You can get a cheaper phone to take on vacation if you really need to.
I would say that 95% or more European phones will work throughout the world. I did have some co-workers in Kuwait that had phones from the US that did not work while in Kuwait. They had to contact Verizon or some other provider to ask them to unlock their card. This is a bass-ackwards way to do biz.
Why buy a cheap phone for trips when one will do? I can take my phone everywhere with me.
I would say that 95% or more European phones will work throughout the world. I did have some co-workers in Kuwait that had phones from the US that did not work while in Kuwait. They had to contact Verizon or some other provider to ask them to unlock their card. This is a bass-ackwards way to do biz.
Why buy a cheap phone for trips when one will do? I can take my phone everywhere with me.
I'm just saying that if you're on Verison or Sprint, you would have to do this.
So many people from Europe who post here, talk about all the different phones they have, that they use by just switching the SIM card, that I would figure that buying one for overseas trips would be no biggie.
The Italians made Steve an offer he *couldn't* refuse
Or it could be that the head of Apple in Europe is an Italian.
I think the mention of exclusivity is only for Italy. I think any 3G iPhone launch in Europe would be pretty much simultaneous in all countries if they really do drop the tied-to-contract model.
If Apple wants part of the call revenue stream, I suggest they take over Vodafone. They are so poorly run it wouldn't be hard for Steve to turn a tidy profit.
Comments
Or any number of other possible problems!
I'll have the wife pay for it, lowering the chances that my jinx will affect it.
First good laugh of the day.. Thanks!
Look to yourself, not to me.
You can also go to some of the links provided by Solipsism to try to understand what a contract is if you refuse to understand what I'm saying.
That's the thing, EVERYONE understands what your saying, EVERYONE understands the different definitions of a contract, EVERYONE gets this because it is common sense. What you do NOT get is the fact that the people in the thread were talking about traditional cell phone contracts, and not some basic bare definition of the word contract.
That's the thing, EVERYONE understands what your saying, EVERYONE understands the different definitions of a contract, EVERYONE gets this because it is common sense. What you do NOT get is the fact that the people in the thread were talking about traditional cell phone contracts, and not some basic bare definition of the word contract.
Reread the thread. This thread was hijacked by a poster claiming that prepaid contract was an oxymoron. The rest of it has been people correcting that and others disputing the meaning of the word contract.
Reread the thread. This thread was hijacked by a poster claiming that prepaid contract was an oxymoron. The rest of it has been people correcting that and others disputing the meaning of the word contract.
I did re-read the thread before I posted and in post #8 is where this nonsense starts. Anyone with basic common sense and a 3rd grade education can decipher what the guy in post #5 was trying to say
I did re-read the thread before I posted and in post #8 is where this nonsense starts. Anyone with basic common sense and a 3rd grade education can decipher what the guy in post #5 was trying to say
Sure, everybody knows what #5 was saying. And just about everybody knows that technically he was incorrect. Any purchase is a kind of contract--even if people do not think of it that way in their everyday lives.
Mel is not going to be convinced to drop something just because the argument has become tiresome--if he is right (or believes he is right) he will persevere. If you don't believe that a purchase is a kind of contract, do the research and come back with some hard hitting information. If you believe that the contract semantics are pointless to the original discussion then just drop it and it will go away.
Unless some other knucklehead keeps it going.
.
.
.
(Yes, I know. I am a knucklehead my my own definition. But I did try to stay out of this, so I am a reluctant knucklehead)
I do not even think a single carrier is present all over western Europe (unless I am wrong), but at least carriers within Germany do roaming agreements for areas where they have no own coverage and there is no additional charge for the user. I can go to any location within the country without worrying about coverage or extra charges. An iPhone user in the US cannot.
Depends on the network agreements.
I know that a 100% coverage in the US may be unaffordable. But I did experience extremely poor coverage in quite a few areas where the population was significantly more dense than in your typical desert. And absolutely every friend from the US visiting me in Germany is singing highest praises about the call quality here, and they all come from bigger cities. Heck, I lived next door to two IBM consultants from Texas when I was working in Thailand - they wished to have Thailands mobile network at home.
The testimonials are nice, but I never pay attention to them. I prefer more objective statements.
While I do not know the exact numbers myself, this is certainly close enough. We partially compensate for that by using kilometers instead of miles
Building out coverage in the US is much more expensive. There are also rules about rural coverage the carriers have to obey.
That's the thing, EVERYONE understands what your saying, EVERYONE understands the different definitions of a contract, EVERYONE gets this because it is common sense. What you do NOT get is the fact that the people in the thread were talking about traditional cell phone contracts, and not some basic bare definition of the word contract.
I know what we're talking about. I also know that when someone says something that's not correct, we feel free to correct them.
I did re-read the thread before I posted and in post #8 is where this nonsense starts. Anyone with basic common sense and a 3rd grade education can decipher what the guy in post #5 was trying to say
Then perhaps you should go back to school.
The three biggest carriers cover virtually the entire country. How many German carriers cover all of western Europe, including the British Isles, and parts of Eastern Europe as well? This is without roaming and extra fees of course.
Germany is a small country. It can't be compared to the US in coverage.
Why do you think GSM was even developed? To have a homogeneous network where interoperablity between countries and networks would not be as fragmented as in the US. I can take my one phone and move throughout most of the world and get connectivity with one standard, while in the US this is not so. Te same 3G phones that work in Europe and the rest of the world will not work in the US. It is not necessarily about size but about interopearbility.
The DC area (and basically the whole north east side of the US) is Verizon's territory. A European going to the US will bring their GSM phone --- which will not get a good reception.
Why do you say this? I travel frequently to the US, DC area, NJ/NY area and the reception is quite okay.
Sure incoming calls are counted --- but if you get more than 1.5 times the minutes as European plans for the same price --- then Americans are still ahead. Don't ask why 1.5 times, but that's what it said in some of the literature I read.
The average American talks 700-800 minutes per month --- so it doesn't matter for us if prepaid tarriff is more expensive. The average German talks somthing like 150-250 minutes per month. The bad effect for the US --- they deploy amr half rate codec which lowers the quality of the voice call.
These are the rates for one operator in Finland (mine to be exact) http://www.dnaoy.fi/en/privatecustom.../dnaIlona.aspx
but the rates are pretty much the same across the board. For an additional 9.95 Euro a month, I get a unlimited data plan. So for 30 Euro, I get unlimited data, 500 voice mins and 100 SMS. On average I would guess the plan rates are about the same.
Why do you say this? I travel frequently to the US, DC area, NJ/NY area and the reception is quite okay.
If you want any cell phone signals in the underground subway in Washington DC and NYC, then the only choice is Verizon Wireless.
Verizon is the landline provider in the northern states. SBC and BellSouth (which merged into the now AT&T) are the landline providers in the southern states. And that translates into their strengths in the cell phone world.
This is why the tv show "American Idol" has always turned out a bunch of country music winners (cingular is the old AT&T wireless).
http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2006/0...-idol-results/
Why do you think GSM was even developed? To have a homogeneous network where interoperablity between countries and networks would not be as fragmented as in the US. I can take my one phone and move throughout most of the world and get connectivity with one standard, while in the US this is not so. Te same 3G phones that work in Europe and the rest of the world will not work in the US. It is not necessarily about size but about interopearbility.
The post I was responding to was a about coverage in the US vs Germany.
More phones have world coverage. It's not a big deal for world travelers. You can get a cheaper phone to take on vacation if you really need to.
The post I was responding to was a about coverage in the US vs Germany.
More phones have world coverage. It's not a big deal for world travelers. You can get a cheaper phone to take on vacation if you really need to.
I would say that 95% or more European phones will work throughout the world. I did have some co-workers in Kuwait that had phones from the US that did not work while in Kuwait. They had to contact Verizon or some other provider to ask them to unlock their card. This is a bass-ackwards way to do biz.
Why buy a cheap phone for trips when one will do? I can take my phone everywhere with me.
I would say that 95% or more European phones will work throughout the world. I did have some co-workers in Kuwait that had phones from the US that did not work while in Kuwait. They had to contact Verizon or some other provider to ask them to unlock their card. This is a bass-ackwards way to do biz.
Why buy a cheap phone for trips when one will do? I can take my phone everywhere with me.
I'm just saying that if you're on Verison or Sprint, you would have to do this.
So many people from Europe who post here, talk about all the different phones they have, that they use by just switching the SIM card, that I would figure that buying one for overseas trips would be no biggie.
Sachin
The Italians made Steve an offer he *couldn't* refuse
Or it could be that the head of Apple in Europe is an Italian.
I think the mention of exclusivity is only for Italy. I think any 3G iPhone launch in Europe would be pretty much simultaneous in all countries if they really do drop the tied-to-contract model.
If Apple wants part of the call revenue stream, I suggest they take over Vodafone. They are so poorly run it wouldn't be hard for Steve to turn a tidy profit.