Yes the embedded connections are considered cellphones, and they are counted as active connections by the network providers.
Well then, those aren't cell phones no matter what they may be considered to be. We had pagers here for many years, but they weren't cell phones. They shouldn't be included in numbers about cell phones.
Quote:
And yes the first two do work, as companies do, do this.
You missed part of what I was saying. I didn't say that companies didn't do this. I said that they did. I said that the *numbers* didn't work, because there couldn't be more than a few tens of millions being given cell phones by their employers. It's very unlikely that employers there are much different from those here. They only spend the money on things like this for employees who actually need the service. If 30 million employees in europe are being given cells by their employers, I'd say that was on the top of the number.
Quote:
The question is, how are they counting the population of Europe, it seems higher than it should be.
That's one of the questions I brought up. Who are these Europeans? It looks that they over counted by about 300 million in the cell phone numbers. I can;t see over 910 million cells in Europe proper. Even with the double counting errors etc, it still seems to be too much by a long shot.
Quote:
Also, in Europe there is a large number of pre-pay connections, which a certain number could be from vistors to Europe, a while back we had eight active connections for four of us in the family, and the network providers might not drop them from being active connections for six months after the last top-up.
If they are counting visitors, then that isn't part of a true, correct count. But then, how many would that be?
Quote:
Also, some providers here, when you upgrade your phone, they give you a pre-pay connection for your old phone, thus another connection.
Well then, those aren't cell phones no matter what they may be considered to be. We had pagers here for many years, but they weren't cell phones. They shouldn't be included in numbers about cell phones.
They are pagers, they were (well they were where I came from) running on a different network. If you have an embedded device (or a data only device) that has a SIM card in it (I will use the majority of the world in this example and not the Qualcomm networks) it will be counted by the likes of Vodafone etc as a connection
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
You missed part of what I was saying. I didn't say that companies didn't do this. I said that they did. I said that the *numbers* didn't work, because there couldn't be more than a few tens of millions being given cell phones by their employers. It's very unlikely that employers there are much different from those here. They only spend the money on things like this for employees who actually need the service. If 30 million employees in europe are being given cells by their employers, I'd say that was on the top of the number.
I know what you are saying, but how about this.
If you are working for a place that requires you to have a cellphone, but you are not allowed to use that phone for personal calls. So you need another phone. Two connections.
In some countries the mobile companies (Vodafone is one) are doing deals with business to replace all the desk phones in a business with mobiles. Apply the no personal call rule again, two connections.
A service company using contractors to provide sales for them, they are provided with a portable device with a data connection, no voice. They have their own phone as well, two connections.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
That's one of the questions I brought up. Who are these Europeans? It looks that they over counted by about 300 million in the cell phone numbers. I can;t see over 910 million cells in Europe proper. Even with the double counting errors etc, it still seems to be too much by a long shot.
I don't know, the reports I have read don't split by country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
If they are counting visitors, then that isn't part of a true, correct count. But then, how many would that be?
Well since it is an anonymous sale, they don't know where they are from
They are pagers, they were (well they were where I came from) running on a different network. If you have an embedded device (or a data only device) that has a SIM card in it (I will use the majority of the world in this example and not the Qualcomm networks) it will be counted by the likes of Vodafone etc as a connection
Well, it's good that we can agree on what they are. But they still aren't cell phones, can't be used that way, and therefore shouldn't be included in the cellphone numbers.
It's as though motorcycles are counted are automobile sales because they have a seat and an engine.
Quote:
I know what you are saying, but how about this.
If you are working for a place that requires you to have a cellphone, but you are not allowed to use that phone for personal calls. So you need another phone. Two connections.
Yes, I accounted for that. The 30 million number I used was for the double count. That meant 30 million towards the total in addition to the 30 million the people would likely have on their own. My wife has that in CitiGroup. She has an iPhone 3G, and a Blackberry from work.
Quote:
In some countries the mobile companies (Vodafone is one) are doing deals with business to replace all the desk phones in a business with mobiles. Apply the no personal call rule again, two connections.
Sure. But I'd like to know just how well they've been doing with that. I'll bet not too well yet. If they've gotten a million users off land lines in business at this point, I'd think it was a lot. Business have central switching services, and equipment, that aren't too well served by cells. Even if they are too small for that, when someone is in the office, they can't be switched over by the small central phone models now used. The person answering the calls would have to do what? Call the cell of the person they need to talk to?
Quote:
A service company using contractors to provide sales for them, they are provided with a portable device with a data connection, no voice. They have their own phone as well, two connections.
A lot of what you're saying may be true, but they are the same people over and again. These are not different categories, they are the same category. All people given a business phone for whatever reason is in the same boat, and is part of the same numbers. 30 million for all these people, maybe, at most.
Quote:
I don't know, the reports I have read don't split by country.
It's too vague.
Quote:
Well since it is an anonymous sale, they don't know where they are from
And so allowances should be made for that, and the number subtracted, but we don't know how many.
Well, it's good that we can agree on what they are. But they still aren't cell phones, can't be used that way, and therefore shouldn't be included in the cellphone numbers.
The thing is you have two different reports, coming from two different groups.
1. The carriers will report connections
2. The handset manufactures will report shipment numbers
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
Sure. But I'd like to know just how well they've been doing with that. I'll bet not too well yet. If they've gotten a million users off land lines in business at this point, I'd think it was a lot. Business have central switching services, and equipment, that aren't too well served by cells. Even if they are too small for that, when someone is in the office, they can't be switched over by the small central phone models now used. The person answering the calls would have to do what? Call the cell of the person they need to talk to?
I know Vodafone are doing this for home users now.
For businesses I know they were in some cases getting rid of the pbx, and moving that control to the carrier, they provided the short code, and handled the switching etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
And so allowances should be made for that, and the number subtracted, but we don't know how many.
At the end of the day, all these figures are used for is for one carrier to say they have more connections than the other
We just use call forwarding now. Why would we need an e-mail to do that instead? I'm not sure how they manage it at home.
Quote:
For businesses I know they were in some cases getting rid of the pbx, and moving that control to the carrier, they provided the short code, and handled the switching etc.
They're trying to do that here as well, but it's proven to be a hard sell. Most business don't want all of that in the phone companies hands. Then it's out if their control. With security being so important these days, that is also an issue.
Quote:
At the end of the day, all these figures are used for is for one carrier to say they have more connections than the other
Yup! And for one region to say that they are more advanced than another.
Comments
I'm talking about old fashioned non wideband CDMA, as used for years here and elsewhere. Code division multiple access. Not cdmaOne, or CDMA2000.
Code Division Multiple Access is a radio technology, the radio technology used to develop cmdaOne, or CDMA2000, and w-cdma
Yes the embedded connections are considered cellphones, and they are counted as active connections by the network providers.
Well then, those aren't cell phones no matter what they may be considered to be. We had pagers here for many years, but they weren't cell phones. They shouldn't be included in numbers about cell phones.
And yes the first two do work, as companies do, do this.
You missed part of what I was saying. I didn't say that companies didn't do this. I said that they did. I said that the *numbers* didn't work, because there couldn't be more than a few tens of millions being given cell phones by their employers. It's very unlikely that employers there are much different from those here. They only spend the money on things like this for employees who actually need the service. If 30 million employees in europe are being given cells by their employers, I'd say that was on the top of the number.
The question is, how are they counting the population of Europe, it seems higher than it should be.
That's one of the questions I brought up. Who are these Europeans? It looks that they over counted by about 300 million in the cell phone numbers. I can;t see over 910 million cells in Europe proper. Even with the double counting errors etc, it still seems to be too much by a long shot.
Also, in Europe there is a large number of pre-pay connections, which a certain number could be from vistors to Europe, a while back we had eight active connections for four of us in the family, and the network providers might not drop them from being active connections for six months after the last top-up.
If they are counting visitors, then that isn't part of a true, correct count. But then, how many would that be?
Also, some providers here, when you upgrade your phone, they give you a pre-pay connection for your old phone, thus another connection.
Then that would be another meaningless number.
As I said, the numbers are fishy.
Well then, those aren't cell phones no matter what they may be considered to be. We had pagers here for many years, but they weren't cell phones. They shouldn't be included in numbers about cell phones.
They are pagers, they were (well they were where I came from) running on a different network. If you have an embedded device (or a data only device) that has a SIM card in it (I will use the majority of the world in this example and not the Qualcomm networks) it will be counted by the likes of Vodafone etc as a connection
You missed part of what I was saying. I didn't say that companies didn't do this. I said that they did. I said that the *numbers* didn't work, because there couldn't be more than a few tens of millions being given cell phones by their employers. It's very unlikely that employers there are much different from those here. They only spend the money on things like this for employees who actually need the service. If 30 million employees in europe are being given cells by their employers, I'd say that was on the top of the number.
I know what you are saying, but how about this.
If you are working for a place that requires you to have a cellphone, but you are not allowed to use that phone for personal calls. So you need another phone. Two connections.
In some countries the mobile companies (Vodafone is one) are doing deals with business to replace all the desk phones in a business with mobiles. Apply the no personal call rule again, two connections.
A service company using contractors to provide sales for them, they are provided with a portable device with a data connection, no voice. They have their own phone as well, two connections.
That's one of the questions I brought up. Who are these Europeans? It looks that they over counted by about 300 million in the cell phone numbers. I can;t see over 910 million cells in Europe proper. Even with the double counting errors etc, it still seems to be too much by a long shot.
I don't know, the reports I have read don't split by country.
If they are counting visitors, then that isn't part of a true, correct count. But then, how many would that be?
Well since it is an anonymous sale, they don't know where they are from
They are pagers, they were (well they were where I came from) running on a different network. If you have an embedded device (or a data only device) that has a SIM card in it (I will use the majority of the world in this example and not the Qualcomm networks) it will be counted by the likes of Vodafone etc as a connection
Well, it's good that we can agree on what they are. But they still aren't cell phones, can't be used that way, and therefore shouldn't be included in the cellphone numbers.
It's as though motorcycles are counted are automobile sales because they have a seat and an engine.
I know what you are saying, but how about this.
If you are working for a place that requires you to have a cellphone, but you are not allowed to use that phone for personal calls. So you need another phone. Two connections.
Yes, I accounted for that. The 30 million number I used was for the double count. That meant 30 million towards the total in addition to the 30 million the people would likely have on their own. My wife has that in CitiGroup. She has an iPhone 3G, and a Blackberry from work.
In some countries the mobile companies (Vodafone is one) are doing deals with business to replace all the desk phones in a business with mobiles. Apply the no personal call rule again, two connections.
Sure. But I'd like to know just how well they've been doing with that. I'll bet not too well yet. If they've gotten a million users off land lines in business at this point, I'd think it was a lot. Business have central switching services, and equipment, that aren't too well served by cells. Even if they are too small for that, when someone is in the office, they can't be switched over by the small central phone models now used. The person answering the calls would have to do what? Call the cell of the person they need to talk to?
A service company using contractors to provide sales for them, they are provided with a portable device with a data connection, no voice. They have their own phone as well, two connections.
A lot of what you're saying may be true, but they are the same people over and again. These are not different categories, they are the same category. All people given a business phone for whatever reason is in the same boat, and is part of the same numbers. 30 million for all these people, maybe, at most.
I don't know, the reports I have read don't split by country.
It's too vague.
Well since it is an anonymous sale, they don't know where they are from
And so allowances should be made for that, and the number subtracted, but we don't know how many.
Well, it's good that we can agree on what they are. But they still aren't cell phones, can't be used that way, and therefore shouldn't be included in the cellphone numbers.
The thing is you have two different reports, coming from two different groups.
1. The carriers will report connections
2. The handset manufactures will report shipment numbers
Sure. But I'd like to know just how well they've been doing with that. I'll bet not too well yet. If they've gotten a million users off land lines in business at this point, I'd think it was a lot. Business have central switching services, and equipment, that aren't too well served by cells. Even if they are too small for that, when someone is in the office, they can't be switched over by the small central phone models now used. The person answering the calls would have to do what? Call the cell of the person they need to talk to?
I know Vodafone are doing this for home users now.
http://www.vodafone.co.nz/local-zone/#
For businesses I know they were in some cases getting rid of the pbx, and moving that control to the carrier, they provided the short code, and handled the switching etc.
And so allowances should be made for that, and the number subtracted, but we don't know how many.
At the end of the day, all these figures are used for is for one carrier to say they have more connections than the other
The thing is you have two different reports, coming from two different groups.
1. The carriers will report connections
2. The handset manufactures will report shipment numbers
It seems they will just co-mingle everything. I'm sure the numbers of what device is selling how many is available, but just too much bother to find.
I know Vodafone are doing this for home users now.
http://www.vodafone.co.nz/local-zone/#
We just use call forwarding now. Why would we need an e-mail to do that instead? I'm not sure how they manage it at home.
For businesses I know they were in some cases getting rid of the pbx, and moving that control to the carrier, they provided the short code, and handled the switching etc.
They're trying to do that here as well, but it's proven to be a hard sell. Most business don't want all of that in the phone companies hands. Then it's out if their control. With security being so important these days, that is also an issue.
At the end of the day, all these figures are used for is for one carrier to say they have more connections than the other
Yup! And for one region to say that they are more advanced than another.