hArTh
09-12-2004, 02:17 PM
http://www.mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=16554&page=2&pp=15
You have 2 options now. (MW isnt really mobile.)
You have 2 options now. (MW isnt really mobile.)
View Full Version : If you need mobilty iBurst is not the only option ...
ic
09-12-2004, 02:57 PM
IMO:
MyWireless, proved to not be mobile at all, people who even look at their IPWireless modem skeef can loose their connection, move it slightly you loose your connection, you really need a directional external antena. All that == stationary like a stone.
iBurst has not been proved to be mobile, I use a UTDesktop, I would like to hear from folk that decided to go with the UTCard - is it mobile in the sense that you can stay connected driving about in your car, before you answer: have you actually achieved this? Coverage (range-wise 12Km) is way better than MyWireless, but is there enough coverage right now to make iBurst truly mobile with a UTC?
Vodacom's 3GOne, Onionpeel's post says "currently available only in the major urban centres", which puts it on the same footing (~) as iBurst.
Another thing WBS need to consider is that 3G will provide handsets that can do way more than the regular cell phone, given the choice between lugging a laptop and carrying a way more compact cell phone about...
I know what I'd choose. So WBS, what do you say to that? Mobility not really your biggest selling point is it now?
MyWireless, proved to not be mobile at all, people who even look at their IPWireless modem skeef can loose their connection, move it slightly you loose your connection, you really need a directional external antena. All that == stationary like a stone.
iBurst has not been proved to be mobile, I use a UTDesktop, I would like to hear from folk that decided to go with the UTCard - is it mobile in the sense that you can stay connected driving about in your car, before you answer: have you actually achieved this? Coverage (range-wise 12Km) is way better than MyWireless, but is there enough coverage right now to make iBurst truly mobile with a UTC?
Vodacom's 3GOne, Onionpeel's post says "currently available only in the major urban centres", which puts it on the same footing (~) as iBurst.
Another thing WBS need to consider is that 3G will provide handsets that can do way more than the regular cell phone, given the choice between lugging a laptop and carrying a way more compact cell phone about...
I know what I'd choose. So WBS, what do you say to that? Mobility not really your biggest selling point is it now?
regardtv
09-12-2004, 09:15 PM
UTC does do tower handover ...quite nicely actually
Did some "brief" 3g testing ..nice ... but wait and see for the pricing...
Did some "brief" 3g testing ..nice ... but wait and see for the pricing...
Arthur
10-12-2004, 06:10 AM
Haven't tried mobile downloads in pre-comm phase as I have a UTD now, but as a pilot tester on 2.3 my first mobile experience was doing a 20MB Win2K Update off the MS site whilst driving down the M1 from Houghton, then up Grayston drive and back via Rivonia/Oxford Rd.
<GeekModeOn>
It still gett a buzz recounting that first mobile download, especially in the light of my first ever modem connection back in 1983 - that was a 75 baud half-duplex connection to a US bbs. Things have evolved somewhat, at least in speeds 'n feeds.
<GeekModeOff>
<GeekModeOn>
It still gett a buzz recounting that first mobile download, especially in the light of my first ever modem connection back in 1983 - that was a 75 baud half-duplex connection to a US bbs. Things have evolved somewhat, at least in speeds 'n feeds.
<GeekModeOff>
alchamy
10-12-2004, 06:52 AM
Well Arthur I can't say that I ever experienced Buad rate of 75 but I do remember the 2400 BBS days, and we have really come a long way since then. I have also tried a UTC while driving and it works perfectly, although the tower handovers can sometimes be a bit nasty. I have not tried with newer firmware though and this is meant to fix the problem.
Mercury
10-12-2004, 07:58 AM
It still gett a buzz recounting that first mobile download, especially in the light of my first ever modem connection back in 1983 - that was a 75 baud half-duplex connection to a US bbs. Things have evolved somewhat, at least in speeds 'n feeds.
Sure it wasn't a 300 baud connection? 1200/75 was a Beltel (anyone remember that?) perversion. Mmm. I remember subscribing to the Saponet packet switching network, so I could get a halfway reasonably priced connection to one of the commercial information services in the USA.
Having now thoroughly dated myself I had better stop!
Sure it wasn't a 300 baud connection? 1200/75 was a Beltel (anyone remember that?) perversion. Mmm. I remember subscribing to the Saponet packet switching network, so I could get a halfway reasonably priced connection to one of the commercial information services in the USA.
Having now thoroughly dated myself I had better stop!
ic
10-12-2004, 08:17 AM
Sadly I remember both BelTel and the CSIR's provision of CompuServe, and wireless is starting to remind me of how frustrating all that was.