Merger Mania Reaches Canada
800 mHz Vs. 1900 mHz; The debate continues....
Where I live 1900mHz was touted as the Saviour in terms of increasing network capacity.
Taking us into the next century with 'Increased subscriber capacity' listed as the main benefit. 1900 MHz A higher frequency therefore a larger bandwidth, allowing the carriers too have more subscribers on a tower and on the network a one time.
The carrier I'm with has recently switched back to 800 MHz after trying to work out the problems with 1900mHz. I clearly remember when 1900mHz was launched. Building penetration was far inferior to the 800 system. I though that maybe it was a quirk that had to be worked out.
Later that summer I travelled to Calgary,Alberta, Canada where 'Telus' had been using the 1900mHz system exclusivily for awhile. The ...
(continues)
Taking us into the next century with 'Increased subscriber capacity' listed as the main benefit. 1900 MHz A higher frequency therefore a larger bandwidth, allowing the carriers too have more subscribers on a tower and on the network a one time.
The carrier I'm with has recently switched back to 800 MHz after trying to work out the problems with 1900mHz. I clearly remember when 1900mHz was launched. Building penetration was far inferior to the 800 system. I though that maybe it was a quirk that had to be worked out.
Later that summer I travelled to Calgary,Alberta, Canada where 'Telus' had been using the 1900mHz system exclusivily for awhile. The ...
(continues)
...
This forum is closed.
