On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 16:54 +0000, Howard Winter wrote:
> Herbert,
> 
> On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:03:22 -0500, Herbert Graf wrote:
> 
> >...
> > It does mean more capacity, so theoretically on GSM you'll get less
> > dropped calls, 
> 
> This has me a bit confused - a lot of the TV adverts in the 'States seem to emphasise their lack of dropped calls as a selling point.  I've *never* had a dropped call 
> in all the time I've been using mobile phones (15 years or so).  I wonder why they seem to be a problem over there?

Well, dropped calls generalizes things a bit.

You won't get a dropped call due to congestion unless you are moving
(the quicker, the more pronounced the problem). The reason being once
you've got a slot on the site you're connected to you're good. The issue
is if you are moving you will have to have your call handed off to
another site. If all the other sites in range are full there's noone to
hand off to, and your call will drop.

While dropped calls are the most annoying part of this phenomenon, the
more common symptom is "unable to call". In a very congested area you
won't be able to initiate the call, usually trying a couple times will
space things long enough that either another call ended, or a handoff
happened, and you'll get a slot.

This problem was much worse in the past, these days it's getting pretty
rare where I live (Toronto, Canada).

One must remember that North America is a VERY different world when it
comes to cell phones. Our population densities can be MUCH lower, to the
point that the 35km site-to-site distance limit really hurts us. Also,
we don't have the caller pays system Europe does for landlines, meaning
cell phone penetration is much less here. I'm not surprised this problem
is much rarer in Europe.

FWIW I was in Britain last year and did have a "unable to call" spell in
central london, so it most certainly happens there too! :)

TTYL
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist