Telstra Dealer Calls NextG Utter Crap

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrFixIt

Hi


Optus also have NextG.

---

:(( Not according to the salespeople we spoke with on Saturday :((

Grrrrrrr

Thanks for the heads up MrFixIt, I'll look into that further methinks!

cheers
Wendy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrFixIt

Hi
Optus also have NextG.

---

Sure they do. If you live in a City.

Wendy, it's not a case of Telstra keeping it to themselves, it's a case of the other service providers not building infrastructure. Before you go off to someone else, make sure you can get reception where you need it.

If you are on another network, and it uses the Telstra one when it doesn't have it's own stations, the charges can be a little um... more than you expect.

Cheers,

P

Optus call it the 3G network. I have my phone on it and would get as good if not occasionally better service than Telstra. Never noticed the charges though because I pretty much only use the phone to recieve call or call SWMBO which is free because our phones are on the same account.

I've just checked and it appears that the cost structure has changed somewhat from the last time I read the fine print. I'd be guessing if there's no cover now, there's no cover. Living in an area that has no cover, which puts me in 4% of Australia's population according to Optus, I tend to look at the fine print!

I can't download the coverage maps, so I guess I can't help!

Cheers,

P
:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wood Butcher

Optus call it the 3G network.

---

Just to be clear, 3G is available from Telstra and Optus and others. NextG is Telstra-only, and it is not 3G.

I'm unaware of any sublicensing to other carriers. It's a typical Telstra gatekeeper ploy to exclude competition from their network.

woodbe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woodbe

It's a typical Telstra gatekeeper ploy to exclude competition from their network.

---

What's the big deal with that?

If I made a particular product, why would I let my competitors use my factory to make a competing product?

I just don't get it. If the other players have a problem because Telstra has the infrastructure, then why don't they do something about it? Oh that's right, it's not profitable for them!

cheers,

P

What sebastiaan 58 said
Aint privatisation grand.
In Telecom we had a world class system, investment from OS, research and developement.
Now wevr got B all.
Ditto with public transport, water, electricity etc etc
Privativation of public utilities never equates to better service to the public.

Astrid

will not work in my place. had to send it back
cdma had no problems here.
now we are stuffed.
when is he going back to mexico !!!
I object to being stripped of a good working phone.

I don't see how you can get better reception from Optus,they are only buying the cals at a wholesale rate from Telstra, and Optus sells them to you at a retail rate.Optus don't provide infrastucture as far as I'm aware.Telsta still own the lines that carry your phones,so you are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Until we get a provider that is able to by pass Telstras hold over us we will just have to put up with it!!:(

We're talking mobile service here, where each operator provides its own infrastructure. It's all rather silly really.

P

I suppose what I'm really peeved about is that HWMNBO will not have decent mobile phone service in South West QLD, regardless of which carrier is used, regardless of which type of service used. Having had a very good look at the maps, there are more dead spots than there are live spots.

As HWMNBO said, "why can't we simply use Analogue. It was the only service that worked and worked well in more areas than any other type of service" and "why the heck can't they make a mobile phone, robust enough with just the simple service needs only, with keys large enough to see and use without fumbling - make and receive voice calls, send and receive text messages, a contacts list, received/missed/made calls lists and a standard telephone sounding ringtone that's loud enough to be heard by those with a touch of industrial deafness"

I think he was being rhetorical:rolleyes:, wasn't he?:?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bitingmidge

What's the big deal with that?

If I made a particular product, why would I let my competitors use my factory to make a competing product?

I just don't get it. If the other players have a problem because Telstra has the infrastructure, then why don't they do something about it? Oh that's right, it's not profitable for them!

cheers,

P

---

The 'big deal' is that we are supposed to have a competitive communications infrastructure, and Telstra has been acting like a monopoly for too long. The 'big deal' is that they are now a private company, and the spoils of monopolistic behaviour go to their executives and shareholders (if there is anything left after the execs get their snouts out of the trough)

Ask all the ISP's who have been trying to get naked DSL past the door so that they can offer world class DSL to Australian Consumers, Ask the various carriers who have invested in Infrastructure only to have the carpet pulled from under their feet.

All this stuff is a 'big deal' because it consumes investment money in the communications sector in under-performing and short-lived communications assets (including Telstra). Why is that a problem? Because it drives the costs up, and we all land up paying through the nose for services.

NextG is a big deal because it does not perform as advertised, and it is a Telstra-only network. So it is yet another monopoly position. It also requires different handsets (another expense foisted on consumers)

There are chinks in the armor though. The recent pullout of Telstra from the National Broadband initiative is a clear indication that they are unwilling to compete on equal terms with other vendors, an action that will not have gone unnoticed in the halls of power.

woodbe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RufflyRustic

As HWMNBO said, "why can't we simply use Analogue. It was the only service that worked and worked well in more areas than any other type of service" and "why the heck can't they make a mobile phone, robust enough with just the simple service needs only, with keys large enough to see and use without fumbling - make and receive voice calls, send and receive text messages, a contacts list, received/missed/made calls lists and a standard telephone sounding ringtone that's loud enough to be heard by those with a touch of industrial deafness"

I think he was being rhetorical:rolleyes:, wasn't he?:?

---

That sounds like my original "bag phone", great job it did too!:2tsup:

Haven't had decent mobile coverage since analogue was switched of, now they are switching off CDMA, that only lasted a few years.:doh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ptc

will not work in my place. had to send it back
cdma had no problems here.
now we are stuffed.
when is he going back to mexico !!!
I object to being stripped of a good working phone.

---

Same here CDMA worked fine 3G is useless in this area.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RufflyRustic

As HWMNBO said, "why can't we simply use Analogue. It was the only service that worked and worked well in more areas

---

Something to do with bandwidth I think. They can put more customers on the 3G system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woodbe

The 'big deal' is that we are supposed to have a competitive communications infrastructure, and Telstra has been acting like a monopoly for too long. The 'big deal' is that they are now a private company, and the spoils of monopolistic behaviour go to their executives and shareholders (if there is anything left after the execs get their snouts out of the trough)

Ask all the ISP's who have been trying to get naked DSL past the door so that they can offer world class DSL to Australian Consumers, Ask the various carriers who have invested in Infrastructure only to have the carpet pulled from under their feet.

All this stuff is a 'big deal' because it consumes investment money in the communications sector in under-performing and short-lived communications assets (including Telstra). Why is that a problem? Because it drives the costs up, and we all land up paying through the nose for services.

NextG is a big deal because it does not perform as advertised, and it is a Telstra-only network. So it is yet another monopoly position. It also requires different handsets (another expense foisted on consumers)

There are chinks in the armor though. The recent pullout of Telstra from the National Broadband initiative is a clear indication that they are unwilling to compete on equal terms with other vendors, an action that will not have gone unnoticed in the halls of power.

woodbe.

---

Yes yes, all that. The point I'm making is that no one else is putting in the infrastructure. They could all do the next G thing, but they aren't. Why is it a problem? Because no one else wants to put the infrastructure in, they all want a free ride.

Until someone else provides a bit of infrastructure, then Telstra have a right to act monopolistically! I don't like it, but I'm glad SOMEONE is servicing us.

P