Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Wireless Carriers Leave Many Callers in Dead Zone

Tags:
  • Cingular
  • Phones
  • Wireless Carriers
  • Internet Service Providers
Last response: in Wireless Carriers
Share
Anonymous
August 9, 2004 1:14:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.verizon,alt.cellular (More info?)

August 9, 2004

Wireless Carriers Leave Many Callers in Dead Zone
Fancy Digital Handsets Come With Coverage Gaps In Busy Cities, Rural
Areas

By MARLON A. WALKER and JESSE DRUCKER
Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

U.S. cellular carriers are aggressively promoting a new generation of
phones that have everything from built-in cameras to Web surfing. But
there's another, less-welcome wrinkle to the latest phones: Many are
missing their old analog gear, and that can make it harder to place
and receive calls in many areas.

As wireless carriers make the transition from analog to digital
networks, many consumers are discovering that their fancier digital
phones simply can't complete a call in a lot of places where their old
phones worked just fine. Problems with blocked calls and dead zones
are afflicting callers in big cities, including New York and Los
Angeles, but they are especially pronounced in rural areas.

It's an unforeseen drawback of the telecommunication industry's big
investment in so-called next-generation equipment. As a group, U.S.
cellular providers have spent more than $146 billion to upgrade their
networks from analog to more-efficient digital technology, according
to the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association.

Analog cellphone service relies on a continuously variable radio
signal to transmit a call, similar to the way vinyl LP records produce
music. Digital calls are transmitted via a series of electrical
pulses, which is similar to the technology in music CDs and far more
efficient than analog.

Digital cellular technology clearly is an improvement over analog.
Digital networks can handle significantly more calls -- up to 10 times
as many, depending on the type of technology, some executives estimate
-- which allow more users to dial at the same time and conserves
precious radio-wave spectrum. Digital technology also allows the phone
manufacturers to make their handsets slimmer, conserve battery life
and offer an array of revenue-generating, high-tech services like
wireless Internet browsing. Many callers say coverage has improved
with all-digital phones.

At the same time, many of the big carriers, like Verizon Wireless,
Cingular Wireless and AT&T Wireless Services Inc., still rely on older
analog networks for "roaming" arrangements in small towns not covered
by the digital infrastructure -- and for backup capacity in big cities
where the digital networks can get overloaded.

The catch is that a lot of today's best-selling phones aren't built to
work on the analog networks. In an effort to get phones and the latest
technology to market more quickly, a number of carriers have pared
back their selection of phones with the component that allows users to
pick up an analog signal.

All five of the top-selling phones from Cingular and AT&T Wireless --
including Motorola's popular V400 clamshell phone with a built-in
camera -- lack an analog component. (Cingular is expected to complete
its acquisition of AT&T Wireless later this year, which probably will
make it the country's biggest cellular carrier.) One of Verizon
Wireless's best-selling phones, the color-screen VX6000 camera phone
by LG Electronics Inc., has no analog component.

While the digital networks cover a large portion of the country, there
are still enormous gaps. Wide swaths of the rural U.S., including much
of Montana, Nevada, Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri, Kentucky, Vermont
and New Hampshire, are still analog only, according to the Federal
Communications Commission. That means myriad dead spots for users of
many of the newer phones.

The problems with the analog-to-digital transition are expected to
recede as digital coverage continues to spread, but they could still
last several years. Other areas of the world have made the transition
to digital much more quickly. In Western Europe, tighter geographic
concentration and quicker construction of digital networks has meant
that users are less likely to spend hours driving through sparsely
populated areas that have only analog coverage.

Other parts of the world have also run into trouble. Three years ago,
Japanese cellular users experienced similar frustrations when leading
operator NTT DoCoMo Inc. rolled out slick new "3G" phones before the
new network covered as much ground as its older network.

In the U.S., AT&T Wireless and Cingular have a big incentive for not
selling phones with analog service: The two carriers are each already
operating two different digital network technologies, called TDMA and
GSM. Encouraging customers to use a third, vastly less-efficient
analog technology puts the squeeze on the operators' scarce radio-wave
spectrum. None of their GSM phones have analog, except for a few
hard-to-find models that combine TDMA and GSM.

AT&T Wireless spokesman Mark Siegel says the demand for analog is
"light, and as such, we only need to allocate minimal spectrum in each
market to handle the traffic."

Plus, calling over analog networks often means the carrier is paying
expensive, per-minute roaming fees to a smaller operator of an analog
network. Eliminating the analog function eliminates those expenses.

"They want more and more for their customers to be completely on their
network," said Charles Golvin, a principal analyst at Forrester
Research Inc., a technology research and consulting firm based in
Cambridge, Mass.

New York City resident Raymond Green, a 23-year-old associate with the
Winged Keel Group, which sells disability and life insurance, has
noticed the problem and switched phones three times in the past year.
All of the models had Internet access and color screens, cost at least
$150 and left him unhappy. Mr. Green says the phones he owned a couple
of years ago had fewer "dropped calls and better reception."

Not all cellular operators are willing to ditch the analog in their
phones. Alltel Corp., the country's seventh-biggest wireless operator,
with 8.3 million customers, says it includes analog backup in every
phone it sells.

"The cost benefit of offering a digital-only phone for us hasn't
outweighed the impact it could have on our ability to provide the
customer with adequate coverage outside of our networks," said Kevin
Beebe, Alltel's group president of operations. The carrier still
operates small parts of its network solely over analog.

Another big problem with the phasing out of analog service: a higher
likelihood of not being able to make an emergency phone call. In a
survey of its subscribers, Consumer Reports found that about 15% of
the 1,880 who tried to call 911 using their cellphone had trouble
getting through. The phasing out of analog is a problem because the
major U.S. cellular carriers use four incompatible digital
technologies. A caller using, say, a Cingular GSM-only phone in an
area where the only digital signal available is a CDMA signal from
Verizon Wireless would not be able to complete the call. But the
caller could if the phone had an analog component.

The FCC requires that carriers continue to operate analog networks
until Feb. 18, 2008 -- but it doesn't require phone manufacturers to
include the analog component in every handset.

"Even at the time the rules were made, the [FCC] noted the growth of
digital phones was going to be a problem," said David Heim, an editor
for Consumer Reports. "The importance of analog is it's a common
language for calls."

Industry officials track figures on attempted calls that don't go
through but decline to release them. The cellphone companies say they
aren't aware of more complaints related to network quality. "The
quality of calls has done nothing but improve," says Mr. Siegel, the
AT&T Wireless spokesman.

But the lack of analog can leave consumers in the lurch. While working
last year in Mountaineer, a small city in West Virginia, Steve
Michaels, a musical director, learned just how important having an
analog component in his phone can be. He was in the process of
switching to Verizon Wireless from Sprint and had both providers'
cellphones with him. But only the Verizon Wireless phone, which had
analog capabilities, worked.

Robert Walker, a software writer who lives in Bellevue, Wash., last
year had to call 911 during a hiking expedition to report another
hiker's injury. He says his Verizon Wireless phone was only able to
find a signal from an AT&T Wireless tower because they shared analog
capabilities. "I certainly hope that ... when carriers are no longer
required to maintain analog that they continue to do so," he says.
"You get outside of the major metropolitan areas here and you're
pretty much toast if you don't have analog."

It can be tough to figure out whether a phone is rigged for analog by
looking at carrier Web sites. Verizon Wireless's site, for example,
lists its phones that include analog backup as "tri-mode" -- but the
word "analog" can be hard to find. Verizon Wireless, however, does
have detailed maps revealing what parts of its network are covered
solely by analog.

Cellphone bulletin boards on the Internet, such as howardchui.com and
phonescoop.com offer information about capabilities of different
phones, including what parts of the country have no digital coverage.

---------------------------------------------------

More about : wireless carriers leave callers dead zone

August 10, 2004 6:31:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.verizon,alt.cellular (More info?)

On 9 Aug 2004 09:14:06 -0700, MrPepper11@go.com (MrPepper11) wrote:

>Robert Walker, a software writer who lives in Bellevue, Wash., last
>year had to call 911 during a hiking expedition to report another
>hiker's injury. He says his Verizon Wireless phone was only able to
>find a signal from an AT&T Wireless tower because they shared analog
>capabilities.

It's amazing that people actually survived before cell phones. I'm
surprised human-kind made it 10,000 years. My God, I can't make a
call, I CAN'T MAKE A CALL!!!
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 6:31:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.verizon,alt.cellular (More info?)

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 02:31:43 GMT, Jimmy <NoOneYet@Nowhere.Net> wrote:

>On 9 Aug 2004 09:14:06 -0700, MrPepper11@go.com (MrPepper11) wrote:
>
>>Robert Walker, a software writer who lives in Bellevue, Wash., last
>>year had to call 911 during a hiking expedition to report another
>>hiker's injury. He says his Verizon Wireless phone was only able to
>>find a signal from an AT&T Wireless tower because they shared analog
>>capabilities.
>
>It's amazing that people actually survived before cell phones. I'm
>surprised human-kind made it 10,000 years. My God, I can't make a
>call, I CAN'T MAKE A CALL!!!
>

Well, it can get a bit frustrating to see a full, native, digital
signal indicated on your phone, try to call 911, then your phone
immediately dumps you off onto AMPS roaming. It happened to me last
week on I-26 in NC. A pickup truck was fully engulfed in flames, and
I couldn't reach 911, either.

Fortunately, no one was injured.
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 6:31:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.verizon,alt.cellular (More info?)

Jimmy wrote:

> On 9 Aug 2004 09:14:06 -0700, MrPepper11@go.com (MrPepper11) wrote:
>
>>Robert Walker, a software writer who lives in Bellevue, Wash., last
>>year had to call 911 during a hiking expedition to report another
>>hiker's injury. He says his Verizon Wireless phone was only able to
>>find a signal from an AT&T Wireless tower because they shared analog
>>capabilities.
>
> It's amazing that people actually survived before cell phones. I'm
> surprised human-kind made it 10,000 years. My God, I can't make a
> call, I CAN'T MAKE A CALL!!!

10,000 of what years? Earth years as we know it now or on a Cosmic scale in
which a day could have been a billion years before there was an earth
circling the sun (a mere medium yellow dwarf star) every 365 rotations. I
guess in some people's minds, the world is still flat and the center of the
solar system and universe. You do realize that by living on a gravitational
object, you are already living in a time distortion which is faster
relative to absence of gravity in space as witnessed by the slowdown of all
clocks on our lunar missions. Frequent clock synchronization had to take
place to keep the mission working properly from the ground to the ships.
As far as people surviving before cellular, many did not survive simply due
to lack of communication devices in remote places so SOME humans survived
but not as many as could have been had these systems been in place. The
reason that some people survived in days of old is we simply had enough
children to ensure that enough would be left by adulthood to keep the
species alive as it was too common for many to never reach adulthood and
even then the average life expectancy was 35.


Dave
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 2:06:21 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.verizon,alt.cellular (More info?)

In alt.cellular Jacob Suter <jsuter@intrastar.net> wrote:

> Once I got off the phone (and the phone was still in emergency mode) I
> made a couple other calls, no problem... About 10 minutes later the
> emergency mode banner was off, and I couldn't make an outgoing call...
>
> And yes, that AT&T system is 'extended area' in my PRL...

Irrelevant. The story was about phones that don't have analog.

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 1:34:17 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.verizon,alt.cellular (More info?)

Jimmy,

Your comment would almost certainly be different if it were YOU having a
heart attack and someone tried to call 911 to save YOUR life. It's never as
important until it directly affects yourself.

Gregg


"Jimmy" <NoOneYet@Nowhere.Net> wrote in message
news:mkcgh01jj1ibodpd9u1sd801fmmj7nse3h@4ax.com...
> On 9 Aug 2004 09:14:06 -0700, MrPepper11@go.com (MrPepper11) wrote:
>
> >Robert Walker, a software writer who lives in Bellevue, Wash., last
> >year had to call 911 during a hiking expedition to report another
> >hiker's injury. He says his Verizon Wireless phone was only able to
> >find a signal from an AT&T Wireless tower because they shared analog
> >capabilities.
>
> It's amazing that people actually survived before cell phones. I'm
> surprised human-kind made it 10,000 years. My God, I can't make a
> call, I CAN'T MAKE A CALL!!!
>
>
August 11, 2004 2:18:49 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.verizon,alt.cellular (More info?)

In article <tbbSc.847$aB1.281@twister.socal.rr.com>,
"Gregg Hill" <bogus@nowhere.com> wrote:

> Jimmy,
>
> Your comment would almost certainly be different if it were YOU having a
> heart attack and someone tried to call 911 to save YOUR life. It's never as
> important until it directly affects yourself.
>
> Gregg

Common law says that Commercials and Advertisements create an implied
warranty. So when carriers talk about Crystal Clear Calls, and National
coverage, they leave themselves liable, and State's Attorney Generals
appreciate this and often find reasons why ETF's should be waived.
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 8:48:08 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.verizon,alt.cellular (More info?)

"Jimmy" <NoOneYet@Nowhere.Net> wrote in message
news:mkcgh01jj1ibodpd9u1sd801fmmj7nse3h@4ax.com...
> On 9 Aug 2004 09:14:06 -0700, MrPepper11@go.com (MrPepper11) wrote:
>
> >Robert Walker, a software writer who lives in Bellevue, Wash., last
> >year had to call 911 during a hiking expedition to report another
> >hiker's injury. He says his Verizon Wireless phone was only able to
> >find a signal from an AT&T Wireless tower because they shared analog
> >capabilities.
>
> It's amazing that people actually survived before cell phones. I'm
> surprised human-kind made it 10,000 years. My God, I can't make a
> call, I CAN'T MAKE A CALL!!!

We didn't used to have cell phones, but then again we didn't always have
penicillin or indoor plumbing. If it brings you comfort to thing that way
when you are out somewhere with a broken leg and no working phone, then good
for you. The rest of us would not be so content to bleed to death and be
eaten by wolves.


---
Update your PC at http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.736 / Virus Database: 490 - Release Date: 8/9/2004
August 11, 2004 8:48:09 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.verizon,alt.cellular (More info?)

Carl. wrote:

> "Jimmy" <NoOneYet@Nowhere.Net> wrote in message
> news:mkcgh01jj1ibodpd9u1sd801fmmj7nse3h@4ax.com...
>
>>On 9 Aug 2004 09:14:06 -0700, MrPepper11@go.com (MrPepper11) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Robert Walker, a software writer who lives in Bellevue, Wash., last
>>>year had to call 911 during a hiking expedition to report another
>>>hiker's injury. He says his Verizon Wireless phone was only able to
>>>find a signal from an AT&T Wireless tower because they shared analog
>>>capabilities.
>>
>>It's amazing that people actually survived before cell phones. I'm
>>surprised human-kind made it 10,000 years. My God, I can't make a
>>call, I CAN'T MAKE A CALL!!!
>
>
> We didn't used to have cell phones, but then again we didn't always have
> penicillin or indoor plumbing. If it brings you comfort to thing that way
> when you are out somewhere with a broken leg and no working phone, then good
> for you. The rest of us would not be so content to bleed to death and be
> eaten by wolves.


hmmm... bleeding to death and becoming wolf dung might be the ticket,
depending on who we're talking about. :) 

--
jer email reply - I am not a 'ten' ICQ = 35253273
"All that we do is touched with ocean, yet we remain on the shore of
what we know." -- Richard Wilbur
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 11:04:40 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.verizon,alt.cellular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <cyhSc.11129$KZ2.10213@fe2.texas.rr.com> on Wed, 11 Aug 2004 04:48:08 GMT,
"Carl." <usenetcarlTHISPROBABLYWONTWORK@hotmail.com> wrote:

>"Jimmy" <NoOneYet@Nowhere.Net> wrote in message
>news:mkcgh01jj1ibodpd9u1sd801fmmj7nse3h@4ax.com...

>> It's amazing that people actually survived before cell phones. I'm
>> surprised human-kind made it 10,000 years. My God, I can't make a
>> call, I CAN'T MAKE A CALL!!!
>
>We didn't used to have cell phones, but then again we didn't always have
>penicillin or indoor plumbing. If it brings you comfort to thing that way
>when you are out somewhere with a broken leg and no working phone, then good
>for you. The rest of us would not be so content to bleed to death and be
>eaten by wolves.

With all due respect, a cell phone isn't likely to have much impact on either
of your remote hypotheticals.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/&gt;
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 12:05:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.verizon,alt.cellular (More info?)

Personally, I liked the previous post by Dave.






John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<cyjSc.6847$54.106054@typhoon.sonic.net>...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <cyhSc.11129$KZ2.10213@fe2.texas.rr.com> on Wed, 11 Aug 2004 04:48:08 GMT,
> "Carl." <usenetcarlTHISPROBABLYWONTWORK@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >"Jimmy" <NoOneYet@Nowhere.Net> wrote in message
> >news:mkcgh01jj1ibodpd9u1sd801fmmj7nse3h@4ax.com...
>
> >> It's amazing that people actually survived before cell phones. I'm
> >> surprised human-kind made it 10,000 years. My God, I can't make a
> >> call, I CAN'T MAKE A CALL!!!
> >
> >We didn't used to have cell phones, but then again we didn't always have
> >penicillin or indoor plumbing. If it brings you comfort to thing that way
> >when you are out somewhere with a broken leg and no working phone, then good
> >for you. The rest of us would not be so content to bleed to death and be
> >eaten by wolves.
>
> With all due respect, a cell phone isn't likely to have much impact on either
> of your remote hypotheticals.
Anonymous
August 12, 2004 10:18:14 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.verizon,alt.cellular (More info?)

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:cyjSc.6847$54.106054@typhoon.sonic.net...
> >We didn't used to have cell phones, but then again we didn't always have
> >penicillin or indoor plumbing. If it brings you comfort to thing that
way
> >when you are out somewhere with a broken leg and no working phone, then
good
> >for you. The rest of us would not be so content to bleed to death and be
> >eaten by wolves.
>
> With all due respect, a cell phone isn't likely to have much impact on
either
> of your remote hypotheticals.

So you contend that:
1. People don't break legs these days? Must be all that fancy genetic milk
we have.
2. Calling 911 won't increase the odds of a man with a broken leg getting to
a hospital?

Arguing that it is a "remote hypothetical" is kind of silly considering that
this thread started with an example of an injury that required a call for
help:
"Robert Walker, a software writer who lives in Bellevue, Wash., last
year had to call 911 during a hiking expedition to report another
hiker's injury."

I suppose we should find that man and tell him that his injury not only
didn't happen, but, hypothetically, if it did, he would be no better off
than if he just stayed there.


---
Update your PC at http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.737 / Virus Database: 491 - Release Date: 8/11/2004
Anonymous
August 12, 2004 11:00:39 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.verizon,alt.cellular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <GYDSc.3401$M8.2762@fe2.texas.rr.com> on Thu, 12 Aug 2004 06:18:14 GMT,
"Carl." <usenetcarlTHISPROBABLYWONTWORK@hotmail.com> wrote:

>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:cyjSc.6847$54.106054@typhoon.sonic.net...

>> >We didn't used to have cell phones, but then again we didn't always have
>> >penicillin or indoor plumbing. If it brings you comfort to thing that way
>> >when you are out somewhere with a broken leg and no working phone, then good
>> >for you. The rest of us would not be so content to bleed to death and be
>> >eaten by wolves.
>>
>> With all due respect, a cell phone isn't likely to have much impact on either
>> of your remote hypotheticals.
>
>So you contend that:
>1. People don't break legs these days? ...

No.

>2. Calling 911 won't increase the odds of a man with a broken leg getting to
>a hospital?

No.

What I wrote was that a cell phone isn't likely to stop you from bleeding to
death or being eaten by wolves. No broken legs there.

>Arguing that it is a "remote hypothetical" is kind of silly

I disagree.

>considering that
>this thread started with an example of an injury that required a call for
>help:
>"Robert Walker, a software writer who lives in Bellevue, Wash., last
>year had to call 911 during a hiking expedition to report another
>hiker's injury."
>
>I suppose we should find that man and tell him that his injury not only
>didn't happen, but, hypothetically, if it did, he would be no better off
>than if he just stayed there.

Anecdotal accounts make for interesting reading, but don't really prove
anything.

While cell phones can sometimes be useful in life threatening situations, like
so many other things, they're too unreliable to be considered serious life
saving devices. If you really want to be safe, get a Personal EPIRB, which
are now less expensive, particularly in real terms, than early cell phones;
e.g., <http://www.anchorexpress.com/2792.html&gt;

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/&gt;
August 15, 2004 8:14:46 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

It's up to YOU the buyer to educate yourself on what you're buying,
what you're using and what to expect out of it. Unless it's plugged
into an outset with a phone line, don't expect 100% reliability (even
if it IS wired).

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 07:00:39 GMT, John Navas
<spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

>[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
>In <GYDSc.3401$M8.2762@fe2.texas.rr.com> on Thu, 12 Aug 2004 06:18:14 GMT,
>"Carl." <usenetcarlTHISPROBABLYWONTWORK@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>>news:cyjSc.6847$54.106054@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
>>> >We didn't used to have cell phones, but then again we didn't always have
>>> >penicillin or indoor plumbing. If it brings you comfort to thing that way
>>> >when you are out somewhere with a broken leg and no working phone, then good
>>> >for you. The rest of us would not be so content to bleed to death and be
>>> >eaten by wolves.
>>>
>>> With all due respect, a cell phone isn't likely to have much impact on either
>>> of your remote hypotheticals.
>>
>>So you contend that:
>>1. People don't break legs these days? ...
>
>No.
>
>>2. Calling 911 won't increase the odds of a man with a broken leg getting to
>>a hospital?
>
>No.
>
>What I wrote was that a cell phone isn't likely to stop you from bleeding to
>death or being eaten by wolves. No broken legs there.
>
>>Arguing that it is a "remote hypothetical" is kind of silly
>
>I disagree.
>
>>considering that
>>this thread started with an example of an injury that required a call for
>>help:
>>"Robert Walker, a software writer who lives in Bellevue, Wash., last
>>year had to call 911 during a hiking expedition to report another
>>hiker's injury."
>>
>>I suppose we should find that man and tell him that his injury not only
>>didn't happen, but, hypothetically, if it did, he would be no better off
>>than if he just stayed there.
>
>Anecdotal accounts make for interesting reading, but don't really prove
>anything.
>
>While cell phones can sometimes be useful in life threatening situations, like
>so many other things, they're too unreliable to be considered serious life
>saving devices. If you really want to be safe, get a Personal EPIRB, which
>are now less expensive, particularly in real terms, than early cell phones;
>e.g., <http://www.anchorexpress.com/2792.html&gt;
August 20, 2004 9:47:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.verizon,alt.cellular (More info?)

John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:<rAESc.7105$54.108020@typhoon.sonic.net>...
> While cell phones can sometimes be useful in life threatening situations, like
> so many other things, they're too unreliable to be considered serious life
> saving devices. If you really want to be safe, get a Personal EPIRB, which
> are now less expensive, particularly in real terms, than early cell phones;
> e.g., <http://www.anchorexpress.com/2792.html&gt;


naaaaah - if you really want something useful for life threatening
situations get a gun.
http://www.glocktalk.com/
Tom’s guide in the world
  • Germany
  • France
  • Italy
  • Ireland
  • UK
Follow Tom’s guide
Subscribe to our newsletter
  • add to twitter
  • add to facebook
  • ajouter un flux RSS