Just 'cause it's smaller doesn't mean it's easier. Or am I overestimating the difficulty of fully rolling out HSUPA in the Scottish Highlands? I always thought that was all mountains; fully blanketing that must be quite a challenge.
Umm, yeah, the size difference is substantial making it a hell of a lot simpler. Superimpose a map of the UK on top of a map of the US and you'll see the difference. The US has rugged terrain, as well; I'm not really getting your point.
Amongst other reasons (and there are several), the size of the US has limited its technological cellular advances.
The difference is that apparently T-Mobile UK has successfully covered this rugged area in 3.5G when the American equivalent is (as far as I know) still on 2G, maybe even analog.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Firtch @ Jul 3rd 2008 11:47PM
It's probably a bit easier than the US rollout
1) Smaller country
2) Established hardware on the 2100MHz band and most popular protocol for 3G
Jamar @ Jul 4th 2008 12:21PM
Just 'cause it's smaller doesn't mean it's easier. Or am I overestimating the difficulty of fully rolling out HSUPA in the Scottish Highlands? I always thought that was all mountains; fully blanketing that must be quite a challenge.
derX @ Jul 4th 2008 11:31PM
Umm, yeah, the size difference is substantial making it a hell of a lot simpler. Superimpose a map of the UK on top of a map of the US and you'll see the difference. The US has rugged terrain, as well; I'm not really getting your point.
Amongst other reasons (and there are several), the size of the US has limited its technological cellular advances.
Jamar @ Jul 6th 2008 10:45PM
The difference is that apparently T-Mobile UK has successfully covered this rugged area in 3.5G when the American equivalent is (as far as I know) still on 2G, maybe even analog.