|
In Reply to: GSM is thonly option if you travel internationally posted by Carlos Soledade on March 04, 2001 at 22:37:47:
Seattle to SF via the coast: mostly no GSM coverage
SouthCentral Alaska: No coverage
SF to Tahoe/Reno: 1/2 coverage
SF down Central Cal Coast: No coverage
Central Florida: Mostly covered
Guatemala/Honduras: Partial in Guetemala (I'm told)
If I break it down between business and personal use, 90% of my business trips have GSM coverage while most of my personal travel has close to none. I find 90% unacceptable. Like any high-availability service that we've grown accustomed to, 99%+ is the norm.
Similar coverage holds true for wireless devices, like Ricochet modems and Palm VII's. I brought a wireless Palm VII for the Seattle to SF trip and it was mostly worthless. While the Palm was useless, my TDMA cell phone had virtually perfect coverage, even in remote areas of the Oregon coast.
North America is WAY behind on cell phone standards, but hopefully GSM coverage will improve over time. Read about the features of GSM and you'll realize the US is in the dark ages.
--gary