Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

America's First WCDMA Call 225

Posted by timothy from the watson-i-need-broadband dept.
k-hell writes "Ericsson and AT&T Wireless recently completed the first WCDMA/UMTS call in a live network environment in the Americas, capable of data transfer speeds of up to 384 Kbps. AT&T Wireless and Ericsson currently pursuing the path to 3G capabilities in the U.S. market by deploying EDGE-ready GSM/GPRS systems. This path ensures an evolution to EDGE, then UMTS, a wideband radio technology that provides mobile users with data rates up to 2 Mbps." This is not yet a strong enough reason to move to Dallas, though.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

America's First WCDMA Call More

America's First WCDMA Call

Comments Filter:
  • ...This is not yet a strong enough reason to move to Dallas, though.

    There are precious few reasons strong enough to make one move to Dallas.
    • "In fact, there's no such thing as "a strong enough reason to move to Dallas.": +1, Funny

      "There are precious few reasons strong enough to make one move to Dallas", -1, Troll

      Anybody else think that's a little odd? Heh.

  • wh00p (Score:2, Insightful)

    by vorovsky ( 413068 )
    Okay, so what... I already live in Dallas and have Sprint's Vision plan... that gets me on average 128kbits/sec including when I plug my phone into my laptop. I don't really think I'm going to rush out and get one of the other carriers for an extra few k/sec.

  • Holy retard, Batman (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 05, 2002 @03:44PM (#4820524)
    AT&T Wireless and Ericsson currently pursuing the path to 3G capabilities in the U.S. market by deploying EDGE-ready GSM/GPRS systems.

    Remember when your teacher told you grammar wasn't that important as long as you could get your point across? THEY LIED.
    • The submitter of the /. story was one of the people who made that first phone call. Seems that the little metal radiation-deflection strip/tinfoil hat combination wasn't quite enough to lessen the effects of the signal.

  • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Rick O'Shea (Score:3, Insightful)

    by glomph ( 2644 ) on Thursday December 05, 2002 @03:45PM (#4820532) Homepage Journal
    The meteoric demise of Metricom's Richochet service (which was unlike most dot-bombs run sincerely, and provided pretty good value) should make it pretty clear as to the demand for such fun.
    • I know someone with one of these new data services - costs $10 a megabyte for bandwidth. I think these people seriously overestimate the utility of wireless data services (aka demand).

      When it competes with dialup (at least during off peak) then I'll buy.
    • Well, if I remember correctly (and I rarely do), Richochet's service covered only metropolitian areas. Many of us work in them but live outside in good ol' suburbia. So unless my company paid for this, I wouldn't spring for it.

      Now if a cell provider impliments it across their coverage area, it is a different story.

      :P

    • Re:Rick O'Shea (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Combuchan ( 123208 )
      I would say Ricochet's demise was partially because of the massive up front capital it took to set up the network. They tried to roll it out in my city [chandleraz.org], but the City Council refused to grant them the ability to place pole top boxes on 7% of all street lamps in the city. More over, Ricochet devices ran in the unlicenesed ISM 900 MHz and 2.4 GHz range, which didn't provide much bandwith, 128 kbps max for $70/month doesn't seem worth it when you can only use it a few places here and there.

      ATT et al. have their own towers and will shortly have their own spectrum licenses, enabling far better penetration. ATT also had $13.6 billion in revenue in 2001, dwarving Metricom's and enabling the capital for more advanced, faster wireless data services.

      my US$0.02

      • I don't have the link right now (try Google news if you're interested) but there have been accusations that Worldcom helped to bankrupt Metricom.

        Essentially, the charge is that Worldcom massively over-charged Metricom for backhaul bandwidth, while failing to re-sell the service as it was supposed to. Worldcom was also a major stock-holder in Metricom, which enabled it to ensure that contracts always favored it.

  • hello? can you download my flash now?
  • some a-hole driving along surfing the web...I'm gonna kill him.

  • WTF? (Score:5, Funny)

    by murphj ( 321112 ) on Thursday December 05, 2002 @03:47PM (#4820552) Homepage
    That writeup is KOC*. It has a LOA** . WIKWTHTM***!

    * Kind Of Confusing
    ** Lot of Acronyms
    *** Wish I knew what the hell they mean

    • Re:WTF? (Score:5, Informative)

      by mdechene ( 607874 ) on Thursday December 05, 2002 @04:10PM (#4820767)
      WCDMA - Wideband Code Division Multiplexing Algorithm
      UMTS - Universal Mobile Telephone System
      3G - Third Generation Cell Phone System
      GSM - Global System for Mobile Communications
      GPRS - General Packet Radio Service
      EDGE - Enhanced Data for GSM Evolution
      • Ahh that is helpful. I understand now.

        -Sean

      • rather... (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Sprunkys ( 237361 )
        WCDMA - Wideband Code Division Multiple Access
        UMTS - Universal Mobile Telecommunications System

        according to www.acronymfinder.com [acronymfinder.com] and others

      • Re:WTF? (Score:5, Funny)

        by stinky wizzleteats ( 552063 ) on Thursday December 05, 2002 @05:04PM (#4821167) Homepage Journal

        So, EDGE fully expands to:

        Enhanced Data for Global System for Mobile Communications Evolution

        Jesus. Let's just start making up words for stuff like this. I hereby proclaim this technology to be called "durf".

        • Some acronyms shouldn't be expanded more than one layer. GNU [astrian.net] is an even better example.
        • <pedantic>
          EDGE would actually expand to Enhanced Data for Groupe Spcial Mobile Evolution. Back in 1982, according to this google result [ucl.ac.uk], this French term was formed out of a Conference of European Posts and Telecommunications initiatve for pan-European mobile services.

          Of course, nobody likes the French and the acronym was ultimately changed to Global System for Mobile [Communication]. And yes, there should be an accent over the e in Groupe but /.'s ampersand character thing is broken.

          a bit of history behind that.
          </pedantic>

    • My favourite though is UTRAN. An acronym including an acronym.
      UMTS Terrestrial Radio Access Network
      Now if you fully expand this, you get the majestic Universal Mobile Telecommunications System Terrestrial Radio Access Network.

  • So how does the privacy work with these things? Does it start with the phone with a MAC address? Your billing information with name & address? And then can they figure out where you're at by triangulation, etc?

    • Re:Privacy (Score:5, Interesting)

      by mdechene ( 607874 ) on Thursday December 05, 2002 @04:16PM (#4820818)
      Actually, alot of the 3G phone handset designs have AGPS (Assisted Global Positioning Satellite) receivers built in, so they don't need triangulation to spot ya any more. Part of the requirement that E911 systems have imposed on cell phones being able to identify their own location so they can send help out as needed.
  • Though a very interesting concept, the question remains...how much is this going to cost?? Phones and plans cost more than enough already! (At least in Canada)

  • Sprint 3G @ 144-230 kbps right now (Score:5, Informative)

    by ckm ( 87462 ) on Thursday December 05, 2002 @03:51PM (#4820592) Homepage
    I'm using Sprint's PCSvision system right now (for this post in fact). It gets somewhere between 144 to 230 kbps (similar to ISDN) and is available right now. I have the unlimited service, which is $110/month-to-month. Pretty resonable, I use it on the road for business.

    The only thing that's been kinda sucky so far is the slow upload speeds and it really sucks battery life out of a notebook...

    Other than that, it works as advertised. Setup is a bit of a pain, but it's only been out for a month or so, so perhaps the next release of the software will fix that.
    • It gets somewhere between 144 to 230 kbps

      Can you do some tests and give us real world numbers?

      The only thing that's been kinda sucky so far is the slow upload speeds

      How slow? I was under the impression the technology was full duplex. It's not?

      Have you tried using the PC card in your desktop computer for internet access?
    • I have a similar service in Tokyo. They advertise anywhere from 64kbps up to 128kbps. I see, on average, 70kbps with peaks in the 110kbps range. I think the 110kbps peak is limited by the fact that windows sees it as a serial modem and limits the serial bus to 115200bps.

      In any event, I pay about $80/month for unlimited service. The only down side is that the connection works by buffering and bursting in 500ms intervals. The server saves up 500ms of traffic and bursts it all at once. Then the modem responds. Completely useless for online gaming. Also it drops packets like a mofo. Methinks there is no real error-correction system between the modem and the cell-towers.

      Still, it beats 56k modems.
  • ...there's NEVER a good reason to move to Dallas.

    In fact, Texas is full. Please find residence in some other state.

    Thank you, please drive through.

  • Up to xxx Mbps... until it gets customers (Score:4, Insightful)

    by phorm ( 591458 ) on Thursday December 05, 2002 @03:52PM (#4820611) Journal
    With initial packet data speeds up to 384 kbps a wideband radio technology that provides mobile users with data rates up to 2 Mbps

    More interesting would be a test of this under high saturation. Current systems are already getting bogged down, reception is getting craps, calls lost, etc. Once the user-base for the service gets high, I would predict a decrease in speed (at least for a time).

    Never trust the "up to." My internet is supposed to get "up to " > 2.5Mbps transfer rate down. Average or mean would be a better indicator.
    • "More interesting would be a test of this under high saturation. Current systems are already getting bogged down, reception is getting craps, calls lost, etc"

      There are different circumstances with data than there is with voice. With voice, the requirement is that you have a constant connection with a minimum bandwidth and a minimum latency. Standards for data trasmission would be much more relaxed. It's okay to wait a few seconds to get a burst of data. At best, most of the cell phones will be bursty instead of constant download streams.

      There are going to be people that use the phone to keep their computer on the net constantly. You can bet, though, that the service providers will provide incentives not to use the internet phone much. For example, they'll charge you by the kilobyte. Maybe one day that'll all be worthwhile, but for the first round I'm reasonably sure that they won't have saturation issues.

      I do whole heartedly agree with your 'up to' comment, though. Seems like it'd be more useful to post a practical data average. Of course, they'd inflate that # too. heh.

      Don'tcha love marketing?

  • WiFi vs. 3G (Score:5, Informative)

    by Lt Razak ( 631189 ) on Thursday December 05, 2002 @03:53PM (#4820614)
    I am one of the toughest critics of cellular operators, whom I believe are the weakest links in the value chain to create viable wireless data businesses. However, I don't think the cellular operators are -- or should be -- embarrassed about 3G vs. WiFi. The operators should be embarrassed about lots of things -- misleading the public about capabilities, marketing WAP as "wireless Internet," providing virtually no customer education, etc., etc. -- but not about the concept of 3G vs. WiFi. Some points of comparison: * WiFi was designed for local area networks. 3G was designed for wide area networks. * WiFi was designed for data. 3G was designed for voice and data. * WiFi emphasizes computing devices (laptops, desktops, PDAs). 3G emphasizes (so far) handsets; I hope the cellular industry gets more aggressive about promoting PC Card/Compact Flash radio modems and wireless-enabled PDAs for 3G. * WiFi uses non-licensed spectrum. 3G uses licensed spectrum. Businesses are often more wary of using unlicensed spectrum than licensed spectrum. * WiFi doesn't require corporations or home users to pay airtime charges for local usage. WiFi companies trying to develop nationwide paid access are still figuring out the business model. 3G (2G and 2.5G) requires local, national and international airtime charges. If the cellular industry fails to develop a viable business model for integrating WiFi with cellular and if public fee-based WiFi networks expand dramatically across the country, then it's possible that WiFi could steal some of the thunder and customers away from 3G data services.

  • Forget about 3G! Take a look at SOMA Networks. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by kakkak ( 448417 ) on Thursday December 05, 2002 @03:54PM (#4820622)
    I have a friend in Japan who was telling me about this product. Land line quality phones and a data connection over the same wireless connection!!

    7 megs/second!!!

    http://www.somanetworks.com, I've heard they are trialing a few places in the US and maybe Canada. IIt would be pretty nice to get away from Bell.

  • Texas has a history in wireless (Score:5, Insightful)

    by t0qer ( 230538 ) on Thursday December 05, 2002 @03:56PM (#4820643) Homepage Journal
    Well not a huge history, but just some interesting trivia..

    Ricochet's wireless modems were not run out of the Bay area office as some like to think. Bay area was mainly a "peoples interface"

    The real behind the curtain work occured down in texas. The NOC in texas was responisible for authenticating the modems and ultimately had complete control over the system.

    [training speil]
    When the ricochet is turned on, it's unique number goes over the poletops until it hits a WAP, then down to texas where the number is checked against the customer database. If it checks out an authorization command is sent back to the modem allowing it to connect to the ricochet network.
    [end training speil]

    Texas is a huge flat land mass located in the southern portion of the united states. It borders the carribean and has fairly nice weather (except for the occasional tornado) These geographical features are what makes it so appealing to wireless development.

    Also to note are the remote oil fields that depend on pump yeild data that is usually sent wirelessly because it's cheaper in terms of right of way. So basically there's a demand in texas for anything new in wireless data transfer.

    Texas is cool place to watch on "King of the Hill", but I wouldn't want to live there just because I love where I live (Friends, family, ect) I'm surprised slashdot editors would allow such a seething comment to make it through. Just because you love where you live is no reason to clown on someplace else.
    • Texas is cool place to watch on "King of the Hill", but I wouldn't want to live there just because I love where I live (Friends, family, ect) I'm surprised slashdot editors would allow such a seething comment to make it through. Just because you love where you live is no reason to clown on someplace else.

      Maybe the editor also likes where he lives and has friends where he lives, hence he doesn't want to move to Dallas. Now, living close to the Dallas Cowboys, on the other hand, that ought to scare anyone from moving there!

    • DFW is also big into telecom for a lot of other reasons, e.g. Texas Instruments being HQ'd up there. Dallas as a city, though... And understand that I'm a native-born and raised Texan when I say this, so my dislike of that metroplex is informed:

      Life is too short to live in Dallas.

      • DFW is also home to Nortel's, Ericsson's, and Alcatel's US headquarters, as well as countless others.

        But as a Dallas resident, I agree with you. This city is damn boring. Street after street of strip malls, and gigantic malls and movie theatres, etc. Not a whole lot of character.

        But perks like low cost of living, no state income tax, no tax on groceries, etc. are enough to keep me here.
    • Texas is a huge flat land mass located in the southern portion of the united states. It borders the carribean...

      uhh, since when does Texas border the Caribbean?
      • Can I get some quality karma whoring for puttin this guy down please :)

        I guess it's true what they're sayin about todays kids, show them a world map and they wouldn't be able to show you what continent they live on :(

        http://plasma.nationalgeographic.com/mapmachine/ in dex.html?id=362&size=medium&left=-70.59&bottom=19. 05&right=-70.19&top=19.45

    • Texas is cool place to watch on "King of the Hill", but I wouldn't want to live there just because I love where I live (Friends, family, ect)

      Friends comes on here in texas too you know--nbc on thursday nights... Yeah, I know we just got indoor plumbing in some parts last year, but come on--we're not BACKWARDS or anything...

  • You're tellin' me! (Score:3, Funny)

    by Asprin ( 545477 ) <(moc.oohay) (ta) (dlonrasg)> on Thursday December 05, 2002 @03:58PM (#4820668) Homepage Journal

    This is not yet a strong enough reason to move to Dallas, though.

    Yeah, they're gonna have to throw in something *important* like downloadable ring tones or a Hello Kitty screensaver.

  • Bluetooth to keep up? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonvmous Coward ( 589068 ) on Thursday December 05, 2002 @03:58PM (#4820670)
    Just curious if 3G will jumpstart a faster Bluetooth spec. To the best of my knowledge, Bluetooth isn't capable of reaching 2 megabits.

    Right now I have a BT enabled cell phone. I use it as an organizer that syncs up with Outlook on my laptop. I've heard that you can use BT to get an internet connection to the laptop, but I haven't personally verified that. If I could, though, it'd mean that my laptop would be able to get on the net without needing to remove my cell phone from my pocket. One less thing sitting 3 inches from my laptop with a 6' cable attached.
  • I want to see you."
  • a strong enough reason to move to Dallas, there could NEVER be (imo)

  • Not the first? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mdechene ( 607874 ) on Thursday December 05, 2002 @04:03PM (#4820715)
    Its probably more accurate to say this is the first WCDMA/UMTS call on a commercial network, as Motorola and probably others have been doing this on their private networks for some time now.

  • CDMA standards (Score:3, Interesting)

    by evilned ( 146392 ) on Thursday December 05, 2002 @04:10PM (#4820771) Homepage
    OK, can someone explain to me the difference between all of the 3g CDMA standards? Like CDMA 2000 vs. WCDMA? Is it a just a difference in how much data a second can be transferred, or is there something else to it. I know 1xRTT fits in there somewhere as well, but I think its just for voice.
    • check out http://www.three-g.net. Everything will be explained.
    • First, 2G digital technologies:
      D-AMPS, aka TDMA (latter name not good because GSM is also TDMA) - Used by Cingular and AT&T until recently
      GSM - Used by T-Mobile. Cing and AT&T are rolling out GSM. GSM doesn't seem to handle multiple providers in the same area very well, as numerous T-Mobile customers are complaining about their phones going into "Emergency service only" mode as soon as Cing and AT&T roll out service in their area. Used in Europe by legal mandate.
      cdmaOne - Qualcomm's original CDMA implementation. Used by Sprint PCS, Verizon, Qwest, Telus Mobility in Canada, and (I believe) Centennial Wireless in Mexico.

      2.5G services:
      GPRS - The GSM high-speed data enhancement. 40ish kilobits/sec
      CDMA2000 1xRTT - Evolution of cdmaOne, 144 kilobits max in initial versions, later going into the 200s-300s. Backwards compatible with cdmaOne - cdmaOne handsets work with CDMA2000 networks and vice versa, which allows providers to do partial rollouts for market testing/high-demand areas.

      3G services:
      UMTS - The 3G evolution of GSM. The GSM people realized their modulation scheme was inferior, so moved to a CDMA variant. Unfortunately, almost all the companies with CDMA expertise are behind CDMA2000, which means that the UMTS camp is having trouble getting anything to work well, especially handsets. (Most well-known problem right now is battery life - No mention was made about how long the battery used in this test would've lasted.) NTT DoCoMo rolled out UMTS in Japan, their name is now mud. Completely incompatible with GSM/GPRS. Requires new handsets, new base stations, and new spectrum.
      CDMA2000 1xEV-DO - 3G evolution of Qualcomm's CDMA technology. From what I've heard, like 1xRTT it's backwards-compatible back to cdmaOne. i.e. a provider rolling out 1xEV-DO doesn't have to upgrade their entire network at once. Already in use in Korea and also I believe by KDDI in Japan (KDDI might only be using 1xRTT - Either way they're mopping up DoCoMo because their service actually works.)
  • I was told (hmm forgot where ;) )that (up to)2 Mb was within the same cell??? Could anyone please tell us if this is true?
  • My voice sounds the same at 384kbps as it does on the current CDMA network.

    Wake me up when they come out with a phone that can hold and play 3 hours of 320x240 MPEG-4 video, receive AM & FM radio, take passable 640x480 pictures, play Java and Gameboy games, record and playback a few hours of MP3s, has distinctive ringers, does SMS and email, and of course, has at least a couple hours of talk time.

    Until then, I wish they'd just concentrate on upgrading the cellular infrastructure, so I can freaking make and receive a phone call during rush hour in Chicago. 3G is just going to strain the frequency bandwidth and infrastructure worse.

  • is that this post was written from Fort Worth.
  • "This is not yet a strong enough reason to move to Dallas, though."

    In Soviet Russia, there is not yet strong enough reason to move out of Dallas. Heek heek!
  • Sprint's doing a promotion for three months of Wireless Web (CDMA, basically a 14.4 hookup; not to be confused with 'PCS Vison', much faster) for free (instead of $5/mo). So what the heck, I signed up. Hooked the phone up via serial line to a Palm IIIxe, loaded up some email and browser software, etc.

    It's interesting to see what can be done with it (you know, Slashdot [slashdot.org], Google [google.com], even MapQuest [mapquest.com]) but I've noticed that connection setup and teardown times are significant, especially when you gotta plug wire the phone to the PDA.

    After that, download speeds aren't too bad if you stick to wireless versions of sites. (Heck, if I were still on dialup instead of DSL, I'd use those at home - fewer ads, too!) I'm not watching streaming video or playing Counterstrike on the road, anyway.

    With things like the Treo, where the phone and PDA are all in one unit (or even just with a Bluetooth link between them), and the ability to quickly pull it out, sign on in less than three seconds, get info, and put it back in your pocket, then it might be worth it. To some people.

    I'm obviously a geek, but even I wouldn't spring $5/mo continuously. I might activate it for a particular month that I know I'll be going on a long road trip where I'd be sharing the driving responsibilities, but otherwise, so what?

    • 1G is analog (FM) cellular
      2G is digital, including circuit-switched data services
      2.5G is the current crop of packet-switched data services (1xRTT and GPRS)
      3G is the next generation (UMTS and 1xEV-DO)

  • I Remember A Day... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Zech Harvey ( 604609 ) on Thursday December 05, 2002 @04:49PM (#4821066)

    ...When Connectivity Providers fought tooth and nail for cities. Recently it has been regions. Now it looks like they are banding together and drawing the lines at nations. I mean, it seems that ubiquitious networks would be wonderful, but I worry when one becomes the national monopoly. Will technology like this allow competition with other protocols? Or do we get one protocol and a bunch of implementations from different companies?
  • ...that people using mobile phones while they're driving can now get into accidents twice as fast? ;-)

  • In Soviet Russia, wireless technology transmits YOU at high speed!

    (Sorry, I don't even know where this joke comes from.)
  • CDMA (2G) -> CDMA-2000(3G) GSM (2G) -> WCDMA(3G) Its funny how these GSM-based 3G technologies are achieving these technical milestones now, while CDMA-based technologies (ie. CDMA-2000) have been commercially deployed for months at much cheaper costs, and much greater flexibility. A testament to the ongoing wireless industry debate between GSM and CDMA. The way it looks right now, GSM-based carriers are going to have a much more expensive and difficult time evolving their networks; especially in Europe, where the 3G migration path was mandated by the European Commission years ago in an effort to protect all of the European companies supporting (and making huge revenues off of) GSM. Now that a better way to 3G exists (ie. CDMA-2000, based off of CDMA), European carriers can't switch technologies and are finding it near impossible to keep up with the evolving pace of CDMA-2000. Euro-carrier Orange all but scrapped their 3G plans today due to mounting costs and complexities of developing WCDMA networks. Its the reason why NTT Docomo (Japanese carrier) is now getting blown away by their competitor(s) in Japan, when 2 years ago they led the market. The same reason why Europe has gone from first to last in terms of carrier technology and services. Some really good thoughts on the GSM vs. CDMA topic from people who know way more than me: http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2002/10/GSM3G.sh tml http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php?s=f5b64 b062368aae582d6f4f7895ce712&threadid=73028
    • cdmaOne (2G) -> CDMA2000 1xRTT (2.5G) -> CDMA2000 1xEV-DO (3G) - Seamless upgrade path, CDMA2000 handsets work with cdmaOne networks and vice versa.

      Now, for GSM...
      GSM (2G) -> GPRS (2.5G) -> dead end
      scratch -> UMTS (3G)

      UMTS and GSM/GPRS are completely different technologies with no relation whatsoever. For a carrier to upgrade to UMTS, they must upgrade their entire network and upgrade all handsets. They need new spectrum too. OUCH. Essentially, they have to start from scratch as if they were a brand new provider. CDMA providers can upgrade as needed. See Verizon's Express Network - They are slowly rolling out CDMA2000 city by city, but they don't have to upgrade everything at once, since CDMA2000 users will still be able to make voice and low-speed data calls even on the old network.
  • What good does this new-fangled crap get me when I can't even get decent reception, much less any reception, when I'm back home? (right betwen Eau Claire and LaCrosse, Wisconsin). Get service(digital-2G) in > 95% of the US and then worry about other shit. I know a lot of people who would get cell phones if they could just get decent(if any) reception. They're missing out, from what I see, as a lot of potential customers. But, there must not be enough possible customers to turn a profit by introducing digital service in certain areas....so we'll just have more hicks without cell phones for a little while longer.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • I live in central NJ (Bridgewater/Martinsville) and I'm perfectly happpy with my cell service with Verizon.

        If you're using T-Mobile or Sprint, maybe you should just get a decent provider. If you look at their coverage maps, the edge of both of their coverage areas is just a few miles west of where I live... That's PITIFUL that neither carrier can fully cover the most densely populated state in the US.

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close