Talk:2G

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

WAP capability[edit]

Can someone provide some indication of the wap capabilities of 2g phones? thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.88.9.234 (talk) 15:15, 11 April 2005 (UTC)

2G does not have WiFi capabilities. It will not connect to a wireless access point (WAP). Gh5046 (talk) 01:34, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

WAP in this case refers to Wireless Access Protocol, not Wi-FI. Most GSM terminals after a certain date (end of 90s) supported WAP. Most still do as MMS uses WAP as a transport Nasula (talk) 16:31, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

wrong information?[edit]

The opening paragraph is fundmentally wrong -

T


erm, one of these 2 articles gives wrong information about data-transfer in gsm:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSM says: "This fact has also meant that data communication was built into the system from very early on."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2G says: "It cannot normally transfer data, such as email or software, other than the digital voice call itself, and other basic ancillary data such as time and date."

these two statements are totally opposing.. so, which one is right?!?

greetz

also look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Global_System_for_Mobile_Communications —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.169.107.10 (talk) 02:29, 25 April 2005 (UTC)

Those conflicting statements resolved. JohnTechnologist 08:33, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

2G or 2-G?[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result was move. Vassyana (talk) 08:19, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

What is the correct title, 2G or 2-G? If it's 2G then the page should be moved. The disambiguation page that currently exists doesn't do much disambiguation. Gh5046 (talk) 01:28, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I moved the disambiguation page 2G to 2G (disambiguation), but I was unable to move 2-G over since the page already existed. Requesting move on the Wikipedia:Requested_moves page. Gh5046 (talk) 22:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
What about Cargoitalia? 70.55.85.35 (talk) 03:22, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
That is covered on the 2G (disambiguation) page since you added it there. Gh5046 (talk) 04:09, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Additionally, if you check what links to 2G you'll see that most, if not all, of the links are related to the wireless technology. Gh5046 (talk) 21:46, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Support per nom. Llamasharmafarmerdrama (talk) 18:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

4G?![edit]

"Sprint deployed the first 4G network in USA in Baltimore." - huh? on 4G page it says that 4G still doesnt exist... 84.237.172.23 (talk) 18:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC) pt

Recommend removal of this section of discussion for two reasons. It was posted two years ago about a fast-developing technology page, and it is no longer correct. Clifsportland (talk) 20:52, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Capacity[edit]

This section currently states. “The digital systems were designed to emit less radio power from the handsets. This meant that cells could be smaller, so more cells could be placed in the same amount of space. This was also made possible by cell towers and related equipment getting less expensive.” Why does less radio power from handsets imply that cells can be smaller? Additionally, the statement seems redundant, Smaller does indeed mean that more can fit in the same space, but it doesn't seem very to add clarity. I don't know enough about the subject to address the wording appropriately. Clifsportland (talk) 20:40, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

2G Spectrum Scam[edit]

Why do we have "2G Spectrum scam" in this section. It has nothing to do with the techonology as such. Chetanshaw (talk) 13:12, 11 October 2012 (UTC)