- 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)
The opening paragraph is fundmentally wrong -
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?!?
also look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Global_System_for_Mobile_Communications —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 02:29, 25 April 2005 (UTC)
- Those conflicting statements resolved. JohnTechnologist 08:33, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
2G or 2-G?
- 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)
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