Mobile Nigeria Forum

Well, too bad you are just a guest, so I doubt if you would be back to read this.

GPRS is not a useless technology. In fact, it is one of the best things to have happened in the mid 1990's when it first emerged.

I am a 'heavy' Internet user, and rely on GPRS when I am out and about: Travelling, at home, in a taxi, at the beach.

I have been using it for tha past three years, in different countries.

My only beef with the technology is that it is 'expensive' if you are relying on it for heavy use.

Your experinece with it in Nigeria should not taint the useful attributes of this great innovation: GPRS.

No sir.

purekernel wrote:

Please note that my opinion is not founded on GPRS expertise, it's just based on my experience of using GPRS of few occasions.

The guy has said it all. I do not believe that there is anything else to say. Read through the lines and see for yourself.

Oops, I thought I should also add that I am typing this on my laptop that is connected to my GPRS-enabled Nokia phone. What could be better? Nothing.

Very funny how people who do not use a service extensively, or even know how it is supposed to be used, stand up to make claims. No valid points, no statistics; just a declaration.

I do not feel obliged to post a response, as the thread starter has said nothing.

But, oh, 99% of my 290 posts on this forum and others have been done on my GPRS-enabled smartphone, on my bed, at the office, in a restaurant, on the road, and sometimes in the loo.

This useless technology is also what I use to access my personal and office mail 24/7, and just yesterday night I modified the web pages on my website via GPRS.

I must say that GPRS is the most useless technology I ever came across in my life!

Last edited by AYA (2005-04-01 13:41:52)

purekernel wrote:

As Niyie mentioned, GPRS is too expensive to use.

Nope. Niyyie said it is expensive if you are a heavy internet user. Big difference. The average person on the street is not a heavy user.

purekernel wrote:

Also, the connection speed is just ridiculous...something like 184kbit/second...?

Again, for the average user, GPRS speeds are more than comfortable. As a power user myself, it gets the job done.

purekernel wrote:

One alternative that crops up in my mind is as follows:
What if the GSM operator could set up wifi networks/hotspots up all over the country, and then get the connection to be authenticated over the GSM network

Have you considered the prevailing Wi-fi rates in the country, mate? I am yet to find any significantly lower than N1,500 per hour of use. I have run GPRS for 3 days and above on N1,500 airtime.

purekernel wrote:

The only thing is that subscribers will need to have a wifi compliant phone, such as a PDA

The only Wi-fi enabled "phone" on the market at the moment is the N100,000 Nokia 9500. Great; just great!

purekernel wrote:

that does not necessarily mean GPRS is the best still after slice bread.  It just means that is what they feed us with and that is what we are stuck with....

What I am looking for is some technical points as to why GPRS is the fruit cake and why there are are no cheaper/more efficient technology.   Indeed may be there isn't... but I seeking technical facts.

It does not sound like that is what you are looking for.

You started this thread by rubbishing GPRS. You do not start a quest for knowledge that way.

Don't you think that "Any Alternatives To GPRS?" would have been a better title for this thread?

Again, the experience of Europe shows clearly that implementing GPRS is not a waste of time and money. In my opinion, implementing something like 3G is.

Without going into the very technical details, one of the reasons why GPRS will continue to be the choice of GSM networks is the fact that it can be seamlessly integrated into existing GSM infrastructure. In the case of 3G for example, you have to build a parallel network. An expensive affair, as the Europeans: discovered.

Have you also considered the limited range of Wi-fi radio? How many such hotspots will say MTN need to put up and integrate into its existing infrastructure to cover Lagos?

Plus, some of the expensive issues I raised in my last post?

Giving up so soon indicates you started this thread to preach and get us all converted, and not to seek knowledge as you say; does it not?

AYA wrote:

purekernel wrote:

that does not necessarily mean GPRS is the best still after slice bread.  It just means that is what they feed us with and that is what we are stuck with....

What I am looking for is some technical points as to why GPRS is the fruit cake and why there are are no cheaper/more efficient technology.   Indeed may be there isn't... but I seeking technical facts.

It does not sound like that is what you are looking for.

You started this thread by rubbishing GPRS. You do not start a quest for knowledge that way.

Don't you think that "Any Alternatives To GPRS?" would have been a better title for this thread?

Again, the experience of Europe shows clearly that implementing GPRS is not a waste of time and money. In my opinion, implementing something like 3G is.

Without going into the very technical details, one of the reasons why GPRS will continue to be the choice of GSM networks is the fact that it can be seamlessly integrated into existing GSM infrastructure. In the case of 3G for example, you have to build a parallel network. An expensive affair, as the Europeans: discovered.

Have you also considered the limited range of Wi-fi radio? How many such hotspots will say MTN need to put up and integrate into its existing infrastructure to cover Lagos?

Plus, some of the expensive issues I raised in my last post?

Giving up so soon indicates you started this thread to preach and get us all converted, and not to seek knowledge as you say; does it not?

Basically, I started with a headline that will provoke passionate contribution.
I am genuinely interested in seeing how people feel about GPRS in Nigeria and if they have ever thought there is an alternative to GPRS.    I give the operators 5-7 years, they will be replacing all their GPRS/3G kits with IP based infrastructures and wifi will surely have a role to play. 

On wifi, the range is not all that limited any more.  I don't have figures, but it is not as limited as people think from my experience.   I hope you are not thinking of the home wireless lan type of setup.?

Thanks
later
purekernel

@purekernel: Passionate contribution is not what we need, but intelligent contribution. As a country, we have been too passionate and too unintelligent about many things.

It is my opinion that an inflammatory declaration such as you made - and without any guidelines or facts -on a highly technical level as this is inappropriate and quite a bit insulting to the intelligence.

We may have to wait and see about your above prediction. Maybe 5-7 years from now, with technological progress and under different circumstances, that prediction will speak for itself. But then, maybe not. Cheers, mate

AYA wrote:

@purekernel: Passionate contribution is not what we need, but intelligentcontribution. As a country, we have been too passionate and too unintelligent about many things.

It is my opinion that an inflammatory declaration such as you made - and without any guidelines or facts -on a highly technical level as this is inappropriate and quite a bit insulting to the intelligence.

We may have to wait and see about your above prediction. Maybe 5-7 years from now, with technological progress and under different circumstances, that prediction will speak for itself. But then, maybe not. Cheers, mate

Please note that I posted on the section title "Express Your Opinions".
This is what I have done.  You are equally entitled to express a contrary opinion without slurs.

Cheers!

purekernel

@purekernel Please register. I agree with you that AYA was getting slurry with his post. I assume he simply could not stomach someone saying "GPRS is a useless technology". Remember, you said it as a matter of fact

Well, AYA has done a terrific job with punching the holes in your very shallow argument. Your assertion was not based on empirical evidence or fact. I'm sorry, I cannot stomach this either.

The answer to you people's "problem" lies in the up-coming 4G technology.

The folks who designed and implement GPRS are not resting on thier oars. I cannot say much, but would simply say that you can understand 4G when you combine the features of GPRS plus that of Wi-Fi.

GPRS + Wifi = 4G.

4G is fast. (10Mbits/s) Theoretical figure.
4G is widely available over a large area {unlike Wi-fi}

Lest I forget, 4G is a technology still under development and is currently being tested in Japan.

Funny enough, I wrote a little about it just three days ago on some other website.

I hope I don't have to tell you that 4G is realistically 15 years away from Nigeria (Africa). For now, GPRS rocks in Nigeria. It's the saving grace for folks like me.

@AYA: Pls do not loose your temper any more.

AYA,
Well, you could have simply stated your reasons why you think GPRS is not a useless technology and let your facts decide whether my declaration was unreasonable or not.  No need to take it personal.
No worries man.... let's chill out!

niyyie, and others...and aya!

There are basically two sides to the story here, as far as I can see.
The world of the user (i.e. GPRS user) which is your world, and the second world is the world of the system/core architect.  Arguably the world of the user is the only world, because at the end of the day, if you put out a technology that doesn't fit the users preference/pocket/purpose/etc, it will be a loss to the architect and everyone else involved.  So, I accept from that perspective that GPRS is a good technology.  Like I said, I don't use it myself, so I am not familiar with the world of the user.  However, I work with other components on the GSM network that interface with the GGSN, SGSN (i.e. GPRS service nodes).... and from my experience of working with these application 9including billing) and comparing them to other alternatives, I began to wonder whether this GPRS thing actually makes sense...especially given the cost of usage.  However, from reading the user experience here, now I can imagine  how useful it can be and I can see the space it fills.  I am really interested in cost effecient converged technology so to speak.  I must admit that I sometimes get carried away and don't take the user into the consideration.  Anyhow, the industry analysts have predicted that GPRS/3G will not last long.  There are too many things in the pipeline that are bound to put GPRS in the museum.  I repeat, wifi is one of them.  When I say wifi, please don't think of the home-type wireless lan.
The telecoms world is moving to a complete packet switching platform (no more circuit-switching!)... and in order to achieve mobility by it, there must be an "air" component to it...and that's where "wifi" (or whatever they choose to call it) comes in.  It may be delayed, because some not so clever operators around the world have invested billions of dollars in 3G licences, and they will want to make that money back. Not to be cynical, but I can see a scenario where the best of technologies are delayed so that these players can recoup their return on investment...and they will start selling 3G equipment to the new up and coming markets.  Thank God, Nigeria hasn't gone down the 3G road yet.  I hope the will stop at 2.5G (i.e. GPRS), so we can go straight into 4G.  The intelligent operators in Nigeria should start thinking along that line now, instead of implementing "near-legacy" technology.

Strangely, we are at an advantage that we didn't have GSM technology until recent, hence we can get the best the industry has to offer and avoid the antiques of the industry.  4 years ago, I worked with the Japanese to deploy/test some of their 3G (the world first 3G!) VAS components, we were doing things that the US/Europe are just beginning to sniff today (and ofcourse Nigeria was snoring then, I was only lucky to be studying some odd subjects which ofcourse people were wondering what I was going to do with it!), ...anyway..and by the time US/Europe begin to get the smell, I am sure the Japanese would be on to something else, namely 4G.  If you see what I mean, it's about forsight and being innovative.  And this is not just for fun, but it pays to do that because you put the people at the forefront of technoloy, both as users and engineers.... not just consumers!!!

Take care bros..
purkernel

And the lesson for the day is: Avoid controvesial titles!

axeprince wrote:

niyyie[quote=axeprince wrote:

Strangely, we are at an advantage that we didn't have GSM technology until recent, hence we can get the best the industry has to offer and avoid the antiques of the industry.

Mr. niyyie, I don't know exactly what my offence really are..because the statement above is not mine.

Please, ka so ra oooo, make i no come vex
So long.../quote]

That was not delibrate. Never. I have no reason to "punch" at you. You could have easily pointed my mistake out without adding the last bit. Well, I have promptly corrected my mistake. I guess I was so much in love with your name, never knew when I typed it.

I'm sorry.

So long...