Rogers rocket stick vs. Bell mobile internet
Hello all,
Does anyone know if either of these options is truly better?
I have the Rogers stick and had zero connection on a drive from Guelph to Bolton along highway 7 - I've heard that Bell is better in remote locations.
Any thoughts/comments will be appreciated - thanks in advance :)
Melanie
»
- Login to post comments
Since its based off 3G
Since its based off 3G receptions, you'll usually get better signals in Urban areas with Rogers and a more widespread signal with Bell. I believe thats the general consensus but I might be wrong.
----------------
Kelvin Lau
2nd Year BAH/CIS
Based on my observations,
Based on my observations, I'd agree with Kelvin. What I've seen on campus is that there's little signal available for people who subscribe to Bell, Telus, etc., but there's plenty of signal for users of Rogers, Fido, etc.
I'd agree with Kelvin as
I'd agree with Kelvin as well,
I've had a telus phone work from very very far off places, once I took it on a camping trip, and was the only one who could get signal.
That said, I have near 0 signal on campus, just walking around outside, nevermind inside an actual building.
Coverage isn't universal
Coverage isn't universal even for Bell... Highway 21 near Grand Bend has Rogers coverage, but nothing from Bell.
I think no matter what you do you're going to run into areas with poor coverage; best to choose service with good rates and service. I've used the Bell service, and though it's reasonable, strangely the most significant performance boost came with OS X 10.6's integrated WWAN support, so I didn't need the crappy software it came with to connect.
--
Andrew
Cell phone differences
It comes down to the technologies used. I'm not going to pretend I'm an expert on the matter, but this is how it was explained to me:
Rogers (and derivative companies) use GSM (I believe). It's great at giving very powerful signals, but has a shorter range. Telus, Bell, etc, use CDMA, which tends to have a longer range per tower.
In cities, since towers are easy to find, GSM seems to be stronger, so "better" coverage is found. Out in the country, CDMA seems to have "better" coverage, since the towers, which are fewer and further between, reach out longer distances.
Again, it's just how it was explained to me, but I did a quick Google to make sure I wasn't full of it (for a change), and nothing seemed to dispute that.
From my own past retail stints, I've found most people are highly disappointed with the range of ANY wireless stick. Not that that helps much, but I thought it deserved mentioning BOTH technologies have a long way to go. A good reason why Canada only has a mid 60% cell phone usage rate.
Rand486
While its true that CDMA is
While its true that CDMA is traditionally used by Bell, they recently made the change over to GSM technology. This happened in early november, so keep an eye out for any new internet stick out there, plus the introduction of the HSPA network from Rogers which is said to be able to run at 21Mps
----------------
Kelvin Lau
2nd Year BAH/CIS
If you're going to be using
If you're going to be using data while mobile, I would recommend switching to the Bell/Telus CDMA network (not their new HSPA network). While mobile, CDMA devices communicate with multiple towers simultaneously and can transition from one to another with no loss in connectivity. You'll lose out on peak theoretical speed (3.1Mbps versus 7.2-21Mbps for HSPA), but for all practical purposes is likely the better solution.
I've used CDMA for data connections in both stationary and mobile roles. While stationary I've achieved speeds of 2Mbps, and usually about 700Kbps going through rural areas on VIA rail. Can't speak for highways though.
Further, since Bell and Telus are putting the hype on their new HSPA network, they've cut the price on their CDMA sticks. Both have CDMA sticks at less than $200 no contract, and free if you sign a 1-year contract. (Telus, Bell)
---
Jordan Kapp
Fourth Year - BA(G)/CIS
Canadian Forces Regular Officer - Aerospace Control Officer