Is Rogers GSM Better Than Fido?
"I've deliberately worded this question in the form of "who is better", but if you've read many of my opinions and suggestions in other parts of this web page, you'd know that I don't give that sort advice. However, this is the way most people seem to think of the issue, and so I felt that it was better to start that way.
The biggest problem with the question, as asked, is the word better. There are many ways that a network can be better or worse than another, and in the case of Rogers GSM vs Fido (Microcell Connexions), it comes down to two distinct issues: 1) Amount of coverage; and 2) Quality of that coverage.
In terms of amount of coverage, there is no question that Rogers GSM covers vastly larger areas of Canada than does Microcell Connexions. However, much of that extra area is sparsely populated, and for the vast majority of city-dwellers, the coverage is of little use to them. However, if you are someone who spends much of their time outside of the areas covered by Microcell Connexions, you are definitely going to feel that Rogers is better than Microcell Connexions. Any coverage is better than no coverage at all.
For those who live, work, and play inside the areas covered by Microcell Connexions, the issue of coverage is moot. To this group of users, the issue is which provider has the best coverage quality. In that respect, Microcell Connexions comes out in the lead. In most places around Southern Ontario, where both networks provide coverage, Microcell Connexions has at least 2 to 3 times as many sites serving that given area. In the GTA, both have about the same number of sites, but Microcell Connexions still wins for the following reasons:
First, Rogers has yet to implement Frequency Hopping, and as such they haven't got anywhere near the resistance to interference that Microcell Connexions does in the GTA. Second, the handoff schedule implemented on the Rogers GSM network is simply not responsive enough. Throughout hours of online testing, I have been extremely disappointed with the extent of call damage caused by delayed handoffs. In fact, these delayed handoffs have resulted in at least 20 dropped calls in areas where coverage is quite decent. Those delayed handoffs have also resulted in countless situations where the audio was damaged to the point of being useless for periods exceeding 5 seconds (though in the end, the call recovered by eventually handing off).
When it comes to network tuning however, we can always hope that the engineers at Rogers will eventually set things right. They can certainly implement Frequency Hopping, and they can change the handoff schedule any time they please. As for the lack of sites outside of the GTA, that too can be fixed by investing in a rather heavy build-out of new GSM-only sites in those areas. This means that in time Rogers can bring their call quality up to the same standards that Microcell Connexions already has. When that happens, we can compare networks solely upon their coverage, but until that day arrives, you must pick which GSM network you want based on the following criteria:
If you require your GSM phone to work in areas where Microcell Connexions does not provide coverage, or where their coverage is weak and Rogers is strong, then go with Rogers. If you spend the vast majority of your time in the urban areas that are well-covered by Microcell Connexions, you'll find that you'll get markedly better quality service by going with them. If you seem to be the type that finds themselves in both situations frequently, you might want to consider getting both services, and using the one that suits you the best at any given moment."
Microcell Connexions = FIDO
Taken from Steve Punter's website.
 feedback form
 feedback form
by elusion 
last modified: 2003-08-11 17:03:21 |
