3 ms·

> To add some more context, their excuse for high prices and mediocre service is generally something to do with the size of the country, which granted they aren

by voisin 4y ago

> To add some more context, their excuse for high prices and mediocre service is generally something to do with the size of the country, which granted they aren't exactly wrong,… Not a problem in other sparsely populated, geographically large countries, like Australia.

dghlsakjg 4y ago
or say... the US which is an even closer comparison
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- aidenn0 4y ago
  The US is around 10x denser than Canada (slightly smaller, 9x the population).
  - sandworm101 4y ago
    Not really. Candians pack more tightly together. There is far more land per person, but 90% of the canadian population, those in cities, live in a smaller area than the 90% us average. Canada is mostly dense cities separated by empty. By comparison, America is one rolling suburb from coast to coast. Take british columbia, a vastly big place by US standards. Drop one 50-mile circle on vancouver and you have 75% of BC's population covered in one service area. If you draw a line from the ski hills north of vancouver, to alaska, you will cross only two roads. Everything to the north is empty by us standards.
    - aidenn0 4y ago
      My original comment was correct for mean density, but US clumps too. In addition, Cell phone networks need to cover the area people travel, so unless Canadians only travel in an area 11% that of those in the US, the point stands.
      - Reason077 4y ago
        > "unless Canadians only travel in an area 11% that of those in the US" Honestly, that's probably not far off. Canada is enormous, but the vast majority of it is completely uninhabited or very, very sparsely populated.
      - bawolff 4y ago
        I'd trade not having service in nunavut for a cheaper phone plan.
        dghlsakjg 4y ago
        Good news. You probably already have the former!
      - dghlsakjg 4y ago
        In all honesty, 11% sounds high for land area covered by cell service. There are large sections of the trans-canada highway that aren't covered (the only east west highway, and the main road across the country). I can't really count on having cell service on the highways between towns when I'm travelling in Canada so they aren't really providing much coverage there. Just to drive the point home here's a map of Rogers coverage. They don't have a single tower in the three provinces that make up the northern half of the country. Canada, despite being large is really a VERY centralized country. 90% of Canadians live within 100 miles of the US border.
    - Reason077 4y ago
      Exactly. And about 18 million people, half of Canada's entire population, live in the Quebec City - Windsor corridor, the narrow and densely populated strip which includes the cities of Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal.
kiwijamo 4y ago
Australia has the worst rural service I've come across in my travels so I wouldn't hold them up as a good example. There are medium sized rural towns with service only from one or maybe two telcos and even then the capacity is often rather limited (one town for instance only had a single 15 MHz LTE channel from an omnidirectional antenna serving the entire town and surrounding region). In New Zealand we pay more than the Australians do but we have service from all carriers to even small towns. In New Zealand towns the same size as the Australian town I mentioned would have a cell site (or even two or three!) from each of our three networks with multiple LTE channels providing LTE carrier aggregation of up up to 50—100 MHz and directional panel antennas. The difference in QOS especially at times of high demand is night and day. In more recent times smaller towns have all three networks cooperating to provide service from the same tower (as part of a joint venture between all three networks called Rural Connectivity Group) making it economical to service small towns with no difference in QOS between networks.I'd rather have the latter than the former IMHO.
- posguy 4y ago
  Upgrading to just sectors would net them so much more range! Sprint and T-Mobile here in the USA used to do egregious stuff like this, or only put up 1 sector of 3 on a tower just to mostly cover a freeway or highway, ignoring the rural userbase entirely.

by voisin 4y ago

dghlsakjg 4y ago

or say... the US which is an even closer comparison

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
aidenn0 4y ago
The US is around 10x denser than Canada (slightly smaller, 9x the population).
- sandworm101 4y ago
  Not really. Candians pack more tightly together. There is far more land per person, but 90% of the canadian population, those in cities, live in a smaller area than the 90% us average. Canada is mostly dense cities separated by empty. By comparison, America is one rolling suburb from coast to coast. Take british columbia, a vastly big place by US standards. Drop one 50-mile circle on vancouver and you have 75% of BC's population covered in one service area. If you draw a line from the ski hills north of vancouver, to alaska, you will cross only two roads. Everything to the north is empty by us standards.
  - aidenn0 4y ago
    My original comment was correct for mean density, but US clumps too. In addition, Cell phone networks need to cover the area people travel, so unless Canadians only travel in an area 11% that of those in the US, the point stands.
    - Reason077 4y ago
      > "unless Canadians only travel in an area 11% that of those in the US" Honestly, that's probably not far off. Canada is enormous, but the vast majority of it is completely uninhabited or very, very sparsely populated.
    - bawolff 4y ago
      I'd trade not having service in nunavut for a cheaper phone plan.
      - dghlsakjg 4y ago
        Good news. You probably already have the former!
    - dghlsakjg 4y ago
      In all honesty, 11% sounds high for land area covered by cell service. There are large sections of the trans-canada highway that aren't covered (the only east west highway, and the main road across the country). I can't really count on having cell service on the highways between towns when I'm travelling in Canada so they aren't really providing much coverage there. Just to drive the point home here's a map of Rogers coverage. They don't have a single tower in the three provinces that make up the northern half of the country. Canada, despite being large is really a VERY centralized country. 90% of Canadians live within 100 miles of the US border.
  - Reason077 4y ago
    Exactly. And about 18 million people, half of Canada's entire population, live in the Quebec City - Windsor corridor, the narrow and densely populated strip which includes the cities of Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal.

kiwijamo 4y ago

Australia has the worst rural service I've come across in my travels so I wouldn't hold them up as a good example. There are medium sized rural towns with service only from one or maybe two telcos and even then the capacity is often rather limited (one town for instance only had a single 15 MHz LTE channel from an omnidirectional antenna serving the entire town and surrounding region). In New Zealand we pay more than the Australians do but we have service from all carriers to even small towns. In New Zealand towns the same size as the Australian town I mentioned would have a cell site (or even two or three!) from each of our three networks with multiple LTE channels providing LTE carrier aggregation of up up to 50—100 MHz and directional panel antennas. The difference in QOS especially at times of high demand is night and day. In more recent times smaller towns have all three networks cooperating to provide service from the same tower (as part of a joint venture between all three networks called Rural Connectivity Group) making it economical to service small towns with no difference in QOS between networks.I'd rather have the latter than the former IMHO.

posguy 4y ago
Upgrading to just sectors would net them so much more range! Sprint and T-Mobile here in the USA used to do egregious stuff like this, or only put up 1 sector of 3 on a tower just to mostly cover a freeway or highway, ignoring the rural userbase entirely.