Talk:Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution/Archive 1

EDGE stands for ...
Hi all! Why is "... GLOBAL evolution" used here as the long name for EDGE? It is ".. GSM evolution" as I have just checked in 3GPP TS 21.905-6.7.0 (2004-06), the document defining "Vocabulary for 3GPP Specifications". The "...global evolution" I have found on the 3GPP server only in some old documents dated 1999 and 2000. As I have not yet the permission to change a Lemma, can somebody else please do it. thanks --Fortythree 15:55, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I will move it to the standard name according to the GSM Association. Global Evolution is an outdated term.  Cacophony July 8, 2005 20:04 (UTC)

US providers
Are there any U.S. celluar providers who are using EDGE? I see GPRS and EVDO offered by TMobile and Verizon.


 * Cingular currently offers EDGE in some markets. T-Mobile is in the process of rolling out EDGE. Cacophony 15:39, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Move the list?
Should we move the list to List of EDGE networks? Right now the list is longer than the article. Cacophony 19:37, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Most operators now have EDGE, so this list might even be useless. Maybe we should list operators that do not provide EDGE ? AlexandreAmant (talk) 22:56, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Edge, grps and hscsd
The beginning of the article leaves me with impression that Edge only boosts the speed of Gprs but it is possible to run Hscsd over Edge. Ltxxx 15:03, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

No: Hscsd is a circuit switched technology (CS) as GPRS or EDGE are Packet switched (PS). AlexandreAmant (talk) 23:03, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Disagree: EDGE was a work item within 3GPP and resultet in two improvements of GSM/EDGE standard: ECSD and EGPRS, where Enhanced Circuit Switched Data, is exactly what Ltxxx refers to, was improved with 8PSK, turbo coder etc. However, this standardization was never finalized and will most likely never be since everything is packet oriented Today. By the way, I definitely think this article should be moved to EGPRS and refer to the work item EDGE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.102.111.48 (talk) 19:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Disorganized
To me, this article seems very poorly organised. I cannot follow it. I do not know anything on the subject else I would try to re-write some of it myself.

Also there are different classes of EDGE. There is no detailed description of these different classes. I need to know about them.

Upload ?
The upload capacity of EGRPS (and EHCSD) is not stated...

List of commercial websites??
This article has a lot of commercial websites embedded links. Please remove these link, per WP:NOT. &mdash; Indon ( reply ) &mdash; 10:28, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup comments in :
I added the sprawling lists, proseline, contradictory section and uncited section templates to this section for the following reasons:
 * The list appears to have been edited by multiple individuals by appending new networks as and when EDGE support was introduced, hence, proseline.
 * Amongst other contradictions, T-Mobile is said to have good edge coverage in Croatia and the Czech Republic, but later said to only have EDGE support in parts of Germany. If this refers to different divisions of T-Mobile, it is unclear ie. the links should use the whole company name (ie. T-Mobile Czech Republic)
 * Where is this information taken from? is it recent and/or accurate?
 * The list requires general clean-up; it is unsightly, poorly ordered, and hard to read. Information is hard to find. Thanks, Jonabofftalk 23:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Lists of EDGE in Europe
This list does not seem to be correct? there is no EDGE in the UK. Many European operators announced EDGE in the late 90's but due to the costs of 3g they never implemented EDGE chosing to remain at GPRS. Does anybody have a real uptodate list? --Rbaal 06:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Personally I think the list is pointless (and in its current incarnation useless) and should simply be stricken. If someone needs to find out if a network has EDGE they can just check out the providers page. Perhaps some blanket statement can be made like "many operators who had early deployments of UMTS have foregone EDGE" (as seems to be the case in the UK as stated above, and Sweden IME), if someone can find a source for it Kalleboo 13:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Seems O2 has quietly rolled out EDGE in the UK - my Blackberry is currently sat on the EDGE network while sat in my office in Somerset - our reps are also reporting EDGE connections throughout the country. Speculation is that preparation for the (alleged) iPhone-O2 partnering deal has started Pharazon 16:10, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

2.75G Redirect -- Eurocentric?
Currently, the Page for CDMA2000 refers to 1xRTT as being a "2.75G" technology, with a link to the "2.75G" article -- which redirects to this page about GSM technology. Clicking on a link in a CDMA article that ostensibly talks about data transmission in a CDMA (or at least access neutral) context and ending up on a GSM-specific page is disorienting at best, and horribly misleading in the worst case. AdamRoach 21:52, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Egypt..
Egypt is stated in both, Africa and Middle East. In Africa, it is stated that Egypt Mobinil tried to implement EDGE and failed. In Middle East, it is stated that in Egypt, Vodafone, Mobinil and Etisalat implement EDGE. This is a contradiction! Sabb0ur 01:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

EDGE is not 3G
This was readded by an anonymous user: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Enhanced_Data_Rates_for_GSM_Evolution&action=edit&undoafter=198717341&undo=199166154

I undid it.

There is no reference, and EDGE isn't actually a 3G technology as it operates as a 2G (GSM) bolt-on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JimpsEd (talk • contribs) 20:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * According to the article 3G, the ITU defined six technologies forming 3G networking, in its IMT-2000 standard, EDGE (not even EDGE Evolution) being one of them: So, what to do? Thyl Engelhardt 213.70.217.172 (talk) 11:53, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Requested move
Proposal, that this article be moved to EDGE (capitalised). 'EDGE' is shorter and represents common usage. The full meaning behind the Backronym can still be expanded on the first line of the main article. Currently 'GSM' is simply GSM. The only potential conflict I am aware of is the EDGE of Existence Programme which already has a suitable name. I have added an otheruses4 to the top of this article pointing back to the edge disambiguity page. —Sladen (talk) 07:57, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm opposed to the moving of this article. The Edge disambiguation page is appropriate, though perhaps acronyms deserve a separate listing on that page.  Enhanced Data Rates for GSM Evolution isn't the only use of the EDGE acronym, and hardly the most useful or sought after.  There is at least equal reason for the EDGE of Existence Programme to claim this redirect, and there will be more entries for this abbreviation in future.136.186.1.191 (talk) 04:51, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose rename to EDGE (GSM) instead 70.51.9.124 (talk) 04:31, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

This article should be moved to EGPRS instead. EDGE was the work item in 3GPP for improving both GPRS and CSD, resulting in EGPRS and ECSD. Jahesi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.102.111.48 (talk) 19:37, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Telia
Why is Telia listed as providing EDGE networks in both Sweden, Denmark and Finland, but is still listed as single country operator? The same goes for Vodafone which also provides networks in multiple countries. --Daniel 83.254.131.36 (talk) 14:13, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

What services does EDGE offer?
I see that the article mentions the obvious telephonic service and Internet appliances (I assume WAP/GPRS), but is there anything else (video, MMS, conferencing, etc) that deserves a more detailed writing?Kim Kusanagi (talk) 21:13, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * EDGE gives you an always-on connection, with sporadic data bursting, and without "tying up the line for every one else". Once you have that data connection, and IP connections on top, you can begin to run all sorts of things over that, all at the same time.  Push-to-talk, MMS, ... these are all just data streams sent over the packet connection.  Perhaps the issue is that the possibilities are endless...  —Sladen (talk) 21:31, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, now I've seen that, basically, EDGE is a "superpowered" version of GPRS, which is itself a "superpowered" version of basic GSM. Would that be correct?Kim Kusanagi (talk) 16:00, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Wrong comparison
In the "Transmission techniques" paragraph it is written "This means it can handle four times as much traffic as standard GPRS." So a 4th of 236.8 kbps, 59.2 kbps, should be the GPRS maximum speed rate? This's wrong: the GPRS maximum speed rate is 114 kbps. Did I get it wrongly? Atcold (talk) 00:14, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

MCS ??
As unexperienced on the area, I don't understand what the MSC (modulation and coding schemes) is all about. There are 9 such listed. Do a network provider decide that they offer one or several? Can a phone support a few, or will an EDGE phone always support all? If all EDGE phones and all EDGE networks support all MCSs, then what decides which one is being used? Is it to be considered like channels, and a basepoint distributes these to different phones?

And finally, it says MCS-9 has 59.2kbit/s/slot, but before that it says that EDGE can give 236.8 kbit/s. How is that explained.

193.140.194.176 (talk) 10:21, 7 March 2012 (UTC)