Talk:LTE Advanced/Archive 1

Archive 1

I think the remaining "issues" tags could now be removed but I will leave this decision to others. Biscuittin (talk) 08:31, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

ITU's definition of LTE-A

Should this ITU document be interpreted like "ITU allowed telecommunication companies to name their service 'LTE-A' even though all they have just started is Carrier Aggregation (phase 1 of LTE-A)"?

If it should, I'd like to rename this article '3GPP release 10', and make 'LTE Advanced' a disambiguation page. But because I'm not a telecommunication expert, I need your help. JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 01:17, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

The source is ambiguous and does not appear to be an official policy statement by ITU. I would ignore it until sources are found that more clearly make the case. Andrew³²⁷ 13:04, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

From what I can follow of it, I agree with User:Andrewman327. There doesn't seem to be any statement in the document about what ITU currently "allows" companies to name their services. I think a better source is needed if you want to make that claim. Anaxial (talk) 08:41, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, I'm asking because SK Telecom and LG U+ is advertising their service as LTE-A when actually all they have just started is Carrier Aggregation, not the full LTE Advanced. Some say ITU are allowing telecom companies to do so, but I'm not sure. JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 07:43, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

I also am not a coms man, but I am inclined to think that Anaxial and Andrewman327 have reasonable points. Think about them before renaming and splitting articles (which certainly might be the right option). If indeed you elect to split, then I shuld think that the umbrella "article" should be more than a disambiguation page, and even if it is in effect a disambiguation page, it should not formally be one; a lot of guys get their kicks from blitzing disambig pages by removing anything that they can criticise in in terms of the definition of such pages. The need that you describe seems to me to require at least a paragraph of overview, and a hint at perspective on what each satellite article is about. Just IMO... Good luck! JonRichfield (talk) 05:57, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Technology demonstrations in separate page

The technology demonstrations are fun, but there are so damn many on this page that they're distracting. I think they should go in a separate page. Comments? Sanpitch (talk) 21:18, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Good luck in finding someone else for a vote. I'm not sure if I agree with you. MrCellular (talk) 22:10, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Take a look at the LTE and 802.11n pages; not a 'technology demonstration' in sight. Sanpitch (talk) 23:20, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Don't get it. MrCellular (talk) 23:24, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Archive 1