| nospam@ptd.net 2005-05-19, 11:51 am |
| On Tue, 10 May 2005 15:13:25 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
<scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:
>
>In California, AT&T (now Cingular) TDMA coverage is superior to GSM
>coverage, but GSM coverage is improving. The merger helped Cingular a
>lot more in California/Nevada because Cingular was 1900 Mhz only (the
>old Pacific Bell Wireless network) and was extremely bad. With the
>merger, Cingular got AT&T's valuable 800 Mhz bandwidth (800 Mhz provides
>much better coverage, especially indoors), and now offers GSM on 800Mhz,
>and is selling their 1900 Mhz bandwidth to T-Mobile. TDMA coverage is
>still fine, and better than GSM coverage in many areas. However in dense
>areas, which had overlapping TDMA coverage, TDMA is being pared down to
>the minimum number of towers to provide full geographic coverage, which
>is resulting in more dead spots.
Any idea how GSM coverage is now in the Palm Springs area? It used to
be pretty marginal when I would visit and go to areas outside the town
cores like Rancho Mirage.
|