|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > Cingular cell phone service > January 2007 > Bye-Bye to ATT/Cingular, and hello to Sprint High-Speed data
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Bye-Bye to ATT/Cingular, and hello to Sprint High-Speed data
|
|
|
| Dont worry Cingular/ATT.
I wont miss your expensive, _SLOW_ GSM data and internet speeds.
The "Edge" my XXX!!!
Going into warp drive on Sprint CDMA 01/22/2007
| |
| Michael Paris 2007-01-20, 10:33 pm |
|
"444" <an@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fk25r25amklbsah
lt0euc9jm0mm0dovdqp@
4ax.com...
> Dont worry Cingular/ATT.
>
> I wont miss your expensive, _SLOW_ GSM data and internet speeds.
>
> The "Edge" my XXX!!!
>
> Going into warp drive on Sprint CDMA 01/22/2007
Thats fine as long as you stay in North America and never travel, otherwise,
you will have a Sprint Logo'd paper weight.
| |
|
| Michael Paris wrote:
> Thats fine as long as you stay in North America and never travel, otherwise,
> you will have a Sprint Logo'd paper weight.
Except for the hundred or so countries, on every continent, that have
CDMA networks.
| |
| RWEmerson 2007-01-20, 10:33 pm |
| SMS wrote:
> Michael Paris wrote:
>
>
> Except for the hundred or so countries, on every continent, that have
> CDMA networks.
You've got it backwards; you're referring to GSM.....
| |
| Todd Allcock 2007-01-20, 10:33 pm |
| At 20 Jan 2007 16:00:40 -0800 SMS wrote:
> Except for the hundred or so countries, on every continent, that have
> CDMA networks.
How many of those countries' carriers actually have roaming agreements
with Sprint?
(I've never owned a CDMA phone- I went analog to TDMA to GSM, so my
knowledge of Sprint and Verizon has very little depth, but I thought they
rented/sold their customers GSM phones to roam with. Why would they need
to if their customers could just roam on CDMA?)
| |
| Porgy Tirebiter 2007-01-20, 10:33 pm |
|
"Todd Allcock" < elecconnec@AmericaOn
Line.com> wrote in message
news:eoui18$3mm$2@ai
oe.org...
> At 20 Jan 2007 16:00:40 -0800 SMS wrote:
>
>
>
> How many of those countries' carriers actually have roaming agreements
> with Sprint?
>
>
> (I've never owned a CDMA phone- I went analog to TDMA to GSM, so my
> knowledge of Sprint and Verizon has very little depth, but I thought they
> rented/sold their customers GSM phones to roam with. Why would they need
> to if their customers could just roam on CDMA?)
>
>
Actually CDMA is very robust. It supports up to 6 connections at the same
time. makes handoffs very successful,less dropped calls.
GSM does "SOUND" better..but here in California its all on 1900Mhz and it
stops at the door in a lot of newer buildings.
Sprint's data system is fast..but their coverage suffers due to the 1900Mhz
band also.
Both verizon and Sprint beat Cingular's poor attempt at data delivery.
Cingular's data is like shitting thru a sock.You see it, you smell it...but
it aint going anywhere fast
| |
|
| Todd Allcock wrote:
> At 20 Jan 2007 16:00:40 -0800 SMS wrote:
>
>
>
> How many of those countries' carriers actually have roaming agreements
> with Sprint?
>
>
> (I've never owned a CDMA phone- I went analog to TDMA to GSM, so my
> knowledge of Sprint and Verizon has very little depth, but I thought they
> rented/sold their customers GSM phones to roam with. Why would they need
> to if their customers could just roam on CDMA?)
I have no idea. Every CDMA country I've been to in Asia I could use my
Verizon phone...if I wanted to. I didn't. I took along an unlocked GSM
phone and bought a prepaid SIM card, or I rented a CDMA phone because it
was cheaper than roaming (Korea). This was all on Verizon.
Even when I had Cingular, and could roam in GSM countries, it was still
better to buy a prepaid SIM card.
I know that with Verizon, you can actually roam in countries that they
don't show on their web site as having roaming capability.
It's definitely true that you have more available roaming with GSM, but
it's a big mistake to state that only North America has CDMA, when in
reality CDMA is continuing to increase its market share worldwide.
| |
|
| Porgy Tirebiter wrote:
> Actually CDMA is very robust. It supports up to 6 connections at the same
> time. makes handoffs very successful,less dropped calls.
> GSM does "SOUND" better..but here in California its all on 1900Mhz and it
> stops at the door in a lot of newer buildings.
GSM is mostly at 800 MHz in California, it's the old TDMA network of
AT&T and a couple of small TDMA carriers that went to GSM.
T-Mobile is at 1900 MHz, having taken over the old Cingular 1900
MHz-only GSM network.
| |
| David W Studeman 2007-01-21, 4:33 am |
| Porgy Tirebiter wrote:
>
> "Todd Allcock" < elecconnec@AmericaOn
Line.com> wrote in message
> news:eoui18$3mm$2@ai
oe.org...
> Actually CDMA is very robust. It supports up to 6 connections at the same
> time. makes handoffs very successful,less dropped calls.
> GSM does "SOUND" better..but here in California its all on 1900Mhz and it
> stops at the door in a lot of newer buildings.
> Sprint's data system is fast..but their coverage suffers due to the
> 1900Mhz band also.
> Both verizon and Sprint beat Cingular's poor attempt at data delivery.
> Cingular's data is like shitting thru a sock.You see it, you smell
> it...but it aint going anywhere fast
Are we talking data or voice here? Cingular data does NOT use gsm and
furthermore, UMTS/HSDPA is Wideband CDMA rather than the old narrowband
CDMA used by Verizon and Sprint. After experimenting with usb serial buffer
size, I get consistent, 1.75mbs thoughput off of a 1.8mbs tower using a
Novatel XU870 with a pcmcia caddy on Cingular's HSDPA network, towers are
going to start being upgraded to 7.2mbs this month as well. My latency is
also down in the 100's now. I have used CDMA recently but found the
thoughput to be bursty and not steadily high, the latency was also bad
enough to cause many services not to work at all. I would consider Sprint
again when they deploy WiMax in a few years and it even comes close to the
hype. I would never consider Verizon regardless of technology they will use
to supplant CDMA simply for their Draconian usage policies, they are
dropping people right and left for actually using broadband as if it were
broadband. There is a good reason why CDMA is not being deployed all over
the world the way W-CDMA or as we know it, HSDPA is. The lack of a sim card
is also an inconvenience. I think once we hit 14.4mbs in three years,
Cingular will also be moving on to something else to supplant it much like
Verizon and Sprint are already working on doing in the not too distant
future. What an expensive hobby this is!
Dave
| |
| David W Studeman 2007-01-21, 4:33 am |
| SMS wrote:
> Michael Paris wrote:
>
>
> Except for the hundred or so countries, on every continent, that have
> CDMA networks.
How many continents have 100 or so countries on them? Interesting geography
lesson you have here!
Dave
| |
| Mij Adyaw 2007-01-21, 3:33 pm |
| With all of the CDMA roaming agreements that Sprint has, they have much
better voice and data coverage.
"Michael Paris" <mparis27@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:T6KdnVyl0MGLDy_
YnZ2dnUVZ_umlnZ2d@co
mcast.com...
>
> "444" <an@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:fk25r25amklbsah
lt0euc9jm0mm0dovdqp@
4ax.com...
>
>
> Thats fine as long as you stay in North America and never travel,
> otherwise, you will have a Sprint Logo'd paper weight.
>
| |
| Mij Adyaw 2007-01-21, 3:33 pm |
| Sprint coverage has increased significanlty in the past 3 to 4 months due to
adding CDMA equipment to almost all of the Nextel Towers. They don't have
the fight the nimbys to do it. Sprint coverage is unsurpassed on SoCal.
"Porgy Tirebiter" <biteme@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5hAsh.62867$qO4.61614@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "Todd Allcock" < elecconnec@AmericaOn
Line.com> wrote in message
> news:eoui18$3mm$2@ai
oe.org...
> Actually CDMA is very robust. It supports up to 6 connections at the same
> time. makes handoffs very successful,less dropped calls.
> GSM does "SOUND" better..but here in California its all on 1900Mhz and it
> stops at the door in a lot of newer buildings.
> Sprint's data system is fast..but their coverage suffers due to the
> 1900Mhz band also.
> Both verizon and Sprint beat Cingular's poor attempt at data delivery.
> Cingular's data is like shitting thru a sock.You see it, you smell
> it...but it aint going anywhere fast
>
>
>
| |
| Elmo P. Shagnasty 2007-01-21, 3:33 pm |
| User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.2 (PPC Mac OS X)
x-no-archive: yes
Message-ID: <elmop-42C403. 16300721012007@nntp2
.usenetserver.com>
Lines: 13
X-Complaints-To: abuse@usenetserver.com
X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 16:30:07 EST
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 16:30:07 -0500
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.cellular.cingular:75754
In article <iwQsh.622$4D2.457@newsfe13.phx>,
"Mij Adyaw" <mij@SpamBucket.com> wrote:
> Sprint coverage has increased significanlty in the past 3 to 4 months due to
> adding CDMA equipment to almost all of the Nextel Towers. They don't have
> the fight the nimbys to do it. Sprint coverage is unsurpassed on SoCal.
John Navas will soon be down to shove a hot poker up your XXX.
I dare you to say anything bad about Motorola equipment. Then it
wouldn't be a hot poker; it would be a flaming blowtorch.
(hmmmm....Navas...Mij...flaming...how appropriate)
| |
|
| Mij Adyaw wrote:
> With all of the CDMA roaming agreements that Sprint has, they have much
> better voice and data coverage.
The problem with Sprint is that they don't allow roaming onto the
Verizon network if they have their own network for that area, even if
their own coverage is poor. This is the situation in California. There
are many areas where the native Sprint coverage is very poor, mainly due
to their late entry, fewer towers, and 1900 MHz spectrum. They even let
my last boss out of his contract with no termination fee when their
service didn't work at his home in Fremont. Another colleague of mine
had Sprint for years with no service at her house in Cupertino, she only
switched to another carrier when she actually wanted coverage at her
house, in order to have mobile to mobile free calls with her kids that
went off to college.
It's ironic that the best Sprint coverage is where they have no network
at all, so you can roam onto Verizon.
Now Sprint has done away with its "Fair and Flexible" pricing plans,
eliminating another reason to choose them. They are hemorrhaging
customers like AT&T Wireless was doing prior to their meltdown and takeover.
| |
| jeremy 2007-01-21, 10:33 pm |
| "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:45b3e5d0$0$6895
7$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> Mij Adyaw wrote:
>
> The problem with Sprint is that they don't allow roaming onto the Verizon
> network if they have their own network for that area, even if their own
> coverage is poor. This is the situation in California. There are many
> areas where the native Sprint coverage is very poor, mainly due to their
> late entry, fewer towers, and 1900 MHz spectrum. They even let my last
> boss out of his contract with no termination fee when their service didn't
> work at his home in Fremont. Another colleague of mine had Sprint for
> years with no service at her house in Cupertino, she only switched to
> another carrier when she actually wanted coverage at her house, in order
> to have mobile to mobile free calls with her kids that went off to
> college.
>
> It's ironic that the best Sprint coverage is where they have no network at
> all, so you can roam onto Verizon.
>
> Now Sprint has done away with its "Fair and Flexible" pricing plans,
> eliminating another reason to choose them. They are hemorrhaging customers
> like AT&T Wireless was doing prior to their meltdown and takeover.
That is not the case here in Philadelphia. My phone will get onto Verizon
digital if there is no Sprint signal. (If I am on a call, the call will
drop, but I can immediately redial and Verizon carries it--Sprint does not
hand my calls off to Verizon if the calls are in progress).
I can set my phone to "Roam Only" and it will connect with the Verizon
tower.
Perhaps they have different roaming agreements in different parts of the
country?
I have never seen a "no signal" area--my phone always connects with
something--and 99%+ it connects with Sprint.
I don't do much roaming outside my home area, but here in Philly the
coverage has been excellent.
| |
| karlkrandall@sbcglobal.net 2007-01-21, 10:33 pm |
| On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 13:36:49 -0800, 444 <an@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Dont worry Cingular/ATT.
>
>I wont miss your expensive, _SLOW_ GSM data and internet speeds.
>
>The "Edge" my XXX!!!
>
>Going into warp drive on Sprint CDMA 01/22/2007
Out of the frying pan into the fire.
Every year:
Consumer Reports, The Yankee Group, and J D Power rate Sprint worse
than Cingular for Customer Support and Service.
| |
| Mij Adyaw 2007-01-22, 4:33 am |
| SMS,
You seem to need some education in this area: (Listen carefully and learn):
I live in Laguna Niguel in Southern California and had been a Verizon
customer for about 10 years back to the days when it was Airtouch Cellular.
I moved to a new area of Laguna Niguel where Verizon did not have coverage.
They sent a technician to my home and about a week later they had a report
that the signal was not usable at my home and that there would be no new
cell sites installed to cover that area in the near future. Cingular and
T-Mobile also do not function in my area since it is surrounded by hills.
Sprint happens to have a cell on a building about 1/2 mile down the street
and I get full signal here. Verizon cancelled my contract due to lack of
ability to provide coverage and I switched to Sprint. I have been with
Sprint for the past several years and have been very satisfied with coverage
in SoCal and throughout my travels within the US. BTW, Sprint will roam on
Verizon in Southern California. I can fore roaming now and I will have a
Verizon SID. The opposite is not true for Verizon. Verizon cannot roam on
Sprint in SoCal as Verizon removed this option about three years ago. If you
cannot get a Verizon signal in SoCal then you are out-of-luck because there
is no other CDMA roaming partner to roam on, even if Sprint has a usable
signal, it is not possible to use it.
You can thank me later, but if you need anymore remedial education, please
let me know. :-)
-mij
"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:45b3e5d0$0$6895
7$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> Mij Adyaw wrote:
>
> The problem with Sprint is that they don't allow roaming onto the Verizon
> network if they have their own network for that area, even if their own
> coverage is poor. This is the situation in California. There are many
> areas where the native Sprint coverage is very poor, mainly due to their
> late entry, fewer towers, and 1900 MHz spectrum. They even let my last
> boss out of his contract with no termination fee when their service didn't
> work at his home in Fremont. Another colleague of mine had Sprint for
> years with no service at her house in Cupertino, she only switched to
> another carrier when she actually wanted coverage at her house, in order
> to have mobile to mobile free calls with her kids that went off to
> college.
>
> It's ironic that the best Sprint coverage is where they have no network at
> all, so you can roam onto Verizon.
>
> Now Sprint has done away with its "Fair and Flexible" pricing plans,
> eliminating another reason to choose them. They are hemorrhaging customers
> like AT&T Wireless was doing prior to their meltdown and takeover.
| |
| Mij Adyaw 2007-01-22, 4:33 am |
| Do were you born yesterday and do you believe everything that you read?
There are areas where Sprint will kick Cingular's XXX and vice versa. It all
depends upon the area that you use the phone. For some folks, Sprint is
better, for other folks Cingular, and for other folks, Verizon or T-Mobile.
Get the idea?
< karlkrandall@sbcglob
al.net> wrote in message
news:vkd8r25l52r5r2c
9gg40miorfcnsrc4kfd@
4ax.com...
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 13:36:49 -0800, 444 <an@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Out of the frying pan into the fire.
>
> Every year:
>
> Consumer Reports, The Yankee Group, and J D Power rate Sprint worse
> than Cingular for Customer Support and Service.
| |
|
| karlkrandall@sbcglob
al.net wrote:
> Every year:
>
> Consumer Reports, The Yankee Group, and J D Power rate Sprint worse
> than Cingular for Customer Support and Service.
Sprint is indeed one of the worst for coverage and customer support.
However they do have some advantages as well. They have nights and
weekends starting at 7:00 p.m. They allow roaming onto more AMPS
networks than Verizon's current plans (Verizon's ACII plan eliminated a
lot of AMPS roaming, according to their maps.
In California's metro areas, Sprint coverage is poor (see the January
Consumer Reports). This is due to several reasons, including their late
entry, and their 1900 MHz spectrum. Often people will think that they
can simply roam onto Verizon from Sprint, but this is usually not the
case. If Sprint has a network, they don't let you roam onto Verizon in
the Sprint dead spots (and vice-versa).
There are parts of the country where Sprint is just fine, but if you
need a service where you can count on the best coverage in both metro
areas and less dense areas, then Verizon is your best bet, as Consumer
Reports showed.
| |
| Ben Skversky 2007-01-22, 3:33 pm |
| And the point of your post is?
"Mij Adyaw" <mij@SpamBucket.com> wrote in message
news:91Zsh.1923$4D2.418@newsfe13.phx...
> SMS,
>
> You seem to need some education in this area: (Listen carefully and
> learn):
>
> I live in Laguna Niguel in Southern California and had been a Verizon
> customer for about 10 years back to the days when it was Airtouch
> Cellular. I moved to a new area of Laguna Niguel where Verizon did not
> have coverage. They sent a technician to my home and about a week later
> they had a report that the signal was not usable at my home and that there
> would be no new cell sites installed to cover that area in the near
> future. Cingular and T-Mobile also do not function in my area since it is
> surrounded by hills. Sprint happens to have a cell on a building about 1/2
> mile down the street and I get full signal here. Verizon cancelled my
> contract due to lack of ability to provide coverage and I switched to
> Sprint. I have been with Sprint for the past several years and have been
> very satisfied with coverage in SoCal and throughout my travels within the
> US. BTW, Sprint will roam on Verizon in Southern California. I can fore
> roaming now and I will have a Verizon SID. The opposite is not true for
> Verizon. Verizon cannot roam on Sprint in SoCal as Verizon removed this
> option about three years ago. If you cannot get a Verizon signal in SoCal
> then you are out-of-luck because there is no other CDMA roaming partner to
> roam on, even if Sprint has a usable signal, it is not possible to use it.
>
> You can thank me later, but if you need anymore remedial education, please
> let me know. :-)
>
> -mij
>
>
> "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
> news:45b3e5d0$0$6895
7$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>
>
| |
| Mij Adyaw 2007-01-22, 10:33 pm |
|
"Mij Adyaw" <mij@SpamBucket.com> wrote in message news:...
> SMS,
>
> You seem to need some education in this area: (Listen carefully and
> learn):
>
> I live in Laguna Niguel in Southern California and had been a Verizon
> customer for about 10 years back to the days when it was Airtouch
> Cellular. I moved to a new area of Laguna Niguel where Verizon did not
> have coverage. They sent a technician to my home and about a week later
> they had a report that the signal was not usable at my home and that there
> would be no new cell sites installed to cover that area in the near
> future. Cingular and T-Mobile also do not function in my area since it is
> surrounded by hills. Sprint happens to have a cell on a building about 1/2
> mile down the street and I get full signal here. Verizon cancelled my
> contract due to lack of ability to provide coverage and I switched to
> Sprint. I have been with Sprint for the past several years and have been
> very satisfied with coverage in SoCal and throughout my travels within the
> US. BTW, Sprint will roam on Verizon in Southern California. I can fore
> roaming now and I will have a Verizon SID. The opposite is not true for
> Verizon. Verizon cannot roam on Sprint in SoCal as Verizon removed this
> option about three years ago. If you cannot get a Verizon signal in SoCal
> then you are out-of-luck because there is no other CDMA roaming partner to
> roam on, even if Sprint has a usable signal, it is not possible to use it.
>
> You can thank me later, but if you need anymore remedial education, please
> let me know. :-)
>
> -mij
>
>
> "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
> news:45b3e5d0$0$6895
7$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>
>
| |
| Mike Jacoubowsky 2007-01-23, 3:33 pm |
| > I know that with Verizon, you can actually roam in countries that they
> don't show on their web site as having roaming capability.
Yikes. Sounds dangerous. I'd hate to see the bill you might get for
essentially using an undocumented feature, where they could make up whatever
rules they wished.
--Mike--
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
| |
| Ben Skversky 2007-01-24, 10:33 pm |
| And the purpose of your post is?
"Mij Adyaw" <mij@SpamBucket.com> wrote in message
news:6oath.30096$Go.24837@newsfe12.phx...
>
> "Mij Adyaw" <mij@SpamBucket.com> wrote in message news:...
>
>
| |
|
| In article < 4MqdnbRlWcISZyrYnZ2d
nUVZ_vyunZ2d@comcast
.com>,
"Ben Skversky" <bskv19114@comcast.net> wrote:
[color=darkred]
> And the purpose of your post is?
>
> "Mij Adyaw" <mij@SpamBucket.com> wrote in message
> news:6oath.30096$Go.24837@newsfe12.phx...
At least he doesn't top post.
--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"
| |
| John Richards 2007-01-24, 10:33 pm |
| "Kurt" <labolide@spacegmail.com> wrote in message news:labolide-9357BF.18274124012007@news.giganews.com...
> At least he doesn't top post.
I guess we now know what your pet peeve is. ;-)
I say, live and let live. Does wonders for one's blood pressure.
Try it, you'll live longer.
--
John Richards
| |
|
| In article <C7Vth.21373$ZT3.540@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com>,
"John Richards" <jr70@blackhole.invalid> wrote:
> "Kurt" <labolide@spacegmail.com> wrote in message
> news:labolide-9357BF.18274124012007@news.giganews.com...
>
> I guess we now know what your pet peeve is. ;-)
> I say, live and let live. Does wonders for one's blood pressure.
> Try it, you'll live longer.
LOL
--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"
| |
|
| 444 wrote:
> Dont worry Cingular/ATT.
>
> I wont miss your expensive, _SLOW_ GSM data and internet speeds.
>
> The "Edge" my XXX!!!
>
> Going into warp drive on Sprint CDMA 01/22/2007
The latest Sprint television ad regarding data is pretty hard-hitting.
They used to compare their EVDO speed to Cingular EDGE, which wasn't
really fair as Cingular does have HSDPA in the top metro areas. The new
ad is two guys using their notebooks and someone is listing a bunch of
cities (all secondary markets) and the Sprint guy keeps saying "Yes,"
while the Cingular guy says "No".
Regardless of the data advantages of Sprint, Cingular had an excellent
fourth quarter 2006, while Sprint had a terrible 4Q2006.
| |
| Kevin K 2007-01-26, 10:33 pm |
| On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 21:36:49 UTC, 444 <an@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dont worry Cingular/ATT.
>
> I wont miss your expensive, _SLOW_ GSM data and internet speeds.
>
> The "Edge" my XXX!!!
>
> Going into warp drive on Sprint CDMA 01/22/2007
Sprint didn't even have good coverage at my home here in Oklahoma
(though it was good 4 miles away at work). But, since you could
occasionally pick up a Sprint tower (even though it was likely I would
get dropped shortly), I couldn't even use their roaming.
So their coverage overseas doesn't matter to me.
--
| |
| Kevin K 2007-01-26, 10:33 pm |
| On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 05:59:23 UTC, David W Studeman
< eat_your_own_spam@ho
rmel.com> wrote:
> SMS wrote:
>
>
> How many continents have 100 or so countries on them? Interesting geography
> lesson you have here!
>
I didn't read this that every continent has 100 countries, but that
100 countries are spread over the continents. Though technically
Antartica doesn't have ANY countries.
| |
| John Navas 2007-01-27, 4:33 am |
| On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 16:00:40 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in < 45b2ad2c$0$68949$742
ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
>Michael Paris wrote:
>
>
>Except for the hundred or so countries, on every continent, that have
>CDMA networks.
Pure fantasy.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
| John Navas 2007-01-27, 12:33 pm |
| On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 07:00:30 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in < 45b4d191$0$68997$742
ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
>In California's metro areas, Sprint coverage is poor (see the January
>Consumer Reports). This is due to several reasons, including their late
>entry, and their 1900 MHz spectrum. ...
The frequency has almost nothing to do with it. The real issue is tower
siting.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
| John Navas 2007-01-27, 12:33 pm |
| On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 18:13:03 -0700, RWEmerson
< foolish_consistency@
hobgoblin.com> wrote in
< 12r5fha16qn7572@corp
.supernews.com>:
>SMS wrote:
>
>You've got it backwards; you're referring to GSM.....
What he's doing is deliberately confusing CDMA2000 (what most everyone
else means by "CDMA") with W-CDMA UMTS (based on GSM infrastructure) in
an attempt to hide the dark clouds on the horizon for CDMA2000.
Similarity in names notwithstanding, they are quite different and
incompatible with each other, and W-CDMA is on the march as compared to
CDMA2000.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
| Scott 2007-01-27, 12:33 pm |
| John Navas < spamfilter1@navasgro
up.com> wrote in
news:9uplr212ic4dj6b
6qc07nl23r8le9n3psn@
4ax.com:
>
> Pure fantasy.
>
Prove it, please. There are a large number of countries using CDMA or your
version of sticking your tongue out at the facts is rather juvenile and
becoming quite boring. Or is your claim of 'pure fantasy' in reference to
your wish fr knowledge on the subject?
| |
|
| Kevin K wrote:
> I didn't read this that every continent has 100 countries, but that
> 100 countries are spread over the continents. Though technically
> Antartica doesn't have ANY countries.
Yes, my mistake. The point was that CDMA networks are in many countries,
all around the world, including Asia, Europe, North and South America,
Africa, and Australia. CDMA market share continues to increase, though
admittedly one reason is that in Europe and Asia they are starting from
a very low share.
| |
| John Navas 2007-01-27, 10:34 pm |
| On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 16:33:53 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in < 45bbef74$0$68972$742
ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
>Kevin K wrote:
>
>
>Yes, my mistake. The point was that CDMA networks are in many countries,
>all around the world, including Asia, Europe, North and South America,
>Africa, and Australia.
Actually very few, since "CDMA" is generally taken to mean CDMA2000.
>CDMA market share continues to increase, though
>admittedly one reason is that in Europe and Asia they are starting from
>a very low share.
Only if you deliberately try to confuse CDMA2000 with W-CDMA UMTS, which
is a completely different animal. On its own, CMDA2000 is in serious
trouble.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
| Dennis Ferguson 2007-01-27, 10:34 pm |
| On 2007-01-27, John Navas < spamfilter1@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 18:13:03 -0700, RWEmerson
>< foolish_consistency@
hobgoblin.com> wrote in
>< 12r5fha16qn7572@corp
.supernews.com>:
>
>
> What he's doing is deliberately confusing CDMA2000 (what most everyone
> else means by "CDMA") with W-CDMA UMTS (based on GSM infrastructure) in
> an attempt to hide the dark clouds on the horizon for CDMA2000.
> Similarity in names notwithstanding, they are quite different and
> incompatible with each other, and W-CDMA is on the march as compared to
> CDMA2000.
No, I don't think he's confusing that. If you look at this page
http://www.cdg.org/technology/produ...0_operators.asp
you'll find a list of 99 "countries" (Hong Kong, Macau, Guam and Saipan
might be debatable) where CDMA2000 has been or is being deployed. And if
you look over here
http://www.cdg.org/technology/produ...e_operators.asp
you'll probably find enough IS-95-only operators to pass 100 (ah, found one:
Myanmar). So there's a "hundred or so" CDMA2000/IS-95 countries.
What he isn't mentioning, of course, is that the number of these countries
you are likely to be able to roam on with your Sprint phone is well under
half of them. Some of those countries haven't had the service deployed yet
or are otherwise science fiction. Some are 450 MHz services, which a Sprint
phone can't roam on. Some, like Australia, you'd better get to quickly
before they turn it off. Others simply may not have roaming agreements with
Sprint because CDMA operators are stingy with that. It is only quite
recently that a Sprint phone would work in South Korea, for example. Verizon
is worse, they only list 20 CDMA roaming countries and some places where
I know a Sprint phone works (Hong Kong, Trinidad & Tobago) a Verizon phone
won't.
I do agree that if you want phone service that works almost everywhere you
travel with a GSM phone that also supports 2100 MHz UMTS.
Dennis Ferguson
| |
| John Navas 2007-01-27, 10:34 pm |
| On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 20:11:41 -0600, Dennis Ferguson
<dcferguson@pacbell.net> wrote in
<slrnero1is.84.dcferguson@akit-ferguson.com>:
>On 2007-01-27, John Navas < spamfilter1@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
>
>No, I don't think he's confusing that. If you look at this page
>
> http://www.cdg.org/technology/produ...0_operators.asp
>
>you'll find a list of 99 "countries" (Hong Kong, Macau, Guam and Saipan
>might be debatable) where CDMA2000 has been or is being deployed. And if
>you look over here
>
> http://www.cdg.org/technology/produ...e_operators.asp
>
>you'll probably find enough IS-95-only operators to pass 100 (ah, found one:
>Myanmar). So there's a "hundred or so" CDMA2000/IS-95 countries.
Point taken, although I think that's a pretty big stretch -- see below.
>What he isn't mentioning, of course, is that the number of these countries
>you are likely to be able to roam on with your Sprint phone is well under
>half of them. Some of those countries haven't had the service deployed yet
>or are otherwise science fiction. Some are 450 MHz services, which a Sprint
>phone can't roam on. Some, like Australia, you'd better get to quickly
>before they turn it off. Others simply may not have roaming agreements with
>Sprint because CDMA operators are stingy with that. It is only quite
>recently that a Sprint phone would work in South Korea, for example. Verizon
>is worse, they only list 20 CDMA roaming countries and some places where
>I know a Sprint phone works (Hong Kong, Trinidad & Tobago) a Verizon phone
>won't.
The key phrase there is "science fiction". ;) I was referring to
countries with working CDMA2000 coverage that's relatively complete.
>I do agree that if you want phone service that works almost everywhere you
>travel with a GSM phone that also supports 2100 MHz UMTS.
Yep.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
|
| Dennis Ferguson wrote:
> Verizon
> is worse, they only list 20 CDMA roaming countries and some places where
> I know a Sprint phone works (Hong Kong, Trinidad & Tobago) a Verizon phone
> won't.
You can roam on CDMA networks in some countries that aren't listed on
the Verizon web site. G-d knows how much you'll end up paying per minute.
|
|
|
|
|