Cingular cell phone service - anybody here who knows voip

Author

anybody here who knows voip

helloj

2007-08-21, 4:33 am

does anybody here knows if cingular has voip technology right now? how
is it going?

Tim Murray

2007-08-21, 10:33 am

On Aug 21, 2007, helloj wrote:
> does anybody here knows if cingular has voip technology right now? how
> is it going?
>

What do you mean by "has?" They "allow" it over their airwaves, if that's
what you mean.

Todd Allcock

2007-08-22, 4:33 am

At 20 Aug 2007 22:28:14 -0700 helloj wrote:
> does anybody here knows if cingular has voip technology right now?
how
> is it going?

No. They're a cellphone company- why would they offer VoIP?

Do you mean UMA, like T-Mo's Hotspots @ Home service?

If so, that's not VoIP- it's "Unlicensed Mobile Access," or GSM over
IP (GoIP?) ;-)

AT&T hasn't announced any upcoming UMA service, and I wouldn't hold
my breath- UMA's purpose is similar to VoIP- to replace your home
landline with a cheaper alternative. AT&T is in the landline business,
so cannibalizing their Unity strategy with UMA isn't likely...

--

"I don't need my cell phone to play video games or take pictures
or double as a Walkie-Talkie; I just need it to work. Thanks for
all the bells and whistles, but I could communicate better with
ACTUAL bells and whistles." -Bill Maher 9/25/2003

Tim Murray

2007-08-22, 10:33 am

On Aug 22, 2007, Todd Allcock wrote:
> At 20 Aug 2007 22:28:14 -0700 helloj wrote:
> how
>
> No. They're a cellphone company- why would they offer VoIP?
>
> Do you mean UMA, like T-Mo's Hotspots @ Home service?
>
> If so, that's not VoIP- it's "Unlicensed Mobile Access," or GSM over
> IP (GoIP?) ;-)
>
> AT&T hasn't announced any upcoming UMA service, and I wouldn't hold
> my breath- UMA's purpose is similar to VoIP- to replace your home
> landline with a cheaper alternative. AT&T is in the landline business,
> so cannibalizing their Unity strategy with UMA isn't likely...
>

One of these days one of these companies will realize they should be in the
business of getting information from A to B. It's like the railroads: They
hated the highways and competed against them, but had they switched from
being "a railway" to "a transportation provider", more would have survived.

PS: you need a space after your two dashes in the signature line.

Todd Allcock

2007-08-22, 12:33 pm

At 22 Aug 2007 10:21:21 -0400 Tim Murray wrote:

> One of these days one of these companies will realize they should be
> in the business of getting information from A to B. It's like the
> railroads: They hated the highways and competed against them, but
> had they switched from
> being "a railway" to "a transportation provider", more would have
> survived.

Agreed. Just as the oil companies need to become "energy companies,"
to insure their future rather than act like alternative energy is
science fiction!

> PS: you need a space after your two dashes in the signature line.

Thanks! Let me know if it's still messed up...

--

"I don't need my cell phone to play video games or take pictures
or double as a Walkie-Talkie; I just need it to work. Thanks for
all the bells and whistles, but I could communicate better with
ACTUAL bells and whistles." -Bill Maher 9/25/2003

dold@88.usenet.us.com

2007-08-22, 3:33 pm

Todd Allcock < elecconnec@americaon
line.com> wrote:
> Do you mean UMA, like T-Mo's Hotspots @ Home service?

> If so, that's not VoIP- it's "Unlicensed Mobile Access," or GSM over
> IP (GoIP?) ;-)

> AT&T hasn't announced any upcoming UMA service, and I wouldn't hold
> my breath- UMA's purpose is similar to VoIP- to replace your home
> landline with a cheaper alternative. AT&T is in the landline business,
> so cannibalizing their Unity strategy with UMA isn't likely...

They certainly poach their own landline customers onto Callvantage VoIP.

I have since gone back to POTS wires. I would really enjoy Wifi-cell
handoff. Not to replace my landline, but just so that my cellphone would
work at my house, where I have excellent WiFi, and poor cellular.

T-Mobile doesn't offer service here, but I know they roam onto the local
carrier. I wonder if the service would work here. Does it hand off an
existing call to WiFi, or how does it "select" WiFi? I don't know that i
would want it to prefer WiFi, if leaving the WiFi space caused your call to
drop, even in a good cellular area.

> --

This -- has no space, your new one does.

--
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5

Todd Allcock

2007-08-22, 10:33 pm

At 22 Aug 2007 19:28:47 +0000 dold@88.usenet.us.com wrote:

> They certainly poach their own landline customers onto Callvantage
VoIP.

Yeah, but Callvantage costs almost as much as a landline, and allows
them to offer service in areas they don't service locally. (I'll bet
they weighed the pros and cons after SBC acquired AT&T! Callvantage
was originally a way for AT&T, when they only sold long-distance
service, to break into local telephone service before SBC bought
them.)

> I have since gone back to POTS wires. I would really enjoy Wifi-
cell
> handoff. Not to replace my landline, but just so that my cellphone
would

> work at my house, where I have excellent WiFi, and poor cellular.

That's one of the many benefits.

> T-Mobile doesn't offer service here, but I know they roam onto the
local

> carrier. I wonder if the service would work here.

It should, but I'm not sure if the handoffs would work seamlessly.

>Does it hand off an
> existing call to WiFi, or how does it "select" WiFi? I don't know
that i
> would want it to prefer WiFi, if leaving the WiFi space caused your
call to
> drop, even in a good cellular area.

It hands off seamlessly between Wi-Fi and cellular in either direction,
preferring wi-fi if available, at least in T-Mobile native areas. I
assume it'd work in a domestic roaming area but I'm not 100%
positive. I KNOW it doesn't handoff internationally- T-Mobile isn't
going to give you free international roaming. (The "rule" is that
any call initiated on wi-fi is free, even if it's on wi-fi for one
minute then switches to cellular for the duration. Similarly, if a
call starts as cellular then switches to wi-fi, the whole call counts
as cellular minutes.)

Of course, if they did let you buy the service, you'd be stuck
picking a number from an area T-Mo does serve natively.

>
> This -- has no space, your new one does.

Thanks!

--

"I don't need my cell phone to play video games or take pictures
or double as a Walkie-Talkie; I just need it to work. Thanks for
all the bells and whistles, but I could communicate better with
ACTUAL bells and whistles." -Bill Maher 9/25/2003

dold@88.usenet.us.com

2007-08-22, 10:33 pm

Todd Allcock < elecconnec@americaon
line.com> wrote:
> It hands off seamlessly between Wi-Fi and cellular in either direction,
> preferring wi-fi if available, at least in T-Mobile native areas. I
> assume it'd work in a domestic roaming area but I'm not 100%
> positive.

> Of course, if they did let you buy the service, you'd be stuck
> picking a number from an area T-Mo does serve natively.

That's not even a difference! The "local" wireless numbers tend to be out
of Santa Rosa anyway, where T-Mobile has service. A couple of
Cingular/AT&T phones have prefixes that show as "BLUE LICENSES HOLDING, LLC
SANTA ROSA" in NANPA. The local Verizon numbers are "CELLCO PARTNERSHIP
DBA VERIZON WIRELESS - CA UKIAH".

--
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5

Todd Allcock

2007-08-23, 4:33 am

At 23 Aug 2007 00:33:19 +0000 dold@88.usenet.us.com wrote:

> That's not even a difference! The "local" wireless numbers tend to
be out
> of Santa Rosa anyway, where T-Mobile has service. A couple of
> Cingular/AT&T phones have prefixes that show as "BLUE LICENSES
HOLDING, LLC
> SANTA ROSA" in NANPA. The local Verizon numbers are "CELLCO
PARTNERSHIP
> DBA VERIZON WIRELESS - CA UKIAH".

So who does provide the GSM coverage where you live. It shows as
roaming on both Cingular's and T-Mo's coverage maps.
WirelessAdvisor.com doesn't show any other licenses in your zip that
use GSM. Does US Cellular operate a GSM network overlay there just
for roaming revenue?

--

"I don't need my cell phone to play video games or take pictures
or double as a Walkie-Talkie; I just need it to work. Thanks for
all the bells and whistles, but I could communicate better with
ACTUAL bells and whistles." -Bill Maher 9/25/2003

dold@88.usenet.us.com

2007-08-23, 10:33 pm

Todd Allcock < elecconnec@americaon
line.com> wrote:
> WirelessAdvisor.com doesn't show any other licenses in your zip that
> use GSM. Does US Cellular operate a GSM network overlay there just
> for roaming revenue?

US Cellular? Bleh, ptooie. That garbage was...
I digress. I used to roam to them occasionally in the bad old days.

Edgewireless is a GSM carrier here, "a wireless affiliate of AT&T", which
is why I guess I'm okay roaming on their network 98% of the time over the
years. Verizon is here, but CDMA. I don't know what USCellular is.

--
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5

Todd Allcock

2007-08-24, 4:33 am

At 24 Aug 2007 03:23:37 +0000 dold@88.usenet.us.com wrote:

> US Cellular? Bleh, ptooie. That garbage was...
> I digress. I used to roam to them occasionally in the bad old days.
>
> Edgewireless is a GSM carrier here, "a wireless affiliate of AT&T",
> which is why I guess I'm okay roaming on their network 98% of the
time
> over the years.

Ah, Edge wireless. Thanks. WirelessAdvisor seems to be quite
outdated these days!

> Verizon is here, but CDMA. I don't know what USCellular is.

Based on the phones their website hawks, they're apparently CDMA.

AFAIK, T-Mobile doesn't penalize you for roaming (versus AT&T or
Sprint who threaten to terminate your service if roam over 50% of the
time- Edge, as an AT&T affiliate is an exception.)

I think T-Mo, as the 4th largest carrier in a three horse race,
is just so happy to get a customer they don't care if they lose money
on him! ;-)

--

"I don't need my cell phone to play video games or take pictures
or double as a Walkie-Talkie; I just need it to work. Thanks for
all the bells and whistles, but I could communicate better with
ACTUAL bells and whistles." -Bill Maher 9/25/2003

LinkBot