Verizon wireless - GSM and TM/Cingular; CDMA and Verizon Wireless

Author

GSM and TM/Cingular; CDMA and Verizon Wireless

Scott Ehrlich

2005-11-30, 11:48 pm

In article <gRsjf.84332$QM5.43024@tornado.socal.rr.com>,
BruceR <razrbruce AT gmail.com> wrote:
>I've never had a dropped call from that but then I don't really know if
>I've ever crossed the line while on a call. GSM does support seamless
>handoffs so I don't think it's a problem.
>

For all practical purposes, with TM's roaming agreements, would it be safe
to say VZW and TM have roughly the same coverage, all things being equal
digitally (CDMA/GSM)?

Thanks.

Scott

BruceR

2005-11-30, 11:48 pm

Again, I have to point you to the maps that each provide. If their
geography matches your travel habits and locales then you probably won't
find much difference in coverage. Of course, you should always try a
service at home, on your commute and at your office to be sure thatthere
are no local dead spots that would affect you. My choice to use TMo was
based on comparable coverage, better selection of phones, international
service, and, of course, price. Nobody else came close to the 1000
minutes for 40 bucks deal - and they just sweetened it to 1500 for the
same price!

From:Scott Ehrlich
scott@mit.edu

> In article <gRsjf.84332$QM5.43024@tornado.socal.rr.com>,
> BruceR <razrbruce AT gmail.com> wrote:
>
> For all practical purposes, with TM's roaming agreements, would it be
> safe to say VZW and TM have roughly the same coverage, all things
> being equal digitally (CDMA/GSM)?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Scott

Elmo P. Shagnasty

2005-11-30, 11:48 pm

In article <aytjf.84335$QM5.58950@tornado.socal.rr.com>,
"BruceR" <br@NOhawaiiSPAM.com> wrote:

> Nobody else came close to the 1000
> minutes for 40 bucks deal - and they just sweetened it to 1500 for the
> same price!

yeah, but T-Mo has, relatively speaking, no coverage compared to Verizon
(or Cingular).

Sure, they give you 1500 minutes for cheap. That's because there's very
few places you can use them. If you stay in one place where there's
T-Mo service, great. But don't head for Grandma's house and expect to
get service.

klugja@hotmail.com

2005-12-01, 2:48 am

>
> For all practical purposes, with TM's roaming agreements, would it be safe
> to say VZW and TM have roughly the same coverage, all things being equal
> digitally (CDMA/GSM)?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Scott
T-Mobile is only comparable to Cingular if you get a phone with GSM
850. They don't map GSM 850 on their web site, because many of their
phones don't have it. Cingular coverage maps in rural areas are
usually quite exagerated.

There are many places in my experience that have either CDMA or GSM,
but not both.

Rural NW Ohio still is lacking in GSM. Note, for instance, that
neither Cingular nor T-Mobile offers service in Tiffin Ohio. In my
state of MN, there are rural places with good CDMA and poor GSM (Isle,
MN) and places with no CDMA and poor GSM (rural Duluth beyond the
northshore).

Corvus

2005-12-01, 2:48 am

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <aytjf.84335$QM5.58950@tornado.socal.rr.com>,
> "BruceR" <br@NOhawaiiSPAM.com> wrote:
>
>
> yeah, but T-Mo has, relatively speaking, no coverage compared to Verizon
> (or Cingular).
>
> Sure, they give you 1500 minutes for cheap. That's because there's very
> few places you can use them. If you stay in one place where there's
> T-Mo service, great. But don't head for Grandma's house and expect to
> get service.

I type this without rancor:

Very few places you can use them? The major metro areas and highway
corridors cover the majority of the population of the US and I dont
think the majority of the majority drives out to B.F.E. Wyoming or
Sheepskin, Montana on a regular basis. Sure there are Road Warriors out
there that need the rural coverage, but if you stay in your home area
why would you pay higher prices for less minutes?

Speaking for myself I need maximum minutes for minimum dollars in my
home area.
BTW, I dig the Einstein PCS unlimited plans. I might have to use a
friend's Wisconsin address and sign up...

BruceR

2005-12-01, 5:48 am

Yeah, I'd have to agree that "relatively speaking TMo has NO coverage"
is a gross overstatement. I generally don't find myself out in the
wilderness so I've never NOT had a TMo signal in the US. Even driving
from Las Vegas to Houston the interstates all had TMo service. I DO find
myself in foreign countries though and I've found that GSM signals are
widely available while US CDMA phones have value only in holding open
doors.

From:Corvus
corvus187@hotmail.com

> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>
> I type this without rancor:
>
> Very few places you can use them? The major metro areas and highway
> corridors cover the majority of the population of the US and I dont
> think the majority of the majority drives out to B.F.E. Wyoming or
> Sheepskin, Montana on a regular basis. Sure there are Road Warriors
> out there that need the rural coverage, but if you stay in your home
> area why would you pay higher prices for less minutes?
>
> Speaking for myself I need maximum minutes for minimum dollars in my
> home area.
> BTW, I dig the Einstein PCS unlimited plans. I might have to use a
> friend's Wisconsin address and sign up...

Steve Sobol

2005-12-01, 11:48 pm

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <aytjf.84335$QM5.58950@tornado.socal.rr.com>,
> "BruceR" <br@NOhawaiiSPAM.com> wrote:
>
>
> yeah, but T-Mo has, relatively speaking, no coverage compared to Verizon
> (or Cingular).

If you have a nationwide calling plan, IT DOESN'T MATTER. Sure, you'll roam
in many non-urban areas, but who cares, you're not paying for it. The only
gotcha is that mobile-to-mobile calls aren't billed M2M while you are
roaming. Besides, T-Mo likely has more native coverage than you realize (see
below).

> Sure, they give you 1500 minutes for cheap. That's because there's very
> few places you can use them. If you stay in one place where there's
> T-Mo service, great. But don't head for Grandma's house and expect to
> get service.

T-Mobile launched really late in Cleveland (2001-2002, just after the
rebranding), but they had extensive coverage, including on State Route 11 in
rural Ashtabula County, Ohio and at my parent's house in the sticks
(Montville Twp., central Geauga County). The only carriers in the Cleveland
area with coverage there at the time, besides T-Mo, were Verizon and Alltel,
both incumbent carriers with networks that had been around for 10-15 years.
Verizon had the former CellularONE/AirTouch Cleveland network, and Alltel
had the old GTE Mobilnet Cleveland network.

My brother even got a number local to Montville, an East Claridon exchange.
East Claridon is literally in the middle of nowhere. Only one other carrier
out of the six that serve northeast Ohio had local numbers out there at the
time.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

Steve Sobol

2005-12-01, 11:48 pm

klugja@hotmail.com wrote:

> Rural NW Ohio still is lacking in GSM. Note, for instance, that
> neither Cingular nor T-Mobile offers service in Tiffin Ohio.

Does anyone? That's close to the I-75 corridor and I'd be rather surprised
if Tiffin *doesn't* have GSM at all.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

SMS

2005-12-02, 5:48 pm

Steve Sobol wrote:
> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>
> If you have a nationwide calling plan, IT DOESN'T MATTER. Sure, you'll
> roam in many non-urban areas, but who cares, you're not paying for it.

It matters because there is no GSM to roam onto in many areas. Of course
you're no better off with Cingular in that case. But many areas that
lack GSM have TDMA, CDMA, and/or AMPS.

BruceR

2005-12-02, 5:48 pm

True, and as I said earlier, the only way one can decide is to look at
coverage maps and see if the coverage matches the places where service
is needed. ALL the carriers claim that they cover more than 90% of the
population which can be done with a much smaller geographic footprint.

From:SMS
scharf.steven@geemail.com

> Steve Sobol wrote:
>
> It matters because there is no GSM to roam onto in many areas. Of
> course you're no better off with Cingular in that case. But many
> areas that lack GSM have TDMA, CDMA, and/or AMPS.

SMS

2005-12-02, 5:48 pm

BruceR wrote:
> True, and as I said earlier, the only way one can decide is to look at
> coverage maps and see if the coverage matches the places where service
> is needed. ALL the carriers claim that they cover more than 90% of the
> population which can be done with a much smaller geographic footprint.

Exactly. Marketing materials that use percent of population covered are
are a red flag. A lot of people get cell phones expecting them to work
if their car breaks down out in the boondocks, coverage in the urban
area is often _less_ of a concern.

I hope that if AMPS is ever turned off in non-urban areas, that
something will take its place, but for now, it's a bad idea to get a
phone without AMPS capability. If you have a GSM phone, or a CDMA phone
that lacks AMPS, at least carry an old phone and car charger in the car,
so you can make 911 calls.

L. Servingham

2005-12-02, 11:48 pm

In article <aytjf.84335$QM5.58950@tornado.socal.rr.com>,
br@NOhawaiiSPAM.com says...
> Nobody else came close to the 1000
> minutes for 40 bucks deal - and they just sweetened it to 1500 for the
> same price!

That's the plan I'm on with VZW. $40 for 1000 anytime minutes. No
evenings or weekends or IN, but for a business phone - it's right on.

BruceR

2005-12-03, 2:48 am

TMo's plan isn't quite the same. They give you 50% more (1500) minutes
for the same $40.

From:L. Servingham
l_serv13lks@yahoo.com

> In article <aytjf.84335$QM5.58950@tornado.socal.rr.com>,
> br@NOhawaiiSPAM.com says...
>
> That's the plan I'm on with VZW. $40 for 1000 anytime minutes. No
> evenings or weekends or IN, but for a business phone - it's right on.

Jerome Zelinske

2005-12-03, 5:48 pm

In some places, maybe many places, something has taken it's place
already. In SE WI the two cellular carriers are cingular and
uscellular. The first's analog has been completely overlaid with gsm
and the second's has been completely overlaid with CDMA.

Steve Sobol

2005-12-03, 5:48 pm

SMS wrote:

> It matters because there is no GSM to roam onto in many areas.

IMHO "many" is an arguable point. I think it was more true a few years ago
than it is now, much like the arguments that Sprint doesn't have service in
"many" places.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

Cyrus Afzali

2005-12-04, 2:48 am

On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 19:31:12 -0800, Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
wrote:

>Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>
>If you have a nationwide calling plan, IT DOESN'T MATTER. Sure, you'll roam
>in many non-urban areas, but who cares, you're not paying for it. The only
>gotcha is that mobile-to-mobile calls aren't billed M2M while you are
>roaming. Besides, T-Mo likely has more native coverage than you realize (see
>below).

Steve, it most certainly does matter. I don't know where you're
getting this idea. I can point you to many areas of this country -- TN
among them -- where Cingular has very strong 850 mHz coverage, but we
can't roam there.

Elmo is right to a degree -- TM is positioning itself as a
cost-effective alternative and is attractive to a great many people
who never travel in rural areas. Urban dwellers also tend to travel
internationally more than rural ones, so they'll love the
international roaming ability.

>My brother even got a number local to Montville, an East Claridon exchange.
>East Claridon is literally in the middle of nowhere. Only one other carrier
>out of the six that serve northeast Ohio had local numbers out there at the
>time.

Well, that's good for him, but I'll tell you this: I wouldn't be
caught in the boonies with a TM phone expecting it to work. I have too
many examples of real-life situations where it won't, and for that
reason, in those cases, I always pack a family member's or friend's
Cingular or VZW handset.

Steve Sobol

2005-12-04, 2:48 am

Cyrus Afzali wrote:

> Steve, it most certainly does matter. I don't know where you're
> getting this idea. I can point you to many areas of this country -- TN
> among them -- where Cingular has very strong 850 mHz coverage, but we
> can't roam there.

....without a multi-mode phone because Cingular is at 850?

Or even with a multi-mode phone because Cingular and TM don't have roaming
agreements in those areas?

Verizon Wireless started exclusively selling tri-mode CDMA phones - 800/1900
CDMA and 800 AMPS - years ago. They are at 800 MHz in most of their markets,
with a couple big exceptions (among them parts of Florida and Texas). But
they stopped selling phones that wouldn't run on both CDMA frequencies about
the same time they started pushing some of the newer nationwide calling
packages.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

SMS

2005-12-04, 5:48 pm

Steve Sobol wrote:
> SMS wrote:
>
>
> IMHO "many" is an arguable point. I think it was more true a few years
> ago than it is now, much like the arguments that Sprint doesn't have
> service in "many" places.

Depends on how you define "many." Let's put it this way. Many places I
go in Northern and Central California have no GSM coverage. In many of
these areas there is CDMA coverage, and in even more there is AMPS
coverage. By "many" I could name five or so areas just in my area. Maybe
this area is unique, we have mountains and forests that are a ten minute
drive from urban areas, and a long sparsely populated coastline.

The one bad thing: I can leave my GSM phone on in areas with no GSM
coverage, but if I leave a tri-mode TDMA or CDMA phone on, the battery
will quickly run-down as it locks onto the AMPS signal and stays there.
I wish that there was an option on the tri-mode phones to turn AMPS
capability on and off. I generally want it in case of a need to make an
urgent call, but I'm happy to not be disturbed when hiking. Turning the
phone off is the best option in this case.

SMS

2005-12-04, 5:48 pm

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

> Sure, they give you 1500 minutes for cheap. That's because there's very
> few places you can use them. If you stay in one place where there's
> T-Mo service, great. But don't head for Grandma's house and expect to
> get service.

Well when Grandma comes to my house, she doesn't have T-Mobile service.
Not a big deal, and it was the best prepaid plan for her needs in South
Florida, where coverage is good.

T-Mobile's prices are lower because that's their value proposition, they
don't deny that their network is very limited.

On the T-Mobile post-paid plans, what is the roaming policy? Can you
roam onto other carriers in areas where T-Mobile has a network, but has
a lot of dead spots (like my area)?

Steve Sobol

2005-12-04, 11:48 pm

SMS wrote:

> On the T-Mobile post-paid plans, what is the roaming policy? Can you
> roam onto other carriers in areas where T-Mobile has a network, but has
> a lot of dead spots (like my area)?

You can.

My Moto V188 lets me choose any available GSM network (I assume that T-Mo
programs... what is it, the IRDB? ... to specify which networks are
"available").

Here in the Victor Valley area of San Bernardino County, California, I can
use Cingular or T-Mobile. I can actually force the phone to Cingular if I'm
in an area where T-Mobile may have a crappy signal but it's not weak enough
for the phone to automatically choose Cingular. It's not an issue in most
parts of town, but there are a lot of unpopulated areas around here, and I
expect there to be some coverage holes in those areas.

I don't pay roaming because I'm on T-Mo's nationwide plan (which works like
Verizon's old National Single Rate). People using local T-Mo plans would pay
roaming charges in such a situation. M2M rates don't apply when you roam.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

Steve Sobol

2005-12-04, 11:48 pm

Steve Sobol wrote:
> SMS wrote:
>
>
> You can.

Let me clarify (hey there Steven) :)

You can, if a roaming agreement is in place for that area. Obviously, if
there isn't, you're SOL.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

Steve Sobol

2005-12-04, 11:48 pm

Steve Sobol wrote:
> SMS wrote:
>
>
> You can.

Let me clarify (hey there, Cyrus) :)

You can, if a roaming agreement is in place for that area. Obviously, if
there isn't, you're SOL.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

David S

2005-12-04, 11:48 pm

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 10:36:52 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> chose
to add this to the great equation of life, the universe, and everything:

>The one bad thing: I can leave my GSM phone on in areas with no GSM
>coverage, but if I leave a tri-mode TDMA or CDMA phone on, the battery
>will quickly run-down as it locks onto the AMPS signal and stays there.
>I wish that there was an option on the tri-mode phones to turn AMPS
>capability on and off.

On many of them, there is such an option. I turned off AMPS on my VX4400
about a month before I got my e815, just to make sure I wouldn't be missing
anything (around home, anyway).

--
David Streeter, "an internet god" -- Dave Barry
http://home.att.net/~dwstreeter
Remove the naughty bit from my address to reply
Expect a train on ANY track at ANY time.
"My mom said she learned how to swim when someone took her out in the lake
and threw her off the boat. I said, Mom, they weren't trying to teach you
how to swim..." - Paula Poundstone

SMS

2005-12-05, 2:48 am

Steve Sobol wrote:
> Steve Sobol wrote:
>
> Let me clarify (hey there Steven) :)
>
> You can, if a roaming agreement is in place for that area. Obviously, if
> there isn't, you're SOL.

That's what worries me. I know that Sprint and Verizon have have areas
like that, where there is no roaming agreement for an area where the
carrier has native coverage, even if the coverage sucks. I'd expect
T-Mobile to not want to offer roaming in areas where they have a
network, even if the network has lousy coverage.

Ironically, one of my friend's is fighting a T-Mobile tower that would
add T-Mobile coverage to my neighborhood. I'd never get T-Mobile myself,
knowing how bad the coverage is in California, but I often have visitors
from areas where T-Mobile is fine.

Cyrus Afzali

2005-12-05, 5:48 pm

On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 22:17:32 -0800, Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
wrote:

>Cyrus Afzali wrote:
>
>
>...without a multi-mode phone because Cingular is at 850?
>
>Or even with a multi-mode phone because Cingular and TM don't have roaming
>agreements in those areas?

I'm saying that I have a quad-band device that includes 850 mHz
capability. I can do a manual network search and can pull up Cingular
as an available network, but cannot authenticate on it.

Apparently you are able to in some areas, but in the vast majority of
areas I've been in, Cingular's 850 mHz system is useless to T-Mobile
customers.

Cyrus Afzali

2005-12-05, 5:48 pm

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 10:40:22 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:

>Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>
>
>Well when Grandma comes to my house, she doesn't have T-Mobile service.
>Not a big deal, and it was the best prepaid plan for her needs in South
>Florida, where coverage is good.
>
>T-Mobile's prices are lower because that's their value proposition, they
>don't deny that their network is very limited.
>
>On the T-Mobile post-paid plans, what is the roaming policy? Can you
>roam onto other carriers in areas where T-Mobile has a network, but has
>a lot of dead spots (like my area)?

You can if you have a device that supports the frequency available and
if there's a roaming partnership that allows authenticating on the
system. The problem for TM customers is even though an increasing
number of devices they offer are 850 mHz capable, the areas where we
can roam on 850 mHz systems are very limited. Unfortunately for us,
that includes the vast majority of Cingular's network.

But it makes sense. You can't be the low-cost provider and then be
paying out tons of money in roaming fees to other network operators.
You just wouldn't be able to stay in biz.

John Richards

2005-12-05, 5:48 pm

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message news:43933724$0$3862
8$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>
> I wish that there was an option on the tri-mode phones to turn AMPS
> capability on and off.

My last three Sprint (Samsung) phones had selections for three roaming options:
1) Sprint only
2) Digital (CDMA) only
3) CDMA and AMPS

--
John Richards

Steve Sobol

2005-12-05, 11:48 pm

John Richards wrote:
> "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
> news:43933724$0$3862
8$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>
> My last three Sprint (Samsung) phones had selections for three roaming
> options:
> 1) Sprint only
> 2) Digital (CDMA) only
> 3) CDMA and AMPS

which ones? My VI660 didn't have the Digital only, it had Sprint, Analog
roaming and Auto, and it was a relatively new model in 2004 when I got it.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

^'^BatAttaK^'^

2005-12-06, 5:48 pm

On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 10:27:07 -0500, Cyrus Afzali <pnsmnyv@lnubb.pbz>
wrote:

>On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 10:40:22 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>You can if you have a device that supports the frequency available and
>if there's a roaming partnership that allows authenticating on the
>system. The problem for TM customers is even though an increasing
>number of devices they offer are 850 mHz capable, the areas where we
>can roam on 850 mHz systems are very limited. Unfortunately for us,
>that includes the vast majority of Cingular's network.
>
>But it makes sense. You can't be the low-cost provider and then be
>paying out tons of money in roaming fees to other network operators.
>You just wouldn't be able to stay in biz.

Also keep in mind that the 850 GSM area are relatively new and were
not present when the original roaming agreements were signed. The
ability to roam on the new areas require new agreements which take
time.

Cyrus Afzali

2005-12-06, 5:48 pm

On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 13:12:06 GMT, ^'^BatAttaK^'^ <nope@noway.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 10:27:07 -0500, Cyrus Afzali <pnsmnyv@lnubb.pbz>
>wrote:

>
>Also keep in mind that the 850 GSM area are relatively new and were
>not present when the original roaming agreements were signed. The
>ability to roam on the new areas require new agreements which take
>time.

That's true, but not as much of an issue now. Cingular started doing
its overlays 2-3 years ago and has had them complete for at least a
year or so now. I truly do believe the issue is cost; there's just no
way the smaller footprint carrier can afford to do that.

SMS

2005-12-09, 11:48 pm

Cyrus Afzali wrote:

> But it makes sense. You can't be the low-cost provider and then be
> paying out tons of money in roaming fees to other network operators.
> You just wouldn't be able to stay in biz.

This is true. Unless you have something to offer the other network, so
there would be reciprocity. I can't imagine Cingular wanting to let
their 850 Mhz network be used by a competitor that is undercutting them
on price. One of the biggest motivations for the AT&T acquisition by
Cingular was all that 850 Mhz spectrum owned by AT&T in the western
region, and in places like NYC.

SMS

2005-12-09, 11:48 pm

Cyrus Afzali wrote:

> That's true, but not as much of an issue now. Cingular started doing
> its overlays 2-3 years ago and has had them complete for at least a
> year or so now. I truly do believe the issue is cost; there's just no
> way the smaller footprint carrier can afford to do that.

I think that a lot of people would be content with at least paid roaming
on other carriers.

Cyrus Afzali

2005-12-12, 5:48 pm

On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 13:58:45 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:

>Cyrus Afzali wrote:
>
>
>I think that a lot of people would be content with at least paid roaming
>on other carriers.

But then that would greatly complicate their marketing efforts. They
have a very clear and concise pitch: low price, lots of anytime
minutes and no roaming charges. I think the desire to have that pitch
was one of the reasons analog roaming was taken away a few years ago,
when you could still get analog sleeves to go with Nokia 5190s and
other now-ancient phones and get service pretty much anywhere if you
were willing to pay.

The chance for TM users to get "universal" coverage tied when the
former AT&T Wireless and TM USA didn't merge.

SMS

2005-12-16, 2:48 am

Cyrus Afzali wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 13:58:45 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> But then that would greatly complicate their marketing efforts.

Yes, as long as their marketing effort doesn't ever claim that the
coverage is as good as the competition.

Tonight I was at a meeting at someone's house who's been leading the
successful opposition to a T-Mobile tower behind his house. I had one
bar of Cingular GSM, one bar of AT&T TDMA, three bars of Verizon, and
someone with a T-Mobile phone has zero or one bars depending on where in
the house he was standing. We were giving the homeowner a good-natured
hard time about how he needed a tower in his back yard.

LinkBot