GSM vs. CDMA - Most Complete Article I ever seen.

[Tauro72]

Before anyone reads this, I think that if Sprint ran their wireless network at 800mhz like Verizon does. Both Verizon and Sprint would be the number 1 and 2 in the USA, and who knows where else.

Plz click the link and read on, this is really some good info, and please, don;t quote me on any, I did not wrote this originally, this is just for those who always wonder who might be better, or at least wants to know some of the history..

PS.. Those that claim that GSM is a newer technolgy and other things, please read it... :rolleyes:

http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2002/10/GSM3G.shtml


PS.. As things are going, not even in the near future, GSM will have an advantage because of their SIM cards. CDMA phones will have memory cards to do the same or similar to it. Once that starts happening, then we will all see where things really go.. :)

[pdx77]

The one thing I like about GSM is having a SIM card, I can just buy any unlocked phone and put my sim card in it, and it will work.. No need to call the carrier to have them change out my ESN ## for a $20 fee.

[Strider420]

I stopped reading about 3/4 of the way down the article.

This guy is obviously biased to the point where his article is flawed.

The EU carriers have already deployed WCDMA and it has proven to be a hit. The also have dual mode GSM/UMTS handsets to deal with the switching of 2G to 3G. This strategy will also apply to US GSM carriers.

At the end of the day, I don't care if my 25khz of allocated frequncy is being wasted when I'm transmitting the sound of me listening. I just care that my calls got through loud and clear, I don't miss calls because of internet connection and my contacs go anywhere my SIM card does.

[mcurtiss1970]

he lost his credibility with me to give a balanced comparison at "As I think many of my readers know, I used to work for Qualcomm designing cell phones." ho hum.

[Tauro72]

[QUOTE=Strider420]The EU carriers have already deployed WCDMA and it has proven to be a hit. The also have dual mode GSM/UMTS handsets to deal with the switching of 2G to 3G. This strategy will also apply to US GSM carriers. QUOTE]

I am currently with Sprint as you have noticed, but due to reception issues, I am somewhat concidering to change to Cingular.. With Cingular soon deplying WCDMA in the USA, is it going to be a smooth transaction like when Verizon started upgrating from CDMA to CDMAk2 ?

[bluecoyote]

I really miss the SIM card, and I miss S60. And yes, i miss getting calls while online.

That said, I don't miss the slow GPRS connection (there's no EDGE here, and no EDGE in Cincinnati, and I never noticed a difference with EDGE) , weak WAP, and did I mention the data rates? With the exception of T-Mo (who I can't use because they're contractually kept out of SC) , GPRS rates are through the roof. 1 cent per KB? You're kidding, right? This isn't 1998.

I like CDMA, and I've had a good experience as a GSM/TDMA convert. I think EV-DO is a waste of time (although I'll certainly take it over 1XRTT), since we could be having Flash-OFDM.

[Strider420]

I am currently with Sprint as you have noticed, but due to reception issues, I am somewhat concidering to change to Cingular.. With Cingular soon deplying WCDMA in the USA, is it going to be a smooth transaction like when Verizon started upgrating from CDMA to CDMAk2 ?

Well cingular has WCDMA (aka UMTS) already active in some markets as a result of the ATT merger. Click here (http://www.attwireless.com/umts/home.html) to find out if it covers your area. As far as a "smooth transition", well you will need a new phone to take advantage 3G. Currently there are only like 2 phones available in the US that support UMTS.

I say if you are the least bit unsatisfied with Sprint, leave. I love GSM since I am a phone whore and would never return to Sprint's crappy CS and their "sorry for lying to you and f-ing up your plan, would you like 50 minutes of long distance" mission statement.

[Philby]

I stopped reading about 3/4 of the way down the article.

This guy is obviously biased to the point where his article is flawed.

The EU carriers have already deployed WCDMA and it has proven to be a hit. The also have dual mode GSM/UMTS handsets to deal with the switching of 2G to 3G. This strategy will also apply to US GSM carriers.

At the end of the day, I don't care if my 25khz of allocated frequncy is being wasted when I'm transmitting the sound of me listening. I just care that my calls got through loud and clear, I don't miss calls because of internet connection and my contacs go anywhere my SIM card does.

You have to notice that this article was written in October of 2002 - was WCDMA rolled out then?

Interesting article - but yeah its not tough to tell he's biased.

[tkrandall]

OK article, but dated. Biased, albeit with no attempt to mask it.

GSM is fully "here" in the US. User interface and phone features will keep it alive a long time I believe.

[mcurtiss1970]

true, in 2002, GSM was not so established and still a question whether it was the best upgrade path for carriers

[Strider420]

true, in 2002, GSM was not so established and still a question whether it was the best upgrade path for carriers

Yup. I remember when ATT first rolled out GSM, my brother got himself a T68i and the service was horrible even though I only used his phone here and there! Now, GSM has come a long way so that article is no longer valid.

I guess it's a fun read if you weed through the BS, there is some decent technical info in there.

[fever]

Den Beste is great, too bad he's not actively writing anymore. He's actually why I've been with Sprint so long. He's also very readable, but can go deep into technical issues, which I find helpful.

f

[FloorMatt]

Yup. I remember when ATT first rolled out GSM, my brother got himself a T68i and the service was horrible even though I only used his phone here and there! Now, GSM has come a long way so that article is no longer valid.

I guess it's a fun read if you weed through the BS, there is some decent technical info in there.

That reminds me.......I remember sometime ago, I was looking through carriers. (still had Sprint, too) I was going to try someone else....Sprint was giving me some signal problems. Well, I decided to go with AT&T Wireless. I think I just ordered online, and I remember you had a choice of technologies at that time. So, I picked me a T68i (GSM)......had it sent here; long story short, I ended up never opening the box and returned it to sender (That's what they told me to do, to cancel......and it wasn't activated, so no termination fee....Wee!).

Just a little side trip on my Cellular journey! Just thought I would share :)

[bluecoyote]

My provider didn't offer GSM in Cincinnati until December of 2003. Barely over a year ago. Now Verizon has EV-DO in Cincinnati! Think about that...

I remember when Sprint first rolled out 1XRTT- the Sprint rep at Best Buy said nationwide high-speed internet access at twice the speed of dial up (ok, that's generous, but I will say in most cases 1XRTT is pretty good to use) .

My provider advertised EDGE phones (I bought one myself) , but the truth of the matter is EDGE wasn't going to be deployed (and still hasn't.) Not that I ever noticed EDGE speed increases on my trips to New York, but that's beside the point. GPRS wasn't painfully slow (although man, the VM4050 runs laps around every other phone I've used, and makes 1XRTT seem that much faster!)

[rdj]

...GPRS wasn't painfully slow... [but] the VM4050 runs laps around every other phone I've used, and makes 1XRTT seem that much faster!)
You ain't kidding, man. It is so good to have a fast(er) CPU in the phone together with enough RAM for smooth operation. Just wish these faster ARMs would take over already so we could get more widespread software support...

Also wish Toshiba would update their dang firmware. There are so many little niggling things on this phone that should be so easy to fix. In truth, the phone's so good as a phone that they're not killers, but imagine how nice the experience would be if the vendors stopped treating these things like pure disposables and "rewarded" us with periodic updates.

Den Beste mentioned that OTA firmware updates were out of the question, but that was a few years ago -- has the situation changed enough for them to become practical, with higher memory capacities and data-friendly RF layers, or has feature creep kept OTA out of reach?

I really enjoyed Den Beste's post. Despite being somewhat dated, it's a great view into how things may have worked in the wireless industry from the non-consumer perspective. I learned a lot from it, technically, as well. Now I know why Qualcomm is (justifiably!) so pervasive in CDMA, and his analysis of US vs. European approaches to technology is consistent with and analogous to what I've seen in traditional computer software development over the past 30 years. Whether he got some details or conclusions right or wrong is irrelevant -- truth isn't the holy grail, validity and relevance are.

[Merlyn_3D]

I personally think it's cool that you can pick up an old IS-95A startac and make it work (VZW will activate it for you) with no problems whatsoever. CDMA is so cool, and when those new voice codecs hit primetime, it will be even better.

[fever]

I don't know what new codecs you're talking about, but if you're using an 8k, you can switch to a 13k, and it *should* sound better, however I was charged an exorbitant fee for doing so by Sprint on my 3500, way long ago. Unless the voice connection speeds are now faster than 14.4k, I don't know what other codecs you're talking about. Ideally, new codecs would be introduced once the voice side has hit faster speeds, but I can't imagine using even 30k for just voice. EVRC is technically 8k.

f

[skrubol]

AFAIK when 3g hit, the voice codecs went from 13k to 8k. I doubt Sprint will do anything to increase the bandwidth voice consumes.

[Bohemian Iconoclast]

Yup. I remember when ATT first rolled out GSM, my brother got himself a T68i and the service was horrible even though I only used his phone here and there! Now, GSM has come a long way so that article is no longer valid.

I guess it's a fun read if you weed through the BS, there is some decent technical info in there.


Try going west of the Rockies.....you'll find it's still valid.

It'll be at least a year or two before GSM is worth much out here...

[fever]

Another reason I've stayed with Sprint... I've put many miles on my Aurora driving from Minneapolis to places in the West, and although the upper western states are pretty slim on digital coverage, the lower Western states are pretty good. I've only really had problems in the Sierra Nevadas and "Flagstaff, The Dead Spot". But it looks as if they've fixed that, though I don't know personally, since I haven't had the chance to drive through that area since early 2002. Supposedly, Verizon has decent coverage in Wyoming and the surrounding states, but I couldn't get a signal at all. Also, Denver did okay, but just a few minutes to the West signal was gone. Of course, that's what mountains do...

f

[topher694]

AFAIK when 3g hit, the voice codecs went from 13k to 8k. I doubt Sprint will do anything to increase the bandwidth voice consumes.

actually 8K was being used long before 3G hit, EV-DV was going to introduce a new codec, SMV (Selectable Mode Vocoder) which would use a max of 8k (same as the current EVRC), but could be set to use half of that. SMV at it's best setting was supposed to rival land-line connection sound quality (and at lower settings improve network capacity significantly). However now that EV-DV is more or less dead, I'm not sure if SMV will see the light of day.

Incidentally the article reminded me of something I've always found kinda funny... the way CDMA works is actually just a theory and can't (currently) be directly proven. However my good 'ol 4900 is some pretty solid indirect proof. ;)

[fever]

Incidentally the article reminded me of something I've always found kinda funny... the way CDMA works is actually just a theory and can't (currently) be directly proven. However my good 'ol 4900 is some pretty solid indirect proof. ;)

Wait, what? Why can't it be proven? The phone idenitifies itself to the tower, the tower registers the phone, and when the call comes through, the tower broadcasts the signal and the phone unencrypts the call. Or are you referring to how CDMA *supposedly* breaks Shannon's Information Theory? As far as I'm concerned, that can be explained without even going into technical jargon by using an analogy of Newtonian Physics and Einstein's Theory of Relativity, which is "Sure, it's true, until it gets disproved.". Or, if you're referring to something else, feel free to correct me.

f

[topher694]

Wait, what? Why can't it be proven? The phone idenitifies itself to the tower, the tower registers the phone, and when the call comes through, the tower broadcasts the signal and the phone unencrypts the call. Or are you referring to how CDMA *supposedly* breaks Shannon's Information Theory? As far as I'm concerned, that can be explained without even going into technical jargon by using an analogy of Newtonian Physics and Einstein's Theory of Relativity, which is "Sure, it's true, until it gets disproved.". Or, if you're referring to something else, feel free to correct me.

f

I don't remember all the details (I'll ask my RF buddy to remind me) but yeah it has to do with the physics and information theory side (purley technically speaking). I just remember it coming up in a meeting once, and us all getting a laugh out of the idea that all of our jobs were just theoritical.

[fever]

I don't remember all the details (I'll ask my RF buddy to remind me) but yeah it has to do with the physics and information theory side (purley technically speaking). I just remember it coming up in a meeting once, and us all getting a laugh out of the idea that all of our jobs were just theoritical.

Gotcha. I've always enjoyed finding out how things worked in relation to similar things, and for a long time I was under the impression that GSM was "better" than CDMA. Glad I got straightened out. Unfortunately, my favorite tech comparison conversation "digital data transmission vs analog data transmission" is generally too mind-wracking to be enjoyable, but that's the way it goes, I guess. I'm anxiously awaiting the day we figure out how to take advantage of analog. Hopefully I'll still be around.

f

[knockback]

I've used both , but I like GSM better. I used GSM in Europe in 96 and 97

[macaddiict]

Interesting read, but my favorite part was the link about how spread spectrum actually worked: http://denbeste.nu/special/cdma_spreading.html

(If you don't get it from the visual aides alone, click the link at the top and he explains it.)

Pretty amazing...

[fever]

I like how he explains that "if someone is listening in on your CDMA calls, you have FAR BIGGER problems than someone listening to your calls".

: )

True.

f

[Neo]

Try going west of the Rockies.....you'll find it's still valid.

It'll be at least a year or two before GSM is worth much out here...

Agreed. I had a T68i and reception was crap. I fought with AT&T for about a year and a half over the issue and almost left them over it. Then I went back to my TDMA Nokia 8260 and the world was a better place again. (This was the phone that got me 2 bars of signal through several feet of concrete under Oakland City Hall and in the parking garage of my workplace as well, which is also an underground concrete basement.) GMS phones have tons of cool features, but out here in Kalifornia, they lack their primary function, to work as a phone. My parents were on PacBell/Cingular and they would lose signal if they walked into Macy's. GSM blows, as far as I'm concerned. I've never had a good experience with it. The straw that broke the proverbial camel's back was when Cingular took over AT&T and basically gave me the finger and told me the only way I would get any customer assistance is if I signed a new 2 year contract with Cingular. I moved on.

[brian32e]

GSM is going to be around for a long time just because of the sheer number of users. Obviously it is a capable system for supporting voice services. However, the fact that all GSM operators are now moving toward WCDMA should tell you all you really need to know about which technology (CDMA or GSM) is better. I am of course defining "better" as providing higher data rates and greater network capacity. All GSM operators have to move to WCDMA to compete with Sprint/Verizon, and WCDMA is just CDMA done in a way to try and avoid patents made for CDMA and CDMA 2000. If you are so inclined, look at the design of WCDMA and you'll see that the codes used to spread the signal are the same as those used in CDMA2000, only reversed. WCDMA is just another form of CDMA.

[Halo1982]

he lost his credibility with me to give a balanced comparison at "As I think many of my readers know, I used to work for Qualcomm designing cell phones." ho hum.
Qualcomm used to make phones, long ago...

[enigmatl]

Wow this thread is back! Um, I saw it around a while ago and that was before I had experience with both CDMA and GSM and I gota say at least as far as Sprint vs Cingular's particular implementation of CDMA vs GSM, I gota give Cingular the thumbs up. The call quality sounded as good if not better and yes, I love the sim card and like not having to call a rep and wait on hold just because I want to change phones. But let's face it. GSM is supposed to be behind the times and CDMA is supposed to be ahead? Well if this is so, why is Cingular's data network better than Sprint's now with Edge (to Sprint's 1xRTT) and soon (UMTS to EV-DO) More importantely, as I begin to use the data on my Sprint service more and more, I find it more and more annoying that my phone is busy when I'm using it? No beeps, no pop-up message, no drop from the net to get a call - just zero rings/straight to voice mail with whoever calls me and you know 9 out of 10 times, they're not gonna leave a message if it's just for chatting so I'm missing more and more calls and I hate it and not a solution can be found. Not now, not later with EV-DO. So we can look at all the reports and articles and theories as to which is better between the 2 formats and it is interesting - but in real life, GSM is proving to whip CDMA's butt. If you happen to live in an area where call quality is better on one than the other then of course you'd be silly to chose the worse one but if you come to my area where both networks seem to shine, you'll hear no difference all over town and frankly, in our area, all the GSM providers are arguably better in the surrounding country areas where CDMA is supposed to shine. So, after experiencing both, It seems pretty clear to me. All Cingular needs to do is offer an unlimited text messaging planat a half decent price and I'm there - broken contract and brand new MM-5600 or not. Come on, Cingular. I'm waiting.

[mcurtiss1970]

Qualcomm used to make phones, long ago...

true..i just knew where he was going with that first sentence

[chazb]

I would like to read the article myself

[sprintboy26]

What's funny is how GSM is supposed to be new technology, but it's actually TDMA technology. Most people do not realize that it's the same technology, GSM is just a slight improvement for data speeds. The call quality is horrible, which is why Cingular loses so many customers. Also, if GSM is so good, then why can't it support its own high speed data...why are they using wCDMA technology??? As said before, that clearly tells you that CDMA is much better.

[mcurtiss1970]

*yawn*

[sprintboy26]

*yawn*

Are you that bored? :laughing:

[Matt]

Holy super old threads Batman.

[mcurtiss1970]

the koolaid makes me sleepy

[Tigrrre]

veryyyyy sleepyyyy *hears thud* :hee:

[sprintboy26]

are some of you so bored that you post nothing in a thread you seem to care nothing about?

[Tigrrre]

oh yes, very.

[The Lance]

What's funny is how GSM is supposed to be new technology, but it's actually TDMA technology. Most people do not realize that it's the same technology, GSM is just a slight improvement for data speeds. The call quality is horrible, which is why Cingular loses so many customers. Also, if GSM is so good, then why can't it support its own high speed data...why are they using wCDMA technology??? As said before, that clearly tells you that CDMA is much better.

Thats the same thing i've been trying to tell people.. If they can answer me that question then I'll take back all the bad things I said and I'll drop dead..

[mcurtiss1970]

most people who've claimed that GSM has lesser call quality curiously seemed to have determined that by using one of the free phones given out by that carrier.

and as far as posting in that thread, i could care less what technology is *better*. i care what carrier is best for me depending on my needs (call quality, international roaming, availability of phones on the free market, better customer service). EV-DO could be better than sliced bread but if my phone doesn't work well in my house, it's as useless as teats on a boar.

[Tigrrre]

well, half rate codec does suck...and i am in no way using a cheap phone...garble garble, in low signal areas...

curtiss, know how to turn off half rate on a sammy?

[mcurtiss1970]

i don't...though i have seen some references to it on hofo, but not sure where

[Alkazarl]

most people who've claimed that GSM has lesser call quality curiously seemed to have determined that by using one of the free phones given out by that carrier.

I agree, both with this comment and the one made after. the 'free' phone is only that because of how crappy it is compared to their top of the line brand. and if your thinking about getting SPRINT and your offered the CDM-105 for free, DON'T TAKE IT!

[sprintboy26]

Either way, GSM is still Time Division (TDMA) and is not up to par with Code Division (CDMA) Even with full signal, high end GSM phones still sound bad. It's always in and out.

[Matt]

No one has ever complained of voice quality when I talk to them nor have I complained when talking to GSM people from my landline. I honestly cannot tell the difference

What difference does it make anyway? Use what you like and allow others to do the same. It's CDMA. It didn't cure cancer and a person using CDMA is not above anyone else. It kinda seems like people are getting so carried away with "Oh mines better". Who cares. It's all just a big pissing match.

Different strokes for different folks. :)

[NASCAR14FAN]

The one thing I like about GSM is having a SIM card, I can just buy any unlocked phone and put my sim card in it, and it will work.. No need to call the carrier to have them change out my ESN ## for a $20 fee.

I agree... Thats one of the things I loved about NEXTEL. Swaping phones is far easier!

[sprintboy26]

No one has ever complained of voice quality when I talk to them nor have I complained when talking to GSM people from my landline. I honestly cannot tell the difference

What difference does it make anyway? Use what you like and allow others to do the same. It's CDMA. It didn't cure cancer and a person using CDMA is not above anyone else. It kinda seems like people are getting so carried away with "Oh mines better". Who cares. It's all just a big pissing match.

Different strokes for different folks. :)

Many people do complain. Network quality is the number one reason people cancel service with Cingular. Believe me, I worked in the retentions department cancelling accounts all day long because people were tired of their phones having good signal but only being able to hear every other word someone was saying. Also, with GSM, phones have to have 2-3 bars of signal to receive calls. I had many many people that cancelled because their phones wouldn't ring for this reason. With CDMA, the phone will ring with 1 bar for sure and most times with no bars.

[sprintboy26]

Also, CDMA signal travels further than GSM (TDMA)

[Matt]

That's funny. I can make and recieve calls just fine with 1 bar. *shrug*

[sprintboy26]

That's funny. I can make and recieve calls just fine with 1 bar. *shrug*


Well, you are lucky. People would call all day long to cust svc complaining about not receiving calls. The first question we'd have to ask them is "Do you have atleast 2-3 bars of sgnal?" They were always confused at why they could place calls with only 1 bar, but not receive them. That's just how time division works.

[Matt]

Granted I am not with Cingular I am with T-Mobile. My parents had issues like you have mentioned when they had Cingular. They no longer have problems with indoor signal since I switch them to T-Mobile.

[sprintboy26]

T-Mobile's native coverage may not be very widespread, but atleast they realize some of the limitations of GSM and make up for some of it. They put more towers in their native areas than Cingular does. That helps more than anything.

[Tigrrre]

Also, CDMA signal travels further than GSM (TDMA)
funny, my a900 phone is hanging on the tower alone, my verizon vx8100 must be between an 850 tower and a 1900 tower because it keeps bouncing off both, and guess which one of my phones is working right with an ok signal at the moment? my t809 is currently roaming on dobson 850 GSM with 3 bars, and i can still use all my features.

the technology isnt always the biggest factor.

[sprintboy26]

funny, my a900 phone is hanging on the tower alone, my verizon vx8100 must be between an 850 tower and a 1900 tower because it keeps bouncing off both, and guess which one of my phones is working right with an ok signal at the moment? my t809 is currently roaming on dobson 850 GSM with 3 bars, and i can still use all my features.

the technology isnt always the biggest factor.

You're right, there are several factors. Just because your t-mobile gsm phone has 3 bars doesn't mean that the quality of the call is good. 1 bar of signal on CDMA has higher call quality than 3 or 4 bars on GSM. You will never see a GSM carrier win best call quality award. It will always be CDMA. Right now, Sprint holds the title of best call quality by JD Power & Associates. GSM quality reduces greatly with the loss of each bar. Using CDMA, you get as good of quality with 1 bar, as 4. CDMA phones will ring with 1 or no bars...GSM won't. GSM needs atleast 2. Most of the time, you can't connect to data 2 bars or less with GSM. With CDMA, you can connect with 1 or no bars.

[Tigrrre]

well, actually, it takes 15-30 seconds for my a900 to successfully make a call out, the vx8100, about 20 seconds as it bounces off towers..and on both, unless im next to the window the call will drop after 10-45 seconds on the a900, and will hang on for a couple minutes on the vx8100, likely on the 850 tower.

the t809 connects within 4 or so seconds, and no drops yet. down on the dock the it will get 1-2 bars, and still connect in the same time.

quit trying so hard to prove something that doesnt matter.

[sprintboy26]

well, actually, it takes 15-30 seconds for my a900 to successfully make a call out, the vx8100, about 20 seconds as it bounces off towers..and on both, unless im next to the window the call will drop after 10-45 seconds on the a900, and will hang on for a couple minutes on the vx8100, likely on the 850 tower.

the t809 connects within 4 or so seconds, and no drops yet. down on the dock the it will get 1-2 bars, and still connect in the same time.

quit trying so hard to prove something that doesnt matter.

If it didn't matter, you wouldn't care either. If you are having problems with the 900 connecting, you're more than likely not too near a sprint tower. Mine connects in 2 seconds every time, even if I only have 1 bar. I'm not trying to prove anything, the proof is in the pudding. Like I said, a GSM carrier will never win a best call quality award. CDMA carriers win every time. I've worked with both CDMA and GSM which is TDMA. CDMA is Code Division, TDMA is Time Division. GSM stands for Global Standard for Mobile Communications. It's not even a technology of its own. It is built on TDMA technology. Anybody that knows anything about the two knows that CDMA is much better than TDMA. I also worked in retentions at Cingular and heard people ***** everyday about the quality. Most of the time, they called from their cell phones in saturated coverage areas and I still only heard every other word. I had to ask them to pull over or call from another line. The number one reason people leave Cingular is the horrible quality of the calls. So, I don't have to prove anything.

[Tigrrre]

did i mention that 1/4th the calls ive made on the 2 cdma phones i am currently carrying sound like static? have to hang up and try calling out again.

also, ive recieved a grand total of 5 calls on my a900 and vx8100, ive recieved 5x the voicemails though..

also, dobson seems to be using the full rate codec out here, so im good. :)

[sprintboy26]

did i mention that 1/4th the calls ive made on the 2 cdma phones i am currently carrying sound like static? have to hang up and try calling out again.

also, ive recieved a grand total of 5 calls on my a900 and vx8100, ive recieved 5x the voicemails though..

also, dobson seems to be using the full rate codec out here, so im good. :)


Sounds like you live in the boonies. Also, I wonder why you have the need for 3 phones? Static is only possible with analog. Since the 900 doesn't have analog, you couldn't hear static on it. Results vary, but you can't argue against my points. CDMA has over double the customers that GSM does and that is growing. Cingular is still churning. T-Mobile doesn't compare enough to mention. They're losing ground in the US as well. T-Mobile just doesn't have the native coverage to be a US carrier for long with all of the competition.

[Matt]

<-- shaking head.

[sprintboy26]

When a GSM carrier wins best call quality award, then you guys that love GSM can come back and gloat. But as I said, it won't happen. It can't. It will always be a CDMA carrier. Period.

[Tigrrre]

ok...whatever..

btw, i don't live in the boonies, i happen to be at our lake house at the moment (that kinda is in the boonies though..)

at home i have no problems with any of the carriers i have, VZW though drops more calls than id like to have..

[Matt]

I don't feel the need to gloat. I am secure with my choices. :) I don't need to blather all over forums about what is best.

Good, better, best is subjective in terms of overall satisfaction. Not just voice quality.

[sprintboy26]

I don't feel the need to gloat. I am secure with my choices. :) I don't need to blather all over forums about what is best.

Good, better, best is subjective in terms of overall satisfaction. Not just voice quality.

You're right. There are several factors. But the fact that GSM is built on TDMA technology should tell you something. GSM is just a mask over TDMA that allows for more callers per channel and allows for slightly higher data speeds. The call quality is the same. Not to mention how GSM carriers are having to use CDMA technology to get true high speed data access, since GSM/TDMA won't support it. A lot of people get fooled into believing that GSM is a nice new technology that is superior, then they get home with the phone and realize it still sounds llike crap. Almost every single customer that called said, "I thought this was supposed to be better." There just aren't any good arguments for GSM being better. Cingular says, "Fewer dropped calls." Ok, that's subjective and hard to prove. They also say, "It's the global standard." Ok, that's pretty loose. Most of the technologically advanced nations use CDMA. CDMA is also a global standard. There are many reasons that CDMA is a better technology, the main one being it's not TDMA based like GSM.

[Tigrrre]

@matt :werd:

[sprintboy26]

And for the record, I've never once had a dropped call. So, I can't complain there.

[Tigrrre]

never ever?

[sprintboy26]

:werd:

Can't argue against facts.
That's all I'm doing, is presenting facts.
The rest is up to the individual.

[sprintboy26]

never ever?

Nope. I live in a saturated coverage area. When traveling, I make sure and space my calls so that I'm not talking during tower handoff. That's what causes most dropped calls, with all carriers. The few times I'm talking while being handed off from one tower to another, I just heard a loud click, wasn't dropped.

[Tigrrre]

that was meant for matt :)

anyway, im done with this conversation, you are obviously a qualcomm fanboy, ive got nothing against you, you're just trying to prove some pretty outlandish claims, never dropped a call, sure you haven't.

CDMA is not always better than GSM, and GSM is not always better than CDMA.

ok? good.

[Matt]

I'm so happy that I am happy. :)

and for the record. In 18 months with TMo, no dropped call.

Granted, I SMS much more than I make/receive calls.

[sprintboy26]

that was meant for matt :)

anyway, im done with this conversation, you are obviously a qualcomm fanboy, ive got nothing against you, you're just trying to prove some pretty outlandish claims, never dropped a call, sure you haven't.

CDMA is not always better than GSM, and GSM is not always better than CDMA.

ok? good.

I'm not a qualcomm fanboy. I just know my stuff. I'm not trying to prove anything outlandish. Everything I said about GSM is absolutely true. A little research will back that up. As far as best call quality never going to be awarded to a GSM carrier...it's never happened and won't, you'll see that for yourself. As far as not having any dropped calls, I haven't. Believe it or not, no skin off my back. If you know what causes them, you can prevent them. No carrier should make any claim about fewest dropped calls. Dropped calls are caused by network congestion and mainly tower hand-off. It happens on all networks.

[Matt]

Okay CDMA is better. I am going to port my number over first thing in the morning. Kinda sucks because I have very little CDMA signal in my house or office, but I have been told by someone that GSM is awful.

*sad* I was so stupid to think I should go with a carrier that actually has signal in my area.

[sprintboy26]

Okay CDMA is better. I am going to port my number over first thing in the morning. Kinda sucks because I have very little CDMA signal in my house or office, but I have been told by someone that GSM is awful.

*sad* I was so stupid to think I should go with a carrier that actually has signal in my area.


See, you're missing the point. Of course you should go with what is best for your location. We're talking about which technology is better. If CDMA signal is low where you are, then even if GSM technology isn't the best, you have to go with it. Of course, you say that CDMA is low where you are. I'm sure there is a CDMA carrier that has good coverage where you are.

[Tigrrre]

lmao@matt

:laughing:

[Matt]

umm I don't really appreciate the insinuation that I am lying. I know my area, my house, and my office. Verizon barely works but I hate their plans.

Either way, the point here that I was making is this.

Let people use whatever they want without dissing them or what they choose to use. That's not really that hard. Does it make you feel better to toss the word superior around alot.

Like thirdshift, I am done here. It's quite clear the bias is deep.

[sprintboy26]

Yeah, that's what happens when someone can't come back with anything, they just get silly about it.

[Matt]

Sorry, but I have a forum to moderate.

[Tigrrre]

it is not wise to get in an argument with a mod ;)

[sprintboy26]

umm I don't really appreciate the insinuation that I am lying. I know my area, my house, and my office. Verizon barely works but I hate their plans.

Either way, the point here that I was making is this.

Let people use whatever they want without dissing them or what they choose to use. That's not really that hard. Does it make you feel better to toss the word superior around alot.

Like thirdshift, I am done here. It's quite clear the bias is deep.


Exactly. Coverage is carrier based. Quality is technology based. So, because one carrier doesn't get coverage where you are doesn't mean it's the fault of the technology. I have only said superior once, and that was talking about the rediculous claim that Cingular throws out about GSM. To say the bias runs deep...all I can say is that I've used both technologies and worked for Cingular dealing with customer complaints and cancellations. All I've done is state facts. I never once said someone was stupid for having GSM or dissed anyone.

[sprintboy26]

it is not wise to get in an argument with a mod ;)


First off, I'm not arguing with anyone. Just stating facts and having friendly debate.
I haven't said anything out of the way. If a mod participates in it, then he/she has to take both sides of it.

[sprintboy26]

Just remember and think real hard these two key facts about GSM:

1. It is not a technology of its own, it uses TDMA technology.
2. It is incapable of high speed data and must use CDMA to achieve this.

[Matt]

Just remember. Most of us GSM users don't care. :D

[sprintboy26]

Just remember. Most of us GSM users don't care. :D

Actually, they do. That's why Cingular's churn rate is so high. Verizon is going to be the top carrier again by the end of the year. Also, a lot of T-Mobile customers cancel and come to Sprint. Cingular also loses a lot of customers to alltel in markets it is available.

[Matt]

Okay let me clear that up for you. :)

Most GSM users here at SprintUsers do not care.

Goodnight.

[Tigrrre]

Okay let me clear that up for you. :)

Most GSM users here at SprintUsers do not care.

Goodnight.

conversation | DONE. :deal:


:hee:

[sprintboy26]

conversation | DONE. :deal:


:hee:

LOL yah, No one in this thread cares, eh?
Yeah, I've stated the facts. You have no leg to stand on.
Yeap, we're done. :clap:

[Tigrrre]

yes, now go to sleep young man. :tu:

[sprintboy26]

yes, now go to sleep young man. :tu:

I'm about to. First I have to brush my teeth though. :)

[mcurtiss1970]

http://www.3dmd.net/gallery/albums/textures/walls/brick/BrownBrickWall_tileable.jpg
.................

[Tigrrre]

i........dont get it?

[mcurtiss1970]

i........dont get it?

ever talked to one?

[Tigrrre]

ohh...ok.... (shut up, it's morning)

[sprintboy26]

LOL I love it. I present facts, others present anger and brick walls.

[Matt]

I'm not seeing many facts other than the technical information.

Anyone could come on a forum and say "I worked for Cingular and most of the complaints were due to call quailty".

So me some actual stats. Untill then you are just text on a screen. :)

[sprintboy26]

Ok, dismiss that part if you choose not to believe it.
But, you can't dismiss the following:

1. GSM is not a technology of its own, it is TDMA technology,
which everyone knows is worse than CDMA.

2. GSM won't support high speed data, this is why GSM carriers
have to use CDMA technology for this.

3. CDMA signal has been proven to travel further than GSM signal.

4. In general, GSM phones need 2-3 bars to perform well, CDMA phones can
perform well with 1 or no bars.

5. CDMA carriers always win best call quality award. You will never see a GSM
carrier win this award. Where do you think they get call quality info from?
It's a polling of customers. So, that should give some credit to what I said.
I worked at Cingular, and the number one reason for cancellation was horrible
call quality. If they called from their phone, I could only hear about every other
word. So, believe that part or not, you can't ignore facts.

[Matt]

3. CDMA signal has been proven to travel further than GSM signal.

4. In general, GSM phones need 2-3 bars to perform well, CDMA phones can
perform well with 1 or no bars.

Show me proof.

Text on a screen mate. :)

as far as J.D. Powers goes. I know who generally wins the Overall Quality award.

[sprintboy26]

6. GSM carriers have much higher churn rates than CDMA carriers.
Hmmm, couldn't be the technology, could it?

[Tigrrre]

like matt said, prove it.

[Matt]

Sprint is going to get bought by Verizon anyway.

[Tigrrre]

:hee:

[mcurtiss1970]

until sprintfanboy comes back with something other than conclusory statements, i'm out

[Matt]

Bye MC. I don't guess you will be in this thread anymore. :D

[sprintboy26]

LOL out of 5 things, you know 3 of them are facts, but you think the other 2 are text on a screen? As far as GSM phones needing 2-3 bars of signal, the carriers tell their customers that when they call when they're having problems. As far as CDMA signal traveling further, that's a technical fact that CDMA travels further than TDMA. If you wish, I'll look up the info and post it. Oh, and Sprint will not and could not be bought by Verizon, that would create too much of a monopoly. Not to mention, Verizon couldn't afford that anyway. The only possible buyouts among the top 5 carriers would be:

1. Verizon buying alltel (which isn't likely anytime soon)
2. Sprint buying alltel (which hasn't been talked about seriously)

Verizon and Sprint combined would be over 100 million customers.
There's no way the feds would ever allow such a thing to happen.

[Tigrrre]

actually, theres a trick to make GSM travel further, something having to do with dual timeslots.

[sprintboy26]

until sprintfanboy comes back with something other than conclusory statements, i'm out

LOL what else do you want? It's all there for the taking. Don't be mad at me because
CDMA performs better overall than GSM. I'm just the messenger.

[The Lance]

Well the fact of the matter is GSM is old technology and it needs to be updated, CDMA is more recent but thats soon gonna be outdated also since CDMA carriers need to use Wimax to get to a 4G standard, in all seriousness in about 10 years all cellphones will be making calls over VOIP, simply because of wimax and the use of bandwidth to do so and not frequency or Time Division or Code Division.. And yes I know what im talking about Im a networking Engineer...


so in conclusion... GSM is old technology and they need to cheat and use CDMA based technology to gain a high speed network, which is still not technically correct because the FCC stats that anything over 300k can be considered High Speed, but in my personal Opion it should be raised to 1mb..

CDMA is more recently technology that can truly support the high speed network but it has its limits which is why Sprint will be using Wimax..

Wimax AKA Long range Wifi - Will become the new standard in upcoming years because its a technology and idea that works better then the other two..

All in all.. go with whichever carrier or technology that works with you and your lifestyle better.. It would be stupid of me to go out and get a CDMA based phone if GSM works better where I live as stated before..

End of dicussion... :bang:

[sprintboy26]

That pretty much sums it up :)

[Tigrrre]

i like the "end of discussion" part :clap:

[Matt]

Indeed.

[sprintboy26]

Of course you guys like the "end of discussion part" because the point has been proven, and it wasn't yours.

[Tigrrre]

matt, wanna lock the thread?

pweeze?

[sprintboy26]

Locking a thread just because you don't like what is being talked about and it doesn't follow your beliefs and opinions is wrong. We are in the USofA, right?

[Matt]

This is a privately owned forum. Are you going to holler Free Speech?

I am not in the habit of closing threads such as this unless the go way off topic or turn into flame fest.

You are safe Sir Constitution.

[Tigrrre]

lol @ sir constitution

[sprintboy26]

This is a privately owned forum. Are you going to holler Free Speech?

I am not in the habit of closing threads such as this unless the go way off topic or turn into flame fest.

You are safe Sir Constitution.


No, I'm not going to "holler" free speech.
I'm just stating that it would be really immature for someone to do as he asked you to do. It may be a privately owned forum, but it's here for a reason.

I've often wondered why you are a moderator when you don't even use sprint.
Not saying you shouldn't be, just curious why you'd want to be.

[Matt]

Are you absolutely sure I don't have a Sprint line?

[Tigrrre]

it makes him more neutral in some things, because this community is for more than just people who use sprint.

[sprintboy26]

Are you absolutely sure I don't have a Sprint line?


You said yourself that you don't.

[Matt]

Don't be so sure. I don't feel the need to babble about the carriers I may or may not use.

Either way. I have been on this site for nearly 3 years, I know the forum, and I know the people. That's why I am a moderator on this forum, and will continue to be. Sprint or no Sprint. :)

[sprintboy26]

Don't be so sure. I don't feel the need to babble about the carriers I may or may not use.

Either way. I have been on this site for nearly 3 years, I know the forum, and I know the people. That's why I am a moderator on this forum, and will continue to be. Sprint or no Sprint. :)


That's cool. Like I said, I wasn't saying you shouldn't be...I was just curious.

[Tigrrre]

in your own little world ;)

[CDMAisGOD]

Before anyone reads this, I think that if Sprint ran their wireless network at 800mhz like Verizon does. Both Verizon and Sprint would be the number 1 and 2 in the USA, and who knows where else.




Sprint running at 1900mhz is actually a good thing. CDMA has what is known as "soft handoffs". which mean your phone is communicating with several towers at once. by Sprint using 1900mhz your phone is communicating with more towers in any one area. this will give you better data speeds and less of a chance at a dropped call. 800mhz CDMA only needs one tower to cover the same area. that leaves your phone with far fewer tower choices.
so 800mhz is great if there is only 1 tower near a your house or something. the signals will reach deeper into your home. but in the real world 2 towers is better then 1.

[Matt]

Lets stay on topic. :)

[OKSOONERFAN]

ok i do know this. when people would call in askig for help at US cellular (cdmaxrt1) and say gee I cannot make a call, we ALSO would ask them how many bars they had. it takes more power to RECEIVE thant make a call, I think, and I have been able to dial out and talk with NO bars showing on the phone, but not been able to receive calls.Now I live in an area where t-mobile cannot give service, but both verizon and cingular are here, and alltel as well in some areas along with US Cellular. cingular is the only gsm carrier here, that I know of, and I do not hear complaints really, though on occassion someone says the call is not as clear, but hey , that can happen anywhere. nad to say CDMA phones do NOT GET STATIC? lol that is a joke, there are tons of areas around here, and in the mountains, where ALL the phones get static. It is really bad out by the Oak Ridge National Labs, so that statement is silly

[CDMAisGOD]

ok i do know this. when people would call in askig for help at US cellular (cdmaxrt1) and say gee I cannot make a call, we ALSO would ask them how many bars they had. it takes more power to RECEIVE thant make a call, I think, and I have been able to dial out and talk with NO bars showing on the phone, but not been able to receive calls.Now I live in an area where t-mobile cannot give service, but both verizon and cingular are here, and alltel as well in some areas along with US Cellular. cingular is the only gsm carrier here, that I know of, and I do not hear complaints really, though on occassion someone says the call is not as clear, but hey , that can happen anywhere. nad to say CDMA phones do NOT GET STATIC? lol that is a joke, there are tons of areas around here, and in the mountains, where ALL the phones get static. It is really bad out by the Oak Ridge National Labs, so that statement is silly


CDMA is less likely to have static then GSM. CDMA has more channels, better spectrum efficiency, is better able to handle data and voice without having dropped calls, and has soft handoffs. it all depends on the carrier but CDMA is still a more dependable technology. that point can not be argued.

[Tigrrre]

neither get "static"

[Bohemian Iconoclast]

...howz about instead of "static" he had used the phrase "call quality."

...this does degrade with distance on GSM but not CDMA, correct...?

[Moogle]

Sprint running at 1900mhz is actually a good thing. CDMA has what is known as "soft handoffs". which mean your phone is communicating with several towers at once. by Sprint using 1900mhz your phone is communicating with more towers in any one area. this will give you better data speeds and less of a chance at a dropped call. 800mhz CDMA only needs one tower to cover the same area. that leaves your phone with far fewer tower choices.
so 800mhz is great if there is only 1 tower near a your house or something. the signals will reach deeper into your home. but in the real world 2 towers is better then 1.

1.) 1900mHz does NOT inherently mean that your phone is communicating with more towers... Since 800mHz signals can travel further, the phone can still "talk" to 3 towers at once. (It really aggrivates me when people think 1900 is better than 800...) 1900 is microwave band... 800 isn't.

2.) 1900mHz does NOT mean that you are going to get better data speeds - that has to do with network load and current customers online (overall usage). The fact is that while 800mHz signals DO travel further, the capacity will QUICKLY exceed the distance... Carriers will build way more towers to handle the required load... Resulting (at least, in my experience) in a higher level of signal received. The whole "tower density" argument is totally bogus in a highly populated area...

FURTHERMORE, While CDMA has soft handoffs, CDMA also has its own crux: The design of the network allows for "just one more call." (At the expense of a small amount of voice quality for each user... Multiply this a few times, for a "few extra calls" and the voice quality of EVERYONE will drop significantly - Coincidentially, this is one of the reasons why phones sometimes drop calls when the signal meter is relatively full.)

GSM, on-the-other-hand, does not allow "just one more call"... If there isn't space on the network, the call won't be completed. In my humble opinion, this actually exposes the flaws in the network operator's network... Whereas on CDMA networks, people won't ever realize that the network is overcapacity. On GSM, the "call cannot be completed" message is a pretty good indicator of a lack of network capacity. Customers can then call into Customer Service and complain.

While I would generally agree that CDMA is superior, I must also point out two very important things:
1.) CDMA is a patented technology developed by the Qualcomm Corporation. GSM is a standard, not patented by anyone - This is why you see GSM chipsets from many manufacturers.

2.) Because of #1, CDMA technology is limited by how fast Qualcomm wants to research it. GSM, on the other hand, is much less limited - That's why you see so many really NICE GSM phones (At least, that's what I've surmised)

[Revolutionary]

Ugh.

Why can't people just enjoy their Phones and not nitpick on stupid stuff.

[Hoosier1]

I've really enjoyed reading all nine pages of this discussion. It seems some of you became a little angry however, I enjoyed reading this because I'm having to make a decision. I live in southern Indiana (just over the river from Louisville, KY) and I've had Verizon as my carrier for several years back before they were Verizon. I have no complaints about call quality, dropped calls, or customer service. My son is an airline pilot and has Sprint and has no complaints about them. the phone generally works well wherever he is and when he calls me he sounds very clear just as a landline phone would. He even gets very good service in Anchorage. We also have Cingular here and I really like their phones. I probably should stay with Verizon since I have no compalints about them but I'm also attracted to lSprint because of their data plans and the fact they do not disable their phones the way Verizon does however, I have heard very ugly things about Sprint's customer service and now I'm reading that if you roam more than 50% of the time they will cancel your service. Perhaps Cingular would be a better choice but I am concerned about call quality and coverage. When I travel I want good coverage and Verizon usually provides that. I've read thqt Sprint coverage is very spotty. AND also, I welcome any current input into CDMA vs. GSM. From the aritcle I read originally and the one this post was organized around, GSM could not continue but it has continued and seems to have grown. Please comment.

[scotsboyuk]

@Hoosier1

The debate over CDMA vs GSM is rather moot in my opinion. GSM is the de facto global 2G standard. However, you live in North America where 2G CDMA has a significant presence so you might want to consider one or the other depending upon your circumstances.

If you travel outside of North America on a regular basis then you would probably be better off choosing GSM, assuming that a GSM network provides good coverage in your local area of course. If you don't travel outside of North America very much then the choice probably comes down to which network provides better coverage for you and/or which network has the handset/tariff you like best.

Perhaps you should also be thinking about what 3G technology you would prefer to use. The GSM networks in North America will be using the same standard as the networks in much of the rest of the world, UMTS, but they will be using different frequencies from the rest of the world. In the short term this means that a North American UMTS handset won't be able to work on foreign UMTS networks and vice versa, but it should still work on non-American GSM networks, assuming it supports the GSM frequency bands used by the non-American network you want to roam on. In the mid to long term the UMTS frequency differences may not be a problem is manufacturers release multi-band UMTS handsets.

You also have the choice of EV-DO as a 3G technology. This is the 3G upgrade path for 2G CDMA networks. It probably won't be as widespread as UMTS given that there are more GSM networks than CDMA networks and hence likely more networks upgrading to UMTS. However, if you don't plan on travelling much EV-DO might be a good choice for you if your local area has good coverage.

[Hoosier1]

@Hoosier1

The debate over CDMA vs GSM is rather moot in my opinion. GSM is the de facto global 2G standard. However, you live in North America where 2G CDMA has a significant presence so you might want to consider one or the other depending upon your circumstances.

If you travel outside of North America on a regular basis then you would probably be better off choosing GSM, assuming that a GSM network provides good coverage in your local area of course. If you don't travel outside of North America very much then the choice probably comes down to which network provides better coverage for you and/or which network has the handset/tariff you like best.

Perhaps you should also be thinking about what 3G technology you would prefer to use. The GSM networks in North America will be using the same standard as the networks in much of the rest of the world, UMTS, but they will be using different frequencies from the rest of the world. In the short term this means that a North American UMTS handset won't be able to work on foreign UMTS networks and vice versa, but it should still work on non-American GSM networks, assuming it supports the GSM frequency bands used by the non-American network you want to roam on. In the mid to long term the UMTS frequency differences may not be a problem is manufacturers release multi-band UMTS handsets.

You also have the choice of EV-DO as a 3G technology. This is the 3G upgrade path for 2G CDMA networks. It probably won't be as widespread as UMTS given that there are more GSM networks than CDMA networks and hence likely more networks upgrading to UMTS. However, if you don't plan on travelling much EV-DO might be a good choice for you if your local area has good coverage.
Thank you Scotsboyuk for your reply concerning my study of gsm vs. cdma. I've been reading so many things in many different forums and find it really interesting. Perhaps I should have studied engineering instead of business and education.
Thanks again for your reply. It's very much appreciated.

[jayhuffdaddy]

Do you think that it will ever be possible that Sprint goes GSM? The reason I ask is because there are some awesome phones on gsmarena.com It would be nice in my opinion if all carriers went this route.

[reemusk]

:rolleyes:

[Xtremegene]

Do you think that it will ever be possible that Sprint goes GSM? The reason I ask is because there are some awesome phones on gsmarena.com It would be nice in my opinion if all carriers went this route.

I doubt Sprint would ditch all of their current CDMA / EVDO tech for GSM, but for future (4G and afterwards), who knows what standards will eventually be used. I wouldn't mind CDMA voice tech. sticking around... as long as some SIM-like or R-UIM is implemented for it, soon, in the USA.


I'll stop dreaming aloud now. :rolleyes:

[TheCEO]

Of course the very patent holder on CDMA is going to be a bit biased, but in all respects, CDMA is superior in terms of data transfer. GPRS and UMTS just cannot match EV-DO in terms of data trasnfer capabilities.

SIM cards can be really nice, and convenient, as I have two GSM phones with these cards. However, there are some downsides. For instance, it is much easier to have your phone illegally cloned by use of SIM cards, and the use of a small card also adds to the risk of losing it, and thus losing data (although it can be backed up beforehand IF you are knowledgable on that).

The only downside of CDMA is really the lack of Global capability, and not always finding the coolest, latest phones to be compatible with it. Too bad Sony Ericsson has to be GSM, and Japan all on their own WCDMA route. You would think WCDMA would be compatible solely based on the name, but it's closer to GSM in all reality.

BTW, all those in the know on WiMax. This could have been a truly amazing step forward for both Sprint, CDMA technology, and the Cell phone world in general. The problem occured when the Nextel nitwits now in charge of the company ran their mouths and pushed for a deal before the technology could be proven. Because of this, the deal fell through and the future of WiMax is now very grim indeed.

[jessep28]

This is the same as the Mac vs. PC debate. One will work well for some people and the other for the rest. It's like that with all format choices. They all have advantages and disadvantages.

Cellular phone choice should be based more on local call quality and coverage. Don't blame Sprint that RIM or Apple won't put a Qualcomm chip in their newest phones.

As long as I can make phone calls, I'm happy :).