Cingular = Single-Bar

[CellGeek]

I was at the local Radio Shack store today discussing the cell phones with the sales folks. They really like the Sprint phones and Sprint service and the Verizon phones and Verizon service, however, they really seem to dislike Cingular. One of the RS employees used to work for Cingular and claims that the Cingular service should be renamed to "Single-Bar". Maybe that is why Cingular's current advertising campaign is about "raising the bar". :hee:

[goddess9]

Well, CDMA vs. GSM is completely understandable. Have you asked them if they've used it before, or if they're just playing by ear?

[M.Z.F]

Yea shows why they are sales people at Radio Shack, they can't even show what value their product has so they make lame jokes and false claims about other providers and put them down to make them look good. :eyeroll:

[Bohemian Iconoclast]

Here's what I find interesting. The OP is in California, and the other two posters are East Coast.

I have sold phones for 3 years, and talked to a lot of people with a lot of different providers. In the Bay Area, there were a lot of people from all over the country.

---> Put simply, the GSM network is much better east of the Rockies.

Sprint and the separate parts that now form Verizon have been building the CDMA networks since 1996. American GSM began...what...2000....2001?

...logic would dictate...

[larry]

Actually GSM here on the West Coast (Pac Bell-Cingular) goes back to 1996.

[Bohemian Iconoclast]

Actually GSM here on the West Coast (Pac Bell-Cingular) goes back to 1996.

Really?

Why isn't the netork even remotely close to CDMA coverage?

GSM is considered a joke because the coverage is STILL spotty out west...in a big way.

T-Mobile is doing major investing in infrastructure, but all you have to do is get a couple of CDMA users and a couple of GSM users to hang out as a group for a day going all over the place.

rip mentioned the fact that each upgrade path for GSM is equvalent a different network for each option. That is also a contributing factor.

If I seemed unsure about the launch of GSM, it is because the technology was off my radar until 2000...service in the Bay Area was worse than a joke prior to that, I saw no evidence of it. All my non-CDMA friends had TDMA phones.

FWIW - I still talk to TDMA people forced into GSM, and to a person they all say service is worse...to this day.

[fever]

I'm not exactly sure how Radioshack works, but they could make more commission on Sprint & Verizon phones & service. Or, more likely, the store makes more for such sales, so the management push those things. Or, they could have been having an internal promotion on them, thus making it a priority to sell those. And, unless these people were known to you, or were your friends, they could have just latched onto you using/liking Sprint, and trying to get you to buy a new phone, or switching to Verizon.

Personally, I've never not been able to make a call with my mother's ATT/Cingular service.

f

[sneak]

Really?

FWIW - I still talk to TDMA people forced into GSM, and to a person they all say service is worse...to this day.

I get this a lot, too. People really don't want to relinguish TDMA service. I would agree that GSM isn't as well deployed, and needs time to catch up. But Cingular has done an incredible job adding towers here in Omaha. AT&T was very lousy, but Cingular has built a very large number of towers I guess since the merger.

[fever]

I get this a lot, too. People really don't want to relinguish TDMA service. I would agree that GSM isn't as well deployed, and needs time to catch up. But Cingular has done an incredible job adding towers here in Omaha. AT&T was very lousy, but Cingular has built a very large number of towers I guess since the merger.

I doubt they erected very many towers in the last couple of months... I would think the ground being frozen would make it less desirable, since there's a very good chance that even with correct anchoring, they'll sag when the thaw is done. It's probably due more to using AT&T AND Cingular towers, or even allowing Cingular calls through AT&T towers, though I'm not sure if they can do that easily, but would be perfect for winter work. There's also the PRL update possibility.

f

[dustman81]

I doubt they erected very many towers in the last couple of months... I would think the ground being frozen would make it less desirable, since there's a very good chance that even with correct anchoring, they'll sag when the thaw is done. It's probably due more to using AT&T AND Cingular towers, or even allowing Cingular calls through AT&T towers, though I'm not sure if they can do that easily, but would be perfect for winter work. There's also the PRL update possibility.

f

Technically, GSM networks don't use PRLs, they use another system, forget the name offhand. But their phones automatically update when they see a newer version of the list is available.

[Bohemian Iconoclast]

I doubt they erected very many towers in the last couple of months... I would think the ground being frozen would make it less desirable, since there's a very good chance that even with correct anchoring, they'll sag when the thaw is done. It's probably due more to using AT&T AND Cingular towers, or even allowing Cingular calls through AT&T towers, though I'm not sure if they can do that easily, but would be perfect for winter work. There's also the PRL update possibility.

f

Ground being frozen is irrelevant (for the most part).

Remember the word co-location. More than one anntenna is on a tower....even more than one company.

Thanks, topher!

[Quill]

Ground being frozen is irrelevant (for the most part).

Remember the word co-location. More than one anntenna is on a tower....even more than one company.

Thanks, topher!

You're right, frozen ground is irrelevant when you're talking about adding another carrier's antenna array to an existing tower, but if you are talking about BUILDING new towers, then the frozen ground is relevant and BUILDING is what was mentioned.

From my experience covering local government, during the past three or four years, the carriers have tried to co-locate when putting up new towers rather than doing so after the fact. Co-location is of course the easiest thing to sell to politicians because you can tell them that means fewer towers have to be erected.

I should find out if the new Verizon tower that is right outside the back door of my office has co-located arrays or not. More apparatus on a tower means more revenue for my company, which is so generously leasing the land to Verizon. But, I digress...

[larry]

But remember that many markets like here in So. Cal don't have many tall towers and so co-location is not always possible. Most carriers build towers just tall enough for their needs and nothing more. Most new applications for cell sites here are disguised on building or rooftops or in the form of smaller disguised towers like a flagpole. It's very difficult to co-locate on a 35 ft flag pole.

[ocelectroboi]

Really?

Why isn't the netork even remotely close to CDMA coverage?

GSM is considered a joke because the coverage is STILL spotty out west...in a big way.

T-Mobile is doing major investing in infrastructure, but all you have to do is get a couple of CDMA users and a couple of GSM users to hang out as a group for a day going all over the place.

rip mentioned the fact that each upgrade path for GSM is equvalent a different network for each option. That is also a contributing factor.

If I seemed unsure about the launch of GSM, it is because the technology was off my radar until 2000...service in the Bay Area was worse than a joke prior to that, I saw no evidence of it. All my non-CDMA friends had TDMA phones.

FWIW - I still talk to TDMA people forced into GSM, and to a person they all say service is worse...to this day.

Using both GSM and CDMA in So cal GSM was 100% better coverage.

[Quill]

But remember that many markets like here in So. Cal don't have many tall towers and so co-location is not always possible. Most carriers build towers just tall enough for their needs and nothing more. Most new applications for cell sites here are disguised on building or rooftops or in the form of smaller disguised towers like a flagpole. It's very difficult to co-locate on a 35 ft flag pole.

Yes, that's definitely a growing trend in wireless. Typically co-location is on monopoles and towers that are 80-90 feet tall. In Nevada I saw a lot of carriers bringing flagpoles and fake palm tree proposals to local governments to disguise arrays since they're such an "eyesore." My favorite was when new churches sprung up, they did fake bell towers on a few for carriers to put up equipment. I'm fairly certain, too, that the flagpoles in Nevada were taller than 35 feet, but of course nowhere near 90. Different circumstances, anyway.

Anyway, I haven't traveled much with my GSM service, so we'll see, but I do know that I have better service than I did with Sprint ... so I don't know that it's fair to make blanket statements about GSM coverage in the West being poor. But, it sounds like there are areas where it is ... wow, big surprise. A couple of carriers have coverage holes. Ooooh.

[Bohemian Iconoclast]

quillhill - Frozen ground was mentioned, but I gathered that the user was unaware of co-location. He said TDMA service was good, and TDMA is based on GSM (so distance wouln't be the issue it is with analog).

But remember that many markets like here in So. Cal don't have many tall towers and so co-location is not always possible. Most carriers build towers just tall enough for their needs and nothing more. Most new applications for cell sites here are disguised on building or rooftops or in the form of smaller disguised towers like a flagpole. It's very difficult to co-locate on a 35 ft flag pole.

Frozen ground was mentioned, which as you well know is not an issue in SoCal...ever...

[mcurtiss1970]

Frozen ground was mentioned, which as you well know is not an issue in SoCal...ever...

you fail to take into account the possibility of the ground being over a "tar pit"

v. froze, (froz) fro·zen, (frozen) freez·ing, freez·es To become rigid and inflexible; solidify.



http://www.howardforums.com/images/smilies/hyper.gif

[Bohemian Iconoclast]

you fail to take into account the possibility of the ground being over a "tar pit"

v. froze, (froz) fro·zen, (frozen) freez·ing, freez·es To become rigid and inflexible; solidify.



http://www.howardforums.com/images/smilies/hyper.gif

I gather you've never seen the Labrea Tar Pits... :eyebrow:

[mcurtiss1970]

I gather you've never seen the Labrea Tar Pits... :eyebrow:

maybe i did as a youth....hey, could "freeze" though :D

[Bohemian Iconoclast]

maybe i did as a youth....hey, could "freeze" though :D


You're right, of course.

It'll freeze over right before hell does...

[Hte2w8]

Using both GSM and CDMA in So cal GSM was 100% better coverage.
I have to disagree. I have the sprint treo 650. My (soon to be) father in law has the GSM Treo. Not only does he drop calls constantly, but the sound quality and echo is horrible. He doesnt get a signal at my house, and I live on the LA/OC border where there are tons of towers.

When we went skiing, his phone got no reception...and mine got great reception.

I travel all over so cal and even the central coast, and my experience has proven to me, that CDMA had better coverage.

[mcurtiss1970]

You're right, of course.

It'll freeze over right before hell does...

v. froze, (froz) fro·zen, (frozen) freez·ing, freez·es To become rigid and inflexible; solidify.

[fever]

lol, well, I was SPECIFICALLY talking about the Omaha area... Which means two things, to me. One: _______________ (flat land) lol, I know, it's not that flat, but you have to put up a new tower in places like that, unless there's something around, in which case you can add an array, but again, there has to be something... Two: The ground in Omaha in the winter is most definitely certainly frozen, unless they're having a freak winter. Flat ground actually freezes "harder" (more) than ground that gets broken up by hills, and buildings. Things other than fields, that is.

Actually, I skipped co-location, since that was an obvious possibility... Quite easy to do, certainly more easy than what I mentioned, which is allowing calls from one carrier go through the other carrier, which can be as easy as signing a roaming agreement, to as difficult as actually taking the calls upon the network. Something that would make sense in Cingular/AT&T's case.

As for PRL's, everything I've ever seen refer to the GSM flavor as "PRL", even some of the phones. And FOTA should allow for PRL updates on everything, soon. At least, in CDMA's case.

f

[Bohemian Iconoclast]

v. froze, (froz) fro·zen, (frozen) freez·ing, freez·es To become rigid and inflexible; solidify.

...your point is?

As for the rigid and inflexible part, you have that down *COLD* :lmao:

[Quill]

quillhill - Frozen ground was mentioned, but I gathered that the user was unaware of co-location. He said TDMA service was good, and TDMA is based on GSM (so distance wouln't be the issue it is with analog).

Well, I figured that's what you were doing, but I felt like being anal. Seemed silly to dismiss the idea of building new towers just because you assumed they might not know about co-location, which is another alternative. I knew you wouldn't take it personally or get all upset... just thought I'd clarify things. Because I could. Heh. :D

In any case, I'm certain there are places where Sprint/Verizon outperform CingulATT and T-Mo. I haven't been to those places, yet, so I can't comment. All I know is that I'm pleased with my service thus far and that for my particularly cellular needs, this is working out. I'm not going to say that everyone should use one or the other ... as always, there are so many variables that go into what an individual should choose that discussing overall footprints or listening to some twit at Radio Shack who will say anything to sell a phone seems utterly moot to me. I guess I'm just a masochist. :hee:

[topher694]

Thanks, topher!

huh?


......

[Bohemian Iconoclast]

huh?


......

You were the one to explain co-location to me....and I thank you. :D

[Quill]

You were the one to explain co-location to me....and I thank you. :D

Lucky you. I had to sit through hour-long cell phone carrier presentations at planning commission then city council meetings ... multiple times. And then sit through politician's stupid questions. Nothing more gratifying than watching some poor wireless mid-manager type try to explain why they need another tower in an area that's growing by leaps and bounds. You could hear them roll their eyes from the back of the room.

"So do you really have to build an ugly 90-foot monopole? Can't you get good coverage by building it half that height? Does it have to be so ugly? Can you put it somewhere noone can see it without hampering your ability to cover dead spots? We really like those disguised cell towers...why can't you make yours look like one of those neon casino signs that looks like a stripper?"

[sneak]

lol, well, I was SPECIFICALLY talking about the Omaha area... Which means two things, to me. One: _______________ (flat land) lol, I know, it's not that flat, but you have to put up a new tower in places like that, unless there's something around, in which case you can add an array, but again, there has to be something... Two: The ground in Omaha in the winter is most definitely certainly frozen, unless they're having a freak winter. Flat ground actually freezes "harder" (more) than ground that gets broken up by hills, and buildings. Things other than fields, that is.

Actually, I skipped co-location, since that was an obvious possibility... Quite easy to do, certainly more easy than what I mentioned, which is allowing calls from one carrier go through the other carrier, which can be as easy as signing a roaming agreement, to as difficult as actually taking the calls upon the network. Something that would make sense in Cingular/AT&T's case.

As for PRL's, everything I've ever seen refer to the GSM flavor as "PRL", even some of the phones. And FOTA should allow for PRL updates on everything, soon. At least, in CDMA's case.

f


Well, it wasn't a freak winter. Today it reached the upper 70s (woohoo). That aside, I forgot something: apparently Cingular already owned towers in Nebraska before the merger. Perhaps that is the cause of the increased RF.

[Bohemian Iconoclast]

quillhill...that sounds a lot like my wireless customers....many ONLY care how it looks, then when the find out that service isn't so good, they need to return it...

[topher694]

You were the one to explain co-location to me....and I thank you. :D

oh, I get it now, I'd nearly forgotten about that... you're welcome!

[topher694]

Lucky you. I had to sit through hour-long cell phone carrier presentations at planning commission then city council meetings ... multiple times. And then sit through politician's stupid questions. Nothing more gratifying than watching some poor wireless mid-manager type try to explain why they need another tower in an area that's growing by leaps and bounds. You could hear them roll their eyes from the back of the room.

"So do you really have to build an ugly 90-foot monopole? Can't you get good coverage by building it half that height? Does it have to be so ugly? Can you put it somewhere noone can see it without hampering your ability to cover dead spots? We really like those disguised cell towers...why can't you make yours look like one of those neon casino signs that looks like a stripper?"

hehe, you know the same people that cut you off at the knees when you are trying to build out a network right are the ones that later complain that their phones don't work in their houses.

I never had to sit through the meetings myself, but I talked with the people that did all the time... it could be hilarious sometimes, one time a farmer insisted that "if you put up a tower there, all my cows will die". Another proclaimed (in all seriousness) that he would have cover his house in tin-foil.

[fever]

There's a whole town of tin-foil hat people people somewhere near the coast of california, between LA and SF, I believe. Some girl tried to get me to move there with her... Good thing I checked out the town first, lol. I think they passed a lot against using WiFi there, too.

f

Anyone know what I'm talking about?

[Quill]

hehe, you know the same people that cut you off at the knees when you are trying to build out a network right are the ones that later complain that their phones don't work in their houses.

I never had to sit through the meetings myself, but I talked with the people that did all the time... it could be hilarious sometimes, one time a farmer insisted that "if you put up a tower there, all my cows will die". Another proclaimed (in all seriousness) that he would have cover his house in tin-foil.

They say ignorance is bliss. Heh.

Recently, the company allowed Verizon to build a tower behind the office. Now, my desk is near the very rear of the building, as are about 10 others in our division. One of my co-workers actually asked if the radiation from the cell tower could be harmful.
The best, though, was when another co-worker told someone on the phone that there was a new cell tower nearby and that it was probably interfering with his landline. Little did he know that the tower hadn't even been TURNED ON.

Yes, they do say ignorance is bliss.