GSM Coverage--I'm Confused

I'm a little confused about the additional GSM coverage provided by the AT&T
combination. I thought AT&T was mostly TDMA service. If so, how does AT&T
add to the GSM coverage of Cingular?

---

› See More: GSM Coverage--I'm Confused

"John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm a little confused about the additional GSM coverage provided by the
AT&T
> combination. I thought AT&T was mostly TDMA service. If so, how does AT&T
> add to the GSM coverage of Cingular?
>
>

I travel extensively throughout the U.S. More than half the time I had to
fly somewhere out of state, my GSM Cingular handset would be connecting to
ATT GSM towers. This was long before the merger was even a rumor, by the
way. I think you've underestimated ATT's GSM coverage just a bit.
-Dave

>>I'm a little confused about the additional GSM coverage provided by the AT&T
>>combination. I thought AT&T was mostly TDMA service. If so, how does AT&T
>>add to the GSM coverage of Cingular?
>
>
> AT&T Wireless started overlaying GSM on their systems even before
> cingular did. AT&T Wireless did a really poor job however doing it.
> Part of the reason AT&T Wireless was an attactive takeover target is
> that they use the same technologies (TDMA and GSM) that cingular did.
> As a bonus they also got lots of spectrum to use with their service.
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Actually, I think it was the other way around. I think AT&T Wireless
was an attractive target for Cingular because of the spectrum, with the
added bonus of having the same technologies, and adding infrastructure,
customers, and entry into new markets.

Isn't Cingular the only one in ALL top 100 markets now?

TH

John,
The (ex-) AT&T network was 100% GSM from all of its sites before the
Cingular takeover. Many new sites were GSM only, and many GSM sites were
1900 MHz only, even in 850 MHz TDMA markets. But as of last year, there
were more AT&T GSM sites than TDMA.

Bill Radio
Click for Western U.S. Wireless Reviews at:
http://www.mountainwireless.com


"John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm a little confused about the additional GSM coverage provided by the
AT&T
> combination. I thought AT&T was mostly TDMA service. If so, how does AT&T
> add to the GSM coverage of Cingular?
>
>

"Bill Radio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> John,
> The (ex-) AT&T network was 100% GSM from all of its sites before the
> Cingular takeover. Many new sites were GSM only, and many GSM sites were
> 1900 MHz only, even in 850 MHz TDMA markets. But as of last year, there
> were more AT&T GSM sites than TDMA.
>
GSM has appeared in NW Illinois within the last two weeks. The MPI map tool
shows it to be "Blue" network (ATT). Prior to that, only TDMA, AMPS and CDMA
(Verizon and U S Cellular) were in the same area. Regardless of what press
releases may have said, Cingular's conversion to GSM (overlay) was complete
before the takeover of ATTWS by Cingular and ATT still had sites in the
Chicago market that only had TDMA.

Mark

"Mark W. Oots" <mark_ctc@(no spam)ameritech.net> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Bill Radio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> John,
>> The (ex-) AT&T network was 100% GSM from all of its sites before the
>> Cingular takeover. Many new sites were GSM only, and many GSM sites were
>> 1900 MHz only, even in 850 MHz TDMA markets. But as of last year, there
>> were more AT&T GSM sites than TDMA.
>>
> GSM has appeared in NW Illinois within the last two weeks. The MPI map
> tool
> shows it to be "Blue" network (ATT). Prior to that, only TDMA, AMPS and
> CDMA
> (Verizon and U S Cellular) were in the same area. Regardless of what press
> releases may have said, Cingular's conversion to GSM (overlay) was
> complete
> before the takeover of ATTWS by Cingular and ATT still had sites in the
> Chicago market that only had TDMA.
>
> Mark
>
>

Gsm has been around for more than 2 years in chicagoland. You forgot the old
voicestream. they used gsm from the start and where gsm long before at&t and
cingular. They started around 2000-2001.

When cingular bought out att they had only one thing in mind. That was att
EDGE network. Wich the EDGE network is data for internet,blackberry. But
allso cingular obtaind all of att towers and are converting most to GSM.
The coverage for voice has not changed that much. But the coverage for data
has doubled.
"John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm a little confused about the additional GSM coverage provided by the
> AT&T
> combination. I thought AT&T was mostly TDMA service. If so, how does AT&T
> add to the GSM coverage of Cingular?
>
>

"Justin Crowell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:J9RWd.100785$tl3.90760@attbi_s02...
> When cingular bought out att they had only one thing in mind. That was att
> EDGE network. Wich the EDGE network is data for internet,blackberry. But
> allso cingular obtaind all of att towers and are converting most to GSM.
> The coverage for voice has not changed that much. But the coverage for
> data has doubled.

Given that Cingular didn't exist in my state before where ATT GSM did I'd
say the coverage for voice on Cingular changed quite a bit.

JohnF wrote:
> Given that Cingular didn't exist in my state before where ATT GSM did
I'd
> say the coverage for voice on Cingular changed quite a bit.

Likewise I'm in a market where there was no AT&T, and SunCom didn't
transfer (as it did in VA). Therefore Cingular gains nothing in most of
the Carolinas/DCS market and I see no gain in data speed or voice
availability.

On a tangent, Fredericksburg, VA must be an interesting place now. They
were serviced by AT&T, Cingular, SunCom, and T-Mobile. Cingular data
users ought to get some good throughput there.

tg.

"Joseph" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 19:15:00 -0600, "Danska" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Gsm has been around for more than 2 years in chicagoland. You forgot the
>>old
>>voicestream. they used gsm from the start and where gsm long before at&t
>>and
>>cingular. They started around 2000-2001.
>
> That's incorrect. T-Mobile started out as VoiceStream Wireless and
> went live January 1996.
>
> AT&T Wireless went live July 2001
>
> cingular wireless went live July 1996 (which was as formerly Pacific
> Bell PCS and Bell South DCS) GSM on the rest of the cingular network
> which is a combination of Bell South Mobility (not DCS) and
> Southwestern Bell Mobile systems came much later.
>
> http://www.gsmworld.com/roaming/gsminfo/cou_us.shtml
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
I was reffering to their buildout in chicago. not nationally..

I did a check on archive.org and they diddn't start offering gsm via retail
to sometime early 2001.

"tom glaab" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>> That's incorrect. T-Mobile started out as VoiceStream Wireless and
>> went live January 1996.
>
> But they didn't deploy in Chicago for YEARS after that. A company's
> launch of a network is not the same as launching in a particular
> market.
>
> tg.
>

Thank you.

Someone knew what i meant.