FAQ: Don't ATTWS and Cingular subscribers now have the same coverage?

Q: Don't ATTWS and Cingular subscribers now have the same coverage?
A: Yes and no.

Post-merger Cingular still has two separate networks, the old ATTWS
(blue)
network and the old Cingular (orange) network. While both ATTWS and
Cingular
customers can now freely roam on the other network, thus given all
subscribers
the same coverage, frequency band issues aside, the difference is that
such
roaming can only happen when there is no "usable" home network signal,
and a
"usable" signal can actually be pretty crappy.

In other words, ATTWS (blue) handsets will only roam on the Cingular
(orange)
network if there is no "usable" ATTWS (blue) network signal, and vice
versa,
even with ENS. Thus in any given location a blue handset may get much
better
service (on the blue network) than an orange handset (given a "usable"
orange
signal), and vice versa.

The new Cingular ENS handsets and Cingular (orange) 64K SIMs (if you
have
both) make it possible for Cingular to manually change your "home"
network (to
blue or orange) OTA (over the air), thus giving subscribers the better
of the
two networks until the two networks are actually integrated. However,
even
with ENS, the handset still *isn't* able to automatically select the
better
network signal -- GSM roaming rules still apply.

---

› See More: FAQ: Don't ATTWS and Cingular subscribers now have the same coverage?

so how can they say it is better since it probable is not for most people?
and since you will probable have sucky signal quality still....

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Q: Don't ATTWS and Cingular subscribers now have the same coverage?
> A: Yes and no.
>
> Post-merger Cingular still has two separate networks, the old ATTWS
> (blue)
> network and the old Cingular (orange) network. While both ATTWS and
> Cingular
> customers can now freely roam on the other network, thus given all
> subscribers
> the same coverage, frequency band issues aside, the difference is that
> such
> roaming can only happen when there is no "usable" home network signal,
> and a
> "usable" signal can actually be pretty crappy.
>
> In other words, ATTWS (blue) handsets will only roam on the Cingular
> (orange)
> network if there is no "usable" ATTWS (blue) network signal, and vice
> versa,
> even with ENS. Thus in any given location a blue handset may get much
> better
> service (on the blue network) than an orange handset (given a "usable"
> orange
> signal), and vice versa.
>
> The new Cingular ENS handsets and Cingular (orange) 64K SIMs (if you
> have
> both) make it possible for Cingular to manually change your "home"
> network (to
> blue or orange) OTA (over the air), thus giving subscribers the better
> of the
> two networks until the two networks are actually integrated. However,
> even
> with ENS, the handset still *isn't* able to automatically select the
> better
> network signal -- GSM roaming rules still apply.
>

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Tue, 27 Sep 2005
03:45:35 GMT, "Phillip Devoll" <[email protected]> wrote:

>so how can they say it is better ...

Because it is.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

John,

Is there an anticipated time frame for the complete merger of the two
networks?

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Tue, 27 Sep 2005
> 03:45:35 GMT, "Phillip Devoll" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>so how can they say it is better ...
>
> Because it is.
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <Pvj%e.192$QW5.2@trnddc07> on Fri, 30 Sep 2005 23:04:15 GMT, "Michael Jay
Friedman" <[email protected]> wrote:

>John,
>
>Is there an anticipated time frame for the complete merger of the two
>networks?

My understanding is that most of it is expected to be done by sometime next
year.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Sat, 01 Oct 2005
08:01:22 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote:

>In article
><zoq%[email protected]>,
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> >Is there an anticipated time frame for the complete merger of the two
>> >networks?
>>
>> My understanding is that most of it is expected to be done by sometime next
>> year.
>
>And from where do you get this "understanding"?

Cingular press releases. Financial statements. Analyst reports. A number of
which I've cited here.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Sat, 01 Oct 2005
11:53:09 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <Nxx%[email protected]>,
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> >And from where do you get this "understanding"?
>>
>> Cingular press releases. Financial statements. Analyst reports. A number of
>> which I've cited here.
>
>Ah. In other words, fiction.

Financial statements and information provided to analysts must be true as a
matter of law. There's a similar burden on press releases. Do you have
credible information to the contrary? Or are you just trying to spread more
FUD?

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Sat, 01 Oct 2005
13:27:46 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote:

>In article
><%oy%[email protected]>,
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> >> >And from where do you get this "understanding"?
>> >>
>> >> Cingular press releases. Financial statements. Analyst reports. A
>> >> number of
>> >> which I've cited here.
>> >
>> >Ah. In other words, fiction.
>>
>> Financial statements and information provided to analysts must be true as a
>> matter of law.
>
>Absolutely.
>
>Just go look at Enron's statements, or Worldcom's. And many others.
>
>That you believe this stuff, speaks volumes about you.

FUD. Thanks for making that clear.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Q: Don't ATTWS and Cingular subscribers now have the same coverage?
> A: Yes and no.

Actually the correct answer is YES!

There are no AT&T subscribers any more.

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <jtC%[email protected]> on Sat, 01 Oct 2005
20:38:39 GMT, "John S." <[email protected]> wrote:

>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> Q: Don't ATTWS and Cingular subscribers now have the same coverage?
>> A: Yes and no.
>
>Actually the correct answer is YES!
>
>There are no AT&T subscribers any more.

There are still people on AT&T Wireless rate plans, which is what that means.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Sat, 01 Oct 2005
19:47:16 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <mGE%[email protected]>,
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> There are still people on AT&T Wireless rate plans, which is what that means.
>
>No, there aren't. ...

Yes, there are.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

In article
<VjF%[email protected]>,
John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:

> >> There are still people on AT&T Wireless rate plans, which is what that
> >> means.
> >
> >No, there aren't. ...
>
> Yes, there are.

Why don't you quote and respond to what I said, instead of snipping it
down to three words?

Cingular owns, lock, stock, and barrel, everything.

Which means that those people are on Cingular rate plans. The fact that
those rate plans originated with ATT Wireless is meaningless. They are
Cingular rate plans. The same goes for people who are on rate plans
that originated with Cingular (or Cell One, or whatever) but which are
no longer offered.

At this point, the two are the same thing: rate plans that are no
longer offered.

Want to try for the consolation prize, Navas?



There are no ATTWS subscribers now, as John S. said. But no, you had to
come in and try to save yourself. And the sad thing is, you did it so
badly.

They are all Cingular subscribers. Don't try to dance around your
mistake. You ****ed up. ADMIT IT. Just for once, show us that you can
be a man and admit that you ****ed up.

You'll never admit it, but we can keep badgering you about it. Like
last time, when you ****ed up so badly you left the Usenet for a few
months. Ah, those were the days...

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Sun, 02 Oct 2005
00:44:19 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote:

>In article
><VjF%[email protected]>,
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> >> There are still people on AT&T Wireless rate plans, which is what that
>> >> means.
>> >
>> >No, there aren't. ...
>>
>> Yes, there are.
>
>Why don't you quote and respond to what I said, instead of snipping it
>down to three words?

I trimmed it to the relevant part. The material following was irrelevant.

>Cingular owns, lock, stock, and barrel, everything.

Indeed, including ATTWS contracts and old Cingular. But this new Cingular
isn't the same as the old Cingular, name notwithstanding -- it's the result of
a *merger* between ATTWS and Cingular.

>Which means that those people are on Cingular rate plans. The fact that
>those rate plans originated with ATT Wireless is meaningless. They are
>Cingular rate plans. ...

Nope. Those rate plans were never offered by Cingular. They were offered by
ATTWS. The surviving entity (which uses the Cingular name) now owns the
contracts of both predecessor firms. They only become (new) Cingular rate
plans in the event of a switch in rate plan to a (new) Cingular offering.
Until then they are still (legacy) ATTWS rate plans.

>[SNIP remaining uninformed rant and usual discourtesy]

You need to learn something about mergers and acquisitions. And some manners.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

Thank you.
"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:zoq%[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <Pvj%e.192$QW5.2@trnddc07> on Fri, 30 Sep 2005 23:04:15 GMT, "Michael
> Jay
> Friedman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>John,
>>
>>Is there an anticipated time frame for the complete merger of the two
>>networks?
>
> My understanding is that most of it is expected to be done by sometime
> next
> year.
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

admittedly Mr. Navas has angered me due to his curt nature, however in this
case your immaturity is rising to the occasion. In this case you are correct
that the plans in question are Cingular plans, however.... Are you familiar
with the term "legacy" or "Archive" as it applies to business? These
"legacy" or "Archive" plans have no bearing on the original question posted
and have nothing to do with how the two networks interoperate.

The two of you and your constant badgering have fallen well off of the point
at hand and have shown an absolutely miserable level of intelligence.

I ceased following this news group several months ago and now, the first
time I come back the group is clogged with your crap!

Best regards to the original poster.... and Mr. Navas for that matter as it
pertains to this posting.


cheers

rj
senior rf engineer







"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <edT%[email protected]>,
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> They only become (new) Cingular rate
>> plans in the event of a switch in rate plan to a (new) Cingular offering.
>> Until then they are still (legacy) ATTWS rate plans.
>
> The guy who sold me the lawnmower no longer owns the lawnmower, so it
> isn't his anymore. It's mine.
>
> Nobody calls it his lawnmower anymore. And the rate plans belong to
> Cingular now. They are Cingular plans.
>
> You keep digging yourself deeper into a hole, Navas. The best advice I
> can offer you is that when you're in a hole and want to get out, quit
> digging.
>