Churn baby churn! Data inferno! Churn baby churn!

Well, you can add my lot to the churn figures. I just switched my
voice and data lines to Verizon. Cingular was just too slow to
implement HSDPA. Their latest web site update does not include my
state, and no one can definitively say when I can get it. I doubt if
I'll be hanging around alt.cellular.cingular much anymore. I'll have
to depend on you guys/gals to keep JN in line here. LOL

"GomJabbar" <dkbatson@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1152224869.818887.125650@75g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
> Well, you can add my lot to the churn figures. I just switched my
> voice and data lines to Verizon. Cingular was just too slow to
> implement HSDPA. Their latest web site update does not include my
> state, and no one can definitively say when I can get it. I doubt if
> I'll be hanging around alt.cellular.cingular much anymore. I'll have
> to depend on you guys/gals to keep JN in line here. LOL
>
>
Hope to see you again!!
...
bamp

GomJabbar wrote:
> Well, you can add my lot to the churn figures. I just switched my
> voice and data lines to Verizon. Cingular was just too slow to
> implement HSDPA. Their latest web site update does not include my
> state, and no one can definitively say when I can get it.

Cingular has said that by the end of 2006 they expect to have 90 markets
covered. It's not that they're necessarily so slow, it's that it's much
easier to add EV-DO to CDMA than it is to add HSDPA to GSM.

On Fri, 07 Jul 2006 14:58:59 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <44aed91e$0$96174$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>GomJabbar wrote:
>> Well, you can add my lot to the churn figures. I just switched my
>> voice and data lines to Verizon. Cingular was just too slow to
>> implement HSDPA. Their latest web site update does not include my
>> state, and no one can definitively say when I can get it.
>
>Cingular has said that by the end of 2006 they expect to have 90 markets
>covered.

Actually 100, as reported in numerous press articles.

>It's not that they're necessarily so slow, it's that it's much
>easier to add EV-DO to CDMA than it is to add HSDPA to GSM.

The primary issue is actually the higher priority of the integration of
"blue" and "orange" networks. Add UMTS/HSDPA to GSM is actually
straightforward, depending on hardware vendor.

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Fri, 07 Jul 2006 14:58:59 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:

>It's not that they're necessarily so slow, it's that it's much easier
>to add EV-DO to CDMA than it is to add HSDPA to GSM.

That's because EV-DO and HSDPA are both based on CDMA technology.

Of course, it's much easier to add EV-DO, it's a relatively painless
soft upgrade the whole way -- CDMA -> CMDA2000 -> EVDO.

To add HSDPA (really W-CDMA) onto GSM, you have to start from scratch
all over again adding a ton of new hardware, similar to the transition
from TDMA to GSM. TDMA -> GSM -> W-CDMA (UMTS) -> HSDPA. About the
only thing you can keep with GSM when you go to HSDPA is the
infrastructure.

This is just their respective companies' philosophies. Look at the
vast difference in forward thinking in Verizon's FiOS vs. AT&T Project
Lightspeed.

On Sat, 08 Jul 2006 10:54:00 -0700, Anon E. Muss <anonymous@example.org>
wrote in <plrva2d9r3n5orapa92fj34va4iibmnl0k@4ax.com>:

>On Fri, 07 Jul 2006 14:58:59 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>It's not that they're necessarily so slow, it's that it's much easier
>>to add EV-DO to CDMA than it is to add HSDPA to GSM.
>
>That's because EV-DO and HSDPA are both based on CDMA technology.

They are actually quite different, name similarity notwithstanding.
That's like saying soft drinks and wine are both based on fruit juice.

>Of course, it's much easier to add EV-DO, it's a relatively painless
>soft upgrade the whole way -- CDMA -> CMDA2000 -> EVDO.
>
>To add HSDPA (really W-CDMA) onto GSM, you have to start from scratch
>all over again adding a ton of new hardware, similar to the transition
>from TDMA to GSM. TDMA -> GSM -> W-CDMA (UMTS) -> HSDPA. About the
>only thing you can keep with GSM when you go to HSDPA is the
>infrastructure.

That's the big part, but carriers actually can upgrade existing radio
hardware, depending on manufacturer and model -- most GSM gear built in
the past few years is easily upgradeable to UMTS (a more accurate and
less misleading term than W-CDMA).

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Sat, 08 Jul 2006 11:21:46 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <44aff7b8$0$96234$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>What really hurt the U.S. is the Japanese investment in AT&T wireless
>which was conditioned upon AT&T going to W-CDMA for high speed data.
>Prior to the investment, AT&T was planning to move from TDMA to CDMA,
>but after the NTT Docomo investment they moved to GSM.

The real reason GSM was chosen according to Rod Nelson, Chief Technology
Officer, AT&T Wireless:

* GSM has almost double the capacity of TDMA - and with AMR codec
software deployed, will quadruple TDMA capacity, making GSM voice
capacity equal to or better than CDMA2000

* Single Antenna Interference Cancellation, in development, will
provide an additional 60-100 percent increase in voice capacity.

* EDGE software triples the data speeds of GPRS using the same
spectrum and radio frequency.

* UMTS provides additional capacity and quality-of-service mechanisms,
and flexibility in managing resources between voice and data
services. And more than triples the data speed of EDGE.

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>