Using Roaming as last vestige to stay with Sprint in LA, question

"Isaiah Beard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Bob Smith wrote:
>
> >>>in the affected area.
> >>
> >>
> >>That's entirely true Bob, and that's exactly the problem. If someone
> >>makes a roaming 100 minute call on the last week of their billing cycle,
> >>thinking they have all of those minutes to burn, there is NO guarantee
> >>at all that those minutes are actually going to show up on that month's
> >>bill. In fact, it's very likely you'll get dinged for at least some if
> >>not all of those 100 minutes on the NEXT bill, leaving you with 100
> >>minutes that were never used previously and 100 minutes LESS time that
> >>you have on the new month.
>
> >
> > Lots of wouda couda shuddas up there Isaiah in that first sentence.
>
> No, actually, there aren't. People don't just stop using their phones
> at the end of the month, Bob. So inevitabely, SOME roaming is going to
> carry over if you roam frequently like the OP was planning on doing.

I never said anyone would stop using their phone at the end of the month.
And at the end of the month, another billing cycle takes place.

The OP was not planning on roaming in the first place. She did realize that
the localized problem was just during rush hour, and was a new problem per
se, which indicates that there is a local tower problem, as she didn't
experience that during prior rush hour traffic.

I just suggested the F&CA roaming option as a short term fix till SPCS fixes
the problem.

>
>
> > agree with you that, in the past, there might have been a delay in
showing
> > roaming minutes, but not in these days,
>
> My final Sprint bill will beg to differ with you, I'm afraid.

I don't have a clue where you were roaming, or on whose network or even if
you were carrying the F&C A option, but if you did and exceeded your roaming
allocation, then who does one look to, but the one making and receiving the
calls.

Again, I don't roam much at all, but my daughter will on occasion, and those
calls will show up pretty darn quick on our on line account.

Bob

---

› See More: Using Roaming as last vestige to stay with Sprint in LA, question

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 02:22:12 GMT, Veronica <Veronica4-no [email protected]>
wrote:

>Hi, Veronica here,
>Thanks guys for the support re coverage on the road that Sprint had
>previously fully covered and is now in question. I will continue to
>monitor and work on that one.
>Does Roaming or Digital roaming seamlessly transfer a call that had
>been being held on PCS ?
>
>I get the impression that one would have to originate the call on the
>Roaming basis and then continue it on that roaming basis and that
>specific call would not come off of that roaming basis until
>disconnected and re-established as a PCS call. Correct ? (I have never
>placed a roaming call prior to this point and would not now were this
>Laurel Canyon road a problem. This is my last attempt to stay with
>Sprint and not shift to Verizon.) Thanks,
>V.

Thank you Gentlemen,
Look at the value of this discourse. No I would not use Vision while
driving.
The reference to using roaming deep in the belly of a building is
fascinating, and valuable.

The area in concern is the higher part of Laurel Canyon Blvd. as it
goes up to Mulholland Drive and down again. Not Ventura Blvd.

I am hoping that Sprint is listening and doing something with the
minicells on the power poles, soon, near the top of Mulholland Drive.
It is actually when one descends down the south side of the big hill
that one is hit with a complete outage and need to transfer to Digital
Roaming, at best,.

It is not so much shrinkage during the rush hour,- that would be more
comprehensible. Rather during business hours, even at noon, on a road
that has zero commercial store frontage beyond the first 3 blocks on
the north side when it leaves Ventura Blvd. Yet after business hours,
when there is jammed traffic on this road, at 7 PM, the reception
improves to full clarity and signal holding. At noon, one will lose
the call one is on and have to patch it back up with the displeased
person at the other end, not to mention our own displeasure. Thus
roaming, while an asset, will still mean that one will have to
terminate the call one has been on and start a new one for 5 minutes
and then another new one on PCS at the end of the 5 minutes. A major
drag and not grasped by the party at the other end, it leaves them
confused and perturbed.

At the top, at Mulholland Drive, there seems to be a LA Water & Power
building that looks much like a cream colored brick bunker. No
observable entrance point on the Laurel Canyon Blvd. which is
traveled.

I cannot fathom what would be interfering during the relatively
lightly trafficked mid day. Nor how the very few residents in houses
along the road would be able to ramp up industrial strength PCS signal
robbing from their nefarious backyard tool sheds.

Again, for years this Laurel Canyon Blvd. was a shining apple of a
prize road that Nextel, T-Mobil (still) etc., did not service. But at
least with our Sanyo 4700's we had perfect coverage without the
THOUGHT of the call being dropped.

I am gaining glimmers of hope in my up and down the road testing on
Laurel Canyon Blvd. (usually with voice mail to check the call
dropping). We won't make the change to Verizon, or another carrier
until hope runs out. Thanks for the continued help.

V.

Veronica wrote:

> Thank you Gentlemen,
> Look at the value of this discourse. No I would not use Vision while
> driving.
> The reference to using roaming deep in the belly of a building is
> fascinating, and valuable.

OK, I still haven't heard an answer from you about whether you talked to
Sprint, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you replied
and I just missed it. Could you answer the question again?

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: [email protected] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

Bob Smith wrote:

> Well, lemme see here Steve. Spent 21 years in LA and So. Orange County, and
> attended two years at S.F.V.S.C. ... aka: Cal State Northridge ... Yea, I'm
> a bit familiar with So. Cal. .

Newbie.

Jeez, how'd you manage the move from SoCal to a part of the world that isn't
populated by weird people?

*duck*

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: [email protected] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 20:20:14 -0700, Steve Sobol <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Veronica wrote:
>
>> Thank you Gentlemen,
>> Look at the value of this discourse. No I would not use Vision while
>> driving.
>> The reference to using roaming deep in the belly of a building is
>> fascinating, and valuable.
>
>OK, I still haven't heard an answer from you about whether you talked to
>Sprint, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you replied
>and I just missed it. Could you answer the question again?

Steve, stepping for the lady here:

She divided her postings into 3 threads, 'Don't quite know why, but
her posting of Sept 6th. I copy it for you for your convenience :

"Thanks all, I add this to a light thread line that has not evolved
into arguments....

The PCS outage condition continues today, Wednesday, September 07,
2005. I did finally reach someone at Sprint and was informed that the
area (between Lookout Mountain Road north almost to Ventura Blvd.) is
a "heavy/intense usage area" (as in cell phone usage). And that the
Nextel inclusion is a possible or likely reason that what was, for
years, a Sprint PCS "gold medal" road, is now reduced to Analog and
Digital roaming. Except at the base of the road on the city side,
north and south.

Again, this is the second most trafficked route through/over the hill
from LA to the San Fernando Valley, where one finds Studio City, etc.
Per the Dept of Transportation - over 50,000 cars per month.

He was friendly, but could not start to predict a resolution on a time
basis.

I can see that Digital Roaming is available on part of that stretch of
road. But that leads me to wonder to which carrier the roaming would
switch to. Presumably Verison. Which leads me to further wonder how it
is that Verison presumably has service but Sprint does not. He said
that 300,000 new Nextel users are now utilizing Sprint towers.
Presumably the 300,000 number is a national number. Also in that my
group/company had to switch from Nextel in order to have cell phone
access on this main artery in the year 2001. And that if Nextel users
had not gained the ability to use cell service on this main artery,
since then, that they would obviously not be now using the Sprint
towers.

Ooooppsss. Then again, perhaps that is exactly what is happening. All
those Nextel users in LA now find that they can jump on the Sprint
towers along this very busy road and the word is out and they are
using their Nextel phones on this road and thus overloading the Sprint
towers and PCS service basically crashes on this heavily trafficked
artery.

The Microcell element is interesting. I did not know about that, and
it makes sense. It also makes sense that these microcell units could
get more easily overloaded with new users, if the Rep is to be assumed
to be correct. Late last night I used voicemail up and down the road,
and the connection did not cut out. Thus I assumed it was resolved.
Today, total disaster. And thanks Bob, I did also send off an email as
per your link.

To have ones ongoing calls killed at a relatively important points in
the conversation and not be able to get the person back on the phone
for 10-20 minutes, is indeed frustrating.

Veronica.
/////

Best, Fred

Veronica wrote:
<snip>
> the north side when it leaves Ventura Blvd. Yet after business hours,
> when there is jammed traffic on this road, at 7 PM, the reception
> improves to full clarity and signal holding. At noon, one will lose
> the call one is on and have to patch it back up with the displeased
> person at the other end, not to mention our own displeasure. Thus
> roaming, while an asset, will still mean that one will have to
> terminate the call one has been on and start a new one for 5 minutes
> and then another new one on PCS at the end of the 5 minutes. A major
> drag and not grasped by the party at the other end, it leaves them
> confused and perturbed.
>

"Confused and perturbed" individuals, far from your vehicle, are not a
priority while driving. On the other hand, I wonder how many "confused
and perturbed" drivers have been near you while you were driving.
Connect the dots.


--
Mike

Fred Atlas wrote:

> The PCS outage condition continues today, Wednesday, September 07,
> 2005. I did finally reach someone at Sprint and was informed that the
> area (between Lookout Mountain Road north almost to Ventura Blvd.) is
> a "heavy/intense usage area" (as in cell phone usage). And that the
> Nextel inclusion is a possible or likely reason that what was, for
> years, a Sprint PCS "gold medal" road, is now reduced to Analog and
> Digital roaming. Except at the base of the road on the city side,
> north and south.

Thanks, Fred, obviously I *did* miss it.

> Again, this is the second most trafficked route through/over the hill
> from LA to the San Fernando Valley, where one finds Studio City, etc.
> Per the Dept of Transportation - over 50,000 cars per month.

right.

> He was friendly, but could not start to predict a resolution on a time
> basis.

Which I can understand, seeing that they have to get permits from the city
and/or state if they have to do any construction work at all. I've seen a
couple computer stores open up months late due to permit problems, recently.

> I can see that Digital Roaming is available on part of that stretch of
> road. But that leads me to wonder to which carrier the roaming would
> switch to. Presumably Verison. Which leads me to further wonder how it
> is that Verison presumably has service but Sprint does not. He said
> that 300,000 new Nextel users are now utilizing Sprint towers.

Well, if it's analog roaming, it could be Verizon, it could be the old AT&T
network... it won't be Cingular or T-Mobile, since T-Mobile has never had
analog and Cingular didn't ever have it in CA.

> Ooooppsss. Then again, perhaps that is exactly what is happening. All
> those Nextel users in LA now find that they can jump on the Sprint
> towers along this very busy road and the word is out and they are
> using their Nextel phones on this road and thus overloading the Sprint
> towers and PCS service basically crashes on this heavily trafficked
> artery.

Well, Nextel is being forced to move off 800MHz, as I understand. I am sure
Sprint could have done a much better job of planning, though, as the merger
didn't happen yesterday; it's been in the works for a while.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: [email protected] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

Why can't Sprint technical support simply give straight answers instead of
making up fairy-tales to get the customer off the phone? I love the Sprint
network, but the CS and Tech support is usually horrible. When I was with
Verizon they filed a trouble ticket and got back to me with a straight
answer within several days.

Mij Adyaw wrote:
> Why can't Sprint technical support simply give straight answers instead of
> making up fairy-tales to get the customer off the phone? I love the Sprint
> network, but the CS and Tech support is usually horrible.

Welcome to my world.

> When I was with
> Verizon they filed a trouble ticket and got back to me with a straight
> answer within several days.

I had problems with Verizon in this area too. But they're much better than
Sprint with regards to customer service (although I've generally been able
to get clued Tech Support reps at Sprint).



--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: [email protected] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

Verizon actually sent an RF engineer to my address in order to investigate
the problem. He determined that the signal strength was not sufficient to
sustain adequate coverage and therefore Verizon let me out of my contract.
Now that is service!! :-)

"Steve Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Mij Adyaw wrote:
>> Why can't Sprint technical support simply give straight answers instead
>> of making up fairy-tales to get the customer off the phone? I love the
>> Sprint network, but the CS and Tech support is usually horrible.
>
> Welcome to my world.
>
>> When I was with Verizon they filed a trouble ticket and got back to me
>> with a straight answer within several days.
>
> I had problems with Verizon in this area too. But they're much better than
> Sprint with regards to customer service (although I've generally been able
> to get clued Tech Support reps at Sprint).
>
>
>
> --
> Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
> Company website: http://JustThe.net/
> Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
> E: [email protected] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

Just for the record all roaming (both CDMA and AMPS) here in the Los
Angeles area is on Verizon. Sprint does not have a roaming agreement
with AT&T's old analog system and never has.

Bob Smith wrote:
> "Veronica" wrote in message
>>Does Roaming or Digital roaming seamlessly transfer a call that had
>>been being held on PCS ?
>
> No, it would be dropped.

That makes sense as "inter-carrier roaming handoffs during calls in
progress" (quoting Larry as he phrased it very well).

My unusual experience was s call that originated on Verizon digital
roaming never released when I got into Sprint's digital area.

There's one particular area where I always hit Verizon's digital
roaming. I placed a call on Verizon digital roaming (I have F&C for that
very reason) and held the call for over 30 minutes as I drove 20 miles
and was WELL inside my Sprint digital coverage.

DecTxCowboy wrote:
> Bob Smith wrote:
>> "Veronica" wrote in message
>>> Does Roaming or Digital roaming seamlessly transfer a call that had
>>> been being held on PCS ?
>>
>> No, it would be dropped.
>
> That makes sense as "inter-carrier roaming handoffs during calls in
> progress" (quoting Larry as he phrased it very well).
>
> My unusual experience was s call that originated on Verizon digital
> roaming never released when I got into Sprint's digital area.
>
> There's one particular area where I always hit Verizon's digital
> roaming. I placed a call on Verizon digital roaming (I have F&C for
> that very reason) and held the call for over 30 minutes as I drove 20
> miles and was WELL inside my Sprint digital coverage.

But you still had Verizon coverage, ergo the call was never dropped. I
was not aware that a roaming call was supposed to auto-terminate just
because a SPCS tower happens to come into range. (Though I suppose that
wouldn't be too bad if you were actually paying for roaming--no F&CA.)


--
Mike

Really makes no difference to me, I have F&C and either way roaming is
the same as in network. Now I *would* be unhappy if it did drop my call
in that part of the county...but it doesn't and I'm not (unhappy).

As long as you have a good roaming signal the call will continue on
that network until ended regardless of whether or not you're back in a
Sprint area. Then it will look for Sprint service again.