ATT/Cingular Coverage and QOS

ATT/Cingular is offering an inexpensive ($0 from Amazon and others),
well-reviewed, MS SmartPhone (the Audiovox 5600). Verizon's only
offering if the aging, overly expensive Samsung i600 for over $400 w/o
Bluetooth. I've been a Verizon customer for about 6 years now and wanted
to know from those of you in the know, if the Cingular GSM coverage is
good enough. I live in the Philly metro area and travel for work (NYC,
Orlando, Vega, etc.). Mostly metropolitan areas. Travel to the South
Jersey Shore in Summer near Cape May.

So how is their coverage, dropped calls, etc. Any thought appreciated.


--
David G.

"David G." <david_please_dont_email_me@i_hate_spam.com> wrote in message
news:m5WdnR2erZvlLzHcRVn-pA@comcast.com...
> ATT/Cingular is offering an inexpensive ($0 from Amazon and others),
> well-reviewed, MS SmartPhone (the Audiovox 5600). Verizon's only offering
> if the aging, overly expensive Samsung i600 for over $400 w/o Bluetooth.
> I've been a Verizon customer for about 6 years now and wanted to know from
> those of you in the know, if the Cingular GSM coverage is good enough. I
> live in the Philly metro area and travel for work (NYC, Orlando, Vega,
> etc.). Mostly metropolitan areas. Travel to the South Jersey Shore in
> Summer near Cape May.
>
> So how is their coverage, dropped calls, etc. Any thought appreciated.
>
>
> --
> David G.

And the reason you didn't post your query in the Cingular newsgroup
is.......................

Special Ed wrote:
> "David G." <david_please_dont_email_me@i_hate_spam.com> wrote in
> message news:m5WdnR2erZvlLzHcRVn-pA@comcast.com...
>> ATT/Cingular is offering an inexpensive ($0 from Amazon and others),
>> well-reviewed, MS SmartPhone (the Audiovox 5600). Verizon's only
>> offering if the aging, overly expensive Samsung i600 for over $400
>> w/o Bluetooth. I've been a Verizon customer for about 6 years now
>> and wanted to know from those of you in the know, if the Cingular
>> GSM coverage is good enough. I live in the Philly metro area and
>> travel for work (NYC, Orlando, Vega, etc.). Mostly metropolitan
>> areas. Travel to the South Jersey Shore in Summer near Cape May.
>>
>> So how is their coverage, dropped calls, etc. Any thought
>> appreciated. --
>> David G.
>
> And the reason you didn't post your query in the Cingular newsgroup
> is.......................

To see if any Verizon customers had experience with ATT/Cingular. Were
you confused about that?

Not too smart are you.

--
David G.

David G. wrote:
> ATT/Cingular is offering an inexpensive ($0 from Amazon and others),
> well-reviewed, MS SmartPhone (the Audiovox 5600). Verizon's only
> offering if the aging, overly expensive Samsung i600 for over $400 w/o
> Bluetooth. I've been a Verizon customer for about 6 years now and wanted
> to know from those of you in the know, if the Cingular GSM coverage is
> good enough. I live in the Philly metro area and travel for work (NYC,
> Orlando, Vega, etc.). Mostly metropolitan areas. Travel to the South
> Jersey Shore in Summer near Cape May.
>
> So how is their coverage, dropped calls, etc. Any thought appreciated.

Good luck getting service. Where you have service today, you probably
won't tomorrow.

That was my experience with Cingular. Your milage may vary.

JS

I too have been a Verizon customer for about 6 years. I just signed with
Cingular to get the Motorola V3.

Over the Thanksgiving holiday I compared reception/coverage of both carriers
in New York, Denver, and on top of the continental divide.

I've had a couple of dropped calls on Cingular, which happens rarely with
Verizon, but all in all I have no problems to report. I also had a great
experience singing up with Cingular (no waiting and sat down! with an acutal
human professional). I also called tech support to get help setting up POP
email and had a good experience there.

The service quality is almost as good as Verizon but the technology of
Cingular's phones is really superior (bluetooth that actually works - ability
to transfer files without paying extra). So, I'm sticking with Cingular and
dumping Verizon.

>The service quality is almost as good as Verizon but the technology of
>Cingular's phones is really superior (bluetooth that actually works - ability
>
>to transfer files without paying extra). So, I'm sticking with Cingular and
>dumping Verizon.

I went to the mall today and noticed *all* the carriers had kiosks signing
people up.

I looked at the latest Verizon service map and compared it to the ATT/Cingular
map.

I was surprised how many blank spots ATT have out in the west.

Verizon seems to have better coverage.

Hunter
--
http://members.aol.com/ILuvBrady/summer2004.htm
"Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body,
but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting
"...holy ****...what a ride!"

bunny wrote:
> I too have been a Verizon customer for about 6 years. I just
> signed with Cingular to get the Motorola V3.
>
> Over the Thanksgiving holiday I compared reception/coverage of both
> carriers in New York, Denver, and on top of the continental divide.
>
> I've had a couple of dropped calls on Cingular, which happens
> rarely with Verizon, but all in all I have no problems to report.
> I also had a great experience singing up with Cingular (no waiting
> and sat down! with an acutal human professional). I also called
> tech support to get help setting up POP email and had a good
> experience there.
>
> The service quality is almost as good as Verizon but the technology
> of Cingular's phones is really superior (bluetooth that actually
> works - ability to transfer files without paying extra). So, I'm
> sticking with Cingular and dumping Verizon.

I'm continually amused by what is important to people in a phone. Having
the ability to auto synchronize or operate wirelessly some accessory is more
important than call performance ... (shakes head).

--

- Philip

SinghaLvr wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 22:04:46 -0500, Philip wrote
> (in article <iDvrd.1078$Va5.213@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.n et>):
>
>> Subject: Re: ATT/Cingular Coverage and QOS
>> From: "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net>
>> Date: Yesterday 10:04 PM
>> Newsgroups: alt.cellular.verizon
>>
>> bunny wrote:
>>> I too have been a Verizon customer for about 6 years. I just
>>> signed with Cingular to get the Motorola V3.
>>>
>>> Over the Thanksgiving holiday I compared reception/coverage of both
>>> carriers in New York, Denver, and on top of the continental divide.
>>>
>>> I've had a couple of dropped calls on Cingular, which happens
>>> rarely with Verizon, but all in all I have no problems to report.
>>> I also had a great experience singing up with Cingular (no waiting
>>> and sat down! with an acutal human professional). I also called
>>> tech support to get help setting up POP email and had a good
>>> experience there.
>>>
>>> The service quality is almost as good as Verizon but the technology
>>> of Cingular's phones is really superior (bluetooth that actually
>>> works - ability to transfer files without paying extra). So, I'm
>>> sticking with Cingular and dumping Verizon.
>>
>> I'm continually amused by what is important to people in a phone.
>> Having the ability to auto synchronize or operate wirelessly some
>> accessory is more important than call performance ... (shakes head).
>
> In all honesty I find the ability to check e-mail and SMS equally
> important as call performance lately. I lecture for 8 - 12 hours per
> day. I can't answer a call, but I can occasionally read a message or
> reply to one (usually during breaks or when I have my students doing
> a lab or something.)
> Just another perspective ...
>
> My secondary importance is international roaming ... something that
> is a bit of a challenge with an american CDMA telephone. It *is*
> something that I'm going to have to address in the near future
> though. (My solution may be something as non-elegant as buying a
> cheap GSM phone and a bunch of local SIM cards.) We'll see ...

I'm starting to think the cheapest way to make international calls is
with Vonage. Get a US number, get a virtual softphone/number from
Vonage, take it with you to Australia and as long as you have internet
access, you can talk all you want to the States - for free. The company
that makes the softphone for Vonage actually sells one for Pocket PCs,
so you could use your Pocket PC with wireless access as your phone. At
least it's lighter while you're roaming around a wireless enabled
campus.

I guess if you need to make local calls from the international location
a local phone may be the way to go.


--
David G.

On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 20:15:42 -0500, SinghaLvr wrote
(in article <0001HW.BDD3D6EE000253DBF04075B0@news-50.giganews.com>):


>
> Have you tried using the RAZR V3 with a Mac yet? (Curious how well it works)
>

Yes, I use a Mac and it works just fine with iSync. You must use cable,
though (well documented nowhere but in the iSync forum on Apple's support
site).

Bluetooth works for file transfer between the phone and computer.

On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 22:04:46 -0500, Philip wrote
(in article <iDvrd.1078$Va5.213@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.n et>):


> I'm continually amused by what is important to people in a phone. Having
> the ability to auto synchronize or operate wirelessly some accessory is more
> important than call performance ... (shakes head).
>
>

Actually "call performance" IS quite important - which is why I've been a
Motorola user since the first Startac phone. Which is why I'm willing to
switch carriers (as long as the service in NYC is good) to get the best
Motorola phone available. (Sure they've had some clunkers but hold the V3 in
your hand for a while and you won't want to let go!)

Since most of my life is kept organized on my computer it's also important
that my phone - my second most-used technological tool - have the ability to
be up to date with my contacts and calendar.

SinghaLvr wrote:

> My secondary importance is international roaming ... something that is a bit
> of a challenge with an american CDMA telephone. It *is* something that I'm
> going to have to address in the near future though. (My solution may be
> something as non-elegant as buying a cheap GSM phone and a bunch of local SIM
> cards.) We'll see ...

Verizon now has at least one hybrid CDMA/GSM phone, but it might still be
cheaper to buy or rent a phone overseas, unless you need to have people reach
you on your US number.




--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.

Steve Sobol wrote:
> SinghaLvr wrote:
>
>> My secondary importance is international roaming ... something that is
>> a bit of a challenge with an american CDMA telephone. It *is*
>> something that I'm going to have to address in the near future
>> though. (My solution may be something as non-elegant as buying a
>> cheap GSM phone and a bunch of local SIM cards.) We'll see ...
>
>
> Verizon now has at least one hybrid CDMA/GSM phone,

FWIW: I believe that would be the Samsung SCH-A690.


--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.

On 12/1/04 9:33 PM, in article 20041201213335.14386.00001263@mb-m13.aol.com,
"HHamp5246" <hhamp5246@aol.comnojunk> wrote:

> I was surprised how many blank spots ATT have out in the west.
>
> Verizon seems to have better coverage.
Not sure how accurate they are. For example, I was supposed to have little
or no ATT GSM service from Las Vegas to the Grand Canyon (if you look @
ATT's Maps). Yet I has solid service all the way to and from the Canyon...

On 12/3/04 3:15 AM, in article
0001HW.BDD58AEC00058317F04075B0@news-50.giganews.com, "SinghaLvr"
<singhalvr@charter.net> wrote:

> Super! One last question:
> Can you use Bluetooth as a wireless modem with the mac?
Should be able to - it sets up as a Com port under the Bluetooth Setup
assistant...

On 12/2/04 6:26 AM, in article
0001HW.BDD466100022EF85F04075B0@news-server.nyc.rr.com, "bunny"
<bunny@bunny.net> wrote:

> Yes, I use a Mac and it works just fine with iSync. You must use cable,
> though (well documented nowhere but in the iSync forum on Apple's support
> site).

www.apple.com/isync states that all Motorola phones need a USB cable. I
think Mot didn't support the sync profile.... One of the main reasons I got
a T637.