Questions regarding the end of Cingular/T-Mobile network sharing:

Being away from the US for sometime, I was aware that Cingular and AT&T
merged but I wasn't aware that Cingular & T-Mobiles' network sharing
deal ended and that Cingular actually sold their CA & NV networks to
T-Mobile, until recently.

Given the fact that that Cingular customers are allowed to roam on the
legacy network (T-Mobile) for the next 4 years as well as having access
to the new network they acquired from AT&T, is there any real reason to
consider T-Mobile at all as far as network coverage is concerned?

1) According to the press release last year, Cingular customers would
be able to roam on the old network for up to 4 years. Has this been
confirmed in the final terms of the deal?

2) If T-Mobile & Cingular are essentially the same network IN CA & NV
with the exception of AT&T Wireless - is it safe to say that calls from
T-Mobile customers would be given 'priority' when routed through the
network compared to Cingular users who are merely roaming on their
legacy network? - Or are calls from either carrier handled in the
exactly same manner?

If the latter is true, then the Cingular network would obviously be
superior for customers in CA or NV. Right?

3) How does overall nationwide service compare between the two
carriers? Which carrier has coverage in more markets in the United
States and is either carrier considered to have better service than the
other in certain parts of the country? (East coast for example)

For customers in CA or NV:
The only factors I could up with where T-Mobile could excel:
- Customer Service
- I haven't done a detailed comparison but perhaps cheaper voice/data
plans
- T-Mobile Hotspot Service

My apologies for the lengthy post. I don't have service yet with
either carrier so I just want to see if there is any real reason to
consider T-Mobile - and if so, WHY?

It all boils down to one thing. How good is the signal where you live
and work or wherever you use it most? Regardless of price or plan, if
one is superior for your specific needs, that's your answer. If all
things are equal in that regard, then check their coverage maps for
where you're likely to travel and compare the plans based on your usage.
My experience with ATT before they became Cingular drove me to TMo where
I have always been treated very well.
As to priority for native callers vs. roamers, you'd never get them to
admit it but back in the analog days I know it was standard practice.

From:rishi@wheresmycell.com
rishi@wheresmycell.com

> Being away from the US for sometime, I was aware that Cingular and
> AT&T merged but I wasn't aware that Cingular & T-Mobiles' network
> sharing deal ended and that Cingular actually sold their CA & NV
> networks to T-Mobile, until recently.
>
> Given the fact that that Cingular customers are allowed to roam on the
> legacy network (T-Mobile) for the next 4 years as well as having
> access to the new network they acquired from AT&T, is there any real
> reason to consider T-Mobile at all as far as network coverage is
> concerned?
>
> 1) According to the press release last year, Cingular customers would
> be able to roam on the old network for up to 4 years. Has this been
> confirmed in the final terms of the deal?
>
> 2) If T-Mobile & Cingular are essentially the same network IN CA & NV
> with the exception of AT&T Wireless - is it safe to say that calls
> from T-Mobile customers would be given 'priority' when routed through
> the network compared to Cingular users who are merely roaming on their
> legacy network? - Or are calls from either carrier handled in the
> exactly same manner?
>
> If the latter is true, then the Cingular network would obviously be
> superior for customers in CA or NV. Right?
>
> 3) How does overall nationwide service compare between the two
> carriers? Which carrier has coverage in more markets in the United
> States and is either carrier considered to have better service than
> the other in certain parts of the country? (East coast for example)
>
> For customers in CA or NV:
> The only factors I could up with where T-Mobile could excel:
> - Customer Service
> - I haven't done a detailed comparison but perhaps cheaper voice/data
> plans
> - T-Mobile Hotspot Service
>
> My apologies for the lengthy post. I don't have service yet with
> either carrier so I just want to see if there is any real reason to
> consider T-Mobile - and if so, WHY?

<rishi@wheresmycell.com> wrote in message
news:1115584123.016639.178000@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Being away from the US for sometime, I was aware that Cingular and AT&T
> merged but I wasn't aware that Cingular & T-Mobiles' network sharing
> deal ended and that Cingular actually sold their CA & NV networks to
> T-Mobile, until recently.
>
> Given the fact that that Cingular customers are allowed to roam on the
> legacy network (T-Mobile) for the next 4 years as well as having access
> to the new network they acquired from AT&T, is there any real reason to
> consider T-Mobile at all as far as network coverage is concerned?

No. Especially if you want the best coverage. I'm in San Diego, California
and I find that Cingular has better coverage than T-Mobile. With Cingular,
you get access to the pre-merger infrastructure + the post merger
Cingular/AT&T network. T-Mobile customers do not have access to the AT&T
(Blue) network in California.

>
> 1) According to the press release last year, Cingular customers would
> be able to roam on the old network for up to 4 years. Has this been
> confirmed in the final terms of the deal?

Correct.

>
> 2) If T-Mobile & Cingular are essentially the same network IN CA & NV
> with the exception of AT&T Wireless - is it safe to say that calls from
> T-Mobile customers would be given 'priority' when routed through the
> network compared to Cingular users who are merely roaming on their
> legacy network? - Or are calls from either carrier handled in the
> exactly same manner?

The network handles all calls the same way. There is no priority for native
customers vs. roamers.
I don't know about now, but before the sale of the network to T-Mobile, the
infrastructure was operated by a jointly owned affiliate. T-Mobile and
Cingular customers had equal access to the network.

> If the latter is true, then the Cingular network would obviously be
> superior for customers in CA or NV. Right?
>
I would think so.

> 3) How does overall nationwide service compare between the two
> carriers? Which carrier has coverage in more markets in the United
> States and is either carrier considered to have better service than the
> other in certain parts of the country? (East coast for example)
>
Nationwide coverage with Cingular is better. T-Mobile works well only in
major markets. Cingular now has 850MHz and 1900MHz coverage in many areas
of the country. T-Mobile does not have access to the 850MHz
infrastructure.

> For customers in CA or NV:
> The only factors I could up with where T-Mobile could excel:
> - Customer Service
> - I haven't done a detailed comparison but perhaps cheaper voice/data
> plans
> - T-Mobile Hotspot Service
>

If you need hotspot, then T-Mobile is a better choice. Or you can subscribe
to hotspot separately.
T-Mobile price plans are cheaper but if you factor in rollover minutes your
cost per minute would be lower. Cingular allows you to start with any plan
then change to any other plan that fits your needs without affecting the
length of your contract.

> My apologies for the lengthy post. I don't have service yet with
> either carrier so I just want to see if there is any real reason to
> consider T-Mobile - and if so, WHY?

The only reason I would consider T-Mobile in California is if I get a
substantially better deal in terms of cost per minute. The same would
apply to Verizon or Sprint for that matter.

On 8 May 2005 13:28:43 -0700, rishi@wheresmycell.com wrote:

>Being away from the US for sometime, I was aware that Cingular and AT&T
>merged but I wasn't aware that Cingular & T-Mobiles' network sharing
>deal ended and that Cingular actually sold their CA & NV networks to
>T-Mobile, until recently.
>

Just a small correction, Cingular bought AT&T Wireless, there was no
merger.


>Given the fact that that Cingular customers are allowed to roam on the
>legacy network (T-Mobile) for the next 4 years as well as having access
>to the new network they acquired from AT&T, is there any real reason to
>consider T-Mobile at all as far as network coverage is concerned?
>
>1) According to the press release last year, Cingular customers would
>be able to roam on the old network for up to 4 years. Has this been
>confirmed in the final terms of the deal?
>
>2) If T-Mobile & Cingular are essentially the same network IN CA & NV
>with the exception of AT&T Wireless - is it safe to say that calls from
>T-Mobile customers would be given 'priority' when routed through the
>network compared to Cingular users who are merely roaming on their
>legacy network? - Or are calls from either carrier handled in the
>exactly same manner?
>
>If the latter is true, then the Cingular network would obviously be
>superior for customers in CA or NV. Right?
>
>3) How does overall nationwide service compare between the two
>carriers? Which carrier has coverage in more markets in the United
>States and is either carrier considered to have better service than the
>other in certain parts of the country? (East coast for example)
>
>For customers in CA or NV:
>The only factors I could up with where T-Mobile could excel:
> - Customer Service
> - I haven't done a detailed comparison but perhaps cheaper voice/data
>plans
> - T-Mobile Hotspot Service
>
>My apologies for the lengthy post. I don't have service yet with
>either carrier so I just want to see if there is any real reason to
>consider T-Mobile - and if so, WHY?

That was an excellent response... albeit I do disagree about
generalizing on Cingular vs TMobile in California. I have had BOTH here
in Northern California, and I am in a fringe area not near any MAJOR
city.. TMobile coverage is better in my neighborhood since they
installed a new tower about a year ago. Cingular has weaker coverage at
my home by at least 2 bars.

As for roaming on the old AT&T.. north of me (Ukiah to Eureka) has
coverage provided by another GSM company (Edge I believe is the name)
and you can roam on their network with either a Cingular or TMobible
account without being charged extra.

My point is, like others have said, every situation is unique. You
cannot generalize that one area or city has better reception. You
should try BOTH companies before finally deciding. Rates here in
California are generally cheaper for both individual and family plans
with TMobile, BUT you do get rollover on Cingular that may or may not be
a benefit to you depending on your usage.

Good luck!

SFB

PS I should say that TMobile has one year contracts and MOST (not all)
Cingular contracts are for 2 years. Also, Cingular currently has a
better selection in phones than TMobile (again only in my opinion).

Richie wrote:
> <rishi@wheresmycell.com> wrote in message
> news:1115584123.016639.178000@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
>>Being away from the US for sometime, I was aware that Cingular and AT&T
>>merged but I wasn't aware that Cingular & T-Mobiles' network sharing
>>deal ended and that Cingular actually sold their CA & NV networks to
>>T-Mobile, until recently.
>>
>>Given the fact that that Cingular customers are allowed to roam on the
>>legacy network (T-Mobile) for the next 4 years as well as having access
>>to the new network they acquired from AT&T, is there any real reason to
>>consider T-Mobile at all as far as network coverage is concerned?
>
>
> No. Especially if you want the best coverage. I'm in San Diego, California
> and I find that Cingular has better coverage than T-Mobile. With Cingular,
> you get access to the pre-merger infrastructure + the post merger
> Cingular/AT&T network. T-Mobile customers do not have access to the AT&T
> (Blue) network in California.
>
>
>>1) According to the press release last year, Cingular customers would
>>be able to roam on the old network for up to 4 years. Has this been
>>confirmed in the final terms of the deal?
>
>
> Correct.
>
>
>>2) If T-Mobile & Cingular are essentially the same network IN CA & NV
>>with the exception of AT&T Wireless - is it safe to say that calls from
>>T-Mobile customers would be given 'priority' when routed through the
>>network compared to Cingular users who are merely roaming on their
>>legacy network? - Or are calls from either carrier handled in the
>>exactly same manner?
>
>
> The network handles all calls the same way. There is no priority for native
> customers vs. roamers.
> I don't know about now, but before the sale of the network to T-Mobile, the
> infrastructure was operated by a jointly owned affiliate. T-Mobile and
> Cingular customers had equal access to the network.
>
>
>>If the latter is true, then the Cingular network would obviously be
>>superior for customers in CA or NV. Right?
>>
>
> I would think so.
>
>
>>3) How does overall nationwide service compare between the two
>>carriers? Which carrier has coverage in more markets in the United
>>States and is either carrier considered to have better service than the
>>other in certain parts of the country? (East coast for example)
>>
>
> Nationwide coverage with Cingular is better. T-Mobile works well only in
> major markets. Cingular now has 850MHz and 1900MHz coverage in many areas
> of the country. T-Mobile does not have access to the 850MHz
> infrastructure.
>
>
>>For customers in CA or NV:
>>The only factors I could up with where T-Mobile could excel:
>>- Customer Service
>>- I haven't done a detailed comparison but perhaps cheaper voice/data
>>plans
>>- T-Mobile Hotspot Service
>>
>
>
> If you need hotspot, then T-Mobile is a better choice. Or you can subscribe
> to hotspot separately.
> T-Mobile price plans are cheaper but if you factor in rollover minutes your
> cost per minute would be lower. Cingular allows you to start with any plan
> then change to any other plan that fits your needs without affecting the
> length of your contract.
>
>
>>My apologies for the lengthy post. I don't have service yet with
>>either carrier so I just want to see if there is any real reason to
>>consider T-Mobile - and if so, WHY?
>
>
> The only reason I would consider T-Mobile in California is if I get a
> substantially better deal in terms of cost per minute. The same would
> apply to Verizon or Sprint for that matter.
>
>

You're right, customers should make a choice based on the coverage at their
location.

For contracts, independent retailers have the best deals on Cingular.
Online and in stores, they often push 2 year contacts for any kind of
decent phone.

I like T-Mobile a lot. The company is innovative and the price is right.
If it weren't for the rollover minutes at Cingular I would have the T-Mobile
Regional Plan for $49.99.

"SFB" <news@spenceburton.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:7oKdnYV6E7OSRePfRVn-uw@comcast.com...
> That was an excellent response... albeit I do disagree about generalizing
> on Cingular vs TMobile in California. I have had BOTH here in Northern
> California, and I am in a fringe area not near any MAJOR city.. TMobile
> coverage is better in my neighborhood since they installed a new tower
> about a year ago. Cingular has weaker coverage at my home by at least 2
> bars.
>
> As for roaming on the old AT&T.. north of me (Ukiah to Eureka) has
> coverage provided by another GSM company (Edge I believe is the name) and
> you can roam on their network with either a Cingular or TMobible account
> without being charged extra.
>
> My point is, like others have said, every situation is unique. You cannot
> generalize that one area or city has better reception. You should try
> BOTH companies before finally deciding. Rates here in California are
> generally cheaper for both individual and family plans with TMobile, BUT
> you do get rollover on Cingular that may or may not be a benefit to you
> depending on your usage.
>
> Good luck!
>
> SFB
>
> PS I should say that TMobile has one year contracts and MOST (not all)
> Cingular contracts are for 2 years. Also, Cingular currently has a better
> selection in phones than TMobile (again only in my opinion).
>
> Richie wrote:
>> <rishi@wheresmycell.com> wrote in message
>> news:1115584123.016639.178000@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>Being away from the US for sometime, I was aware that Cingular and AT&T
>>>merged but I wasn't aware that Cingular & T-Mobiles' network sharing
>>>deal ended and that Cingular actually sold their CA & NV networks to
>>>T-Mobile, until recently.
>>>
>>>Given the fact that that Cingular customers are allowed to roam on the
>>>legacy network (T-Mobile) for the next 4 years as well as having access
>>>to the new network they acquired from AT&T, is there any real reason to
>>>consider T-Mobile at all as far as network coverage is concerned?
>>
>>
>> No. Especially if you want the best coverage. I'm in San Diego,
>> California and I find that Cingular has better coverage than T-Mobile.
>> With Cingular, you get access to the pre-merger infrastructure + the post
>> merger Cingular/AT&T network. T-Mobile customers do not have access to
>> the AT&T (Blue) network in California.
>>
>>
>>>1) According to the press release last year, Cingular customers would
>>>be able to roam on the old network for up to 4 years. Has this been
>>>confirmed in the final terms of the deal?
>>
>>
>> Correct.
>>
>>
>>>2) If T-Mobile & Cingular are essentially the same network IN CA & NV
>>>with the exception of AT&T Wireless - is it safe to say that calls from
>>>T-Mobile customers would be given 'priority' when routed through the
>>>network compared to Cingular users who are merely roaming on their
>>>legacy network? - Or are calls from either carrier handled in the
>>>exactly same manner?
>>
>>
>> The network handles all calls the same way. There is no priority for
>> native customers vs. roamers.
>> I don't know about now, but before the sale of the network to T-Mobile,
>> the infrastructure was operated by a jointly owned affiliate. T-Mobile
>> and Cingular customers had equal access to the network.
>>
>>
>>>If the latter is true, then the Cingular network would obviously be
>>>superior for customers in CA or NV. Right?
>>>
>>
>> I would think so.
>>
>>
>>>3) How does overall nationwide service compare between the two
>>>carriers? Which carrier has coverage in more markets in the United
>>>States and is either carrier considered to have better service than the
>>>other in certain parts of the country? (East coast for example)
>>>
>>
>> Nationwide coverage with Cingular is better. T-Mobile works well only in
>> major markets. Cingular now has 850MHz and 1900MHz coverage in many
>> areas of the country. T-Mobile does not have access to the 850MHz
>> infrastructure.
>>
>>
>>>For customers in CA or NV:
>>>The only factors I could up with where T-Mobile could excel:
>>>- Customer Service
>>>- I haven't done a detailed comparison but perhaps cheaper voice/data
>>>plans
>>>- T-Mobile Hotspot Service
>>>
>>
>>
>> If you need hotspot, then T-Mobile is a better choice. Or you can
>> subscribe to hotspot separately.
>> T-Mobile price plans are cheaper but if you factor in rollover minutes
>> your cost per minute would be lower. Cingular allows you to start with
>> any plan then change to any other plan that fits your needs without
>> affecting the length of your contract.
>>
>>
>>>My apologies for the lengthy post. I don't have service yet with
>>>either carrier so I just want to see if there is any real reason to
>>>consider T-Mobile - and if so, WHY?
>>
>>
>> The only reason I would consider T-Mobile in California is if I get a
>> substantially better deal in terms of cost per minute. The same would
>> apply to Verizon or Sprint for that matter.
>>
>>
>

"BruceR" <brNOSPAM@hawaii.com> wrote in message
news:vAvfe.30258$R46.2876@tornado.socal.rr.com...
> It all boils down to one thing. How good is the signal where you live and
> work or wherever you use it most? Regardless of price or plan, if one is
> superior for your specific needs, that's your answer. If all things are
> equal in that regard, then check their coverage maps for where you're
> likely to travel and compare the plans based on your usage. My experience
> with ATT before they became Cingular drove me to TMo where I have always
> been treated very well.
> As to priority for native callers vs. roamers, you'd never get them to
> admit it but back in the analog days I know it was standard practice.

All very good points. Except that it not good enough to check the maps but
to actually have a phone in hand and try it in the places you'll likely be
using the phone. In my case lack of coverage for TMo in my area drove me to
ATT. Just as lack of coverage for Cingular GSM after the merger keeps me on
TDMA.

i have t-mobile in los angeles and my motorola v300 gave me horrible
coverage at home and office. i switched to an unlocked razr and it always
says cingular roaming and the razr is much more sensitive than the v300 and
the coverage is much better at home and office. during one recent call to
t-mobile, i was told they were doing software upgrades on the v300 but when
i called back to do it, they didn't know what i was talking about. so it
goes.

>
>>Being away from the US for sometime, I was aware that Cingular and AT&T
>>merged but I wasn't aware that Cingular & T-Mobiles' network sharing
>>deal ended and that Cingular actually sold their CA & NV networks to
>>T-Mobile, until recently.
>>
>
> Just a small correction, Cingular bought AT&T Wireless, there was no
> merger.
>
>
>>Given the fact that that Cingular customers are allowed to roam on the
>>legacy network (T-Mobile) for the next 4 years as well as having access
>>to the new network they acquired from AT&T, is there any real reason to
>>consider T-Mobile at all as far as network coverage is concerned?
>>
>>1) According to the press release last year, Cingular customers would
>>be able to roam on the old network for up to 4 years. Has this been
>>confirmed in the final terms of the deal?
>>
>>2) If T-Mobile & Cingular are essentially the same network IN CA & NV
>>with the exception of AT&T Wireless - is it safe to say that calls from
>>T-Mobile customers would be given 'priority' when routed through the
>>network compared to Cingular users who are merely roaming on their
>>legacy network? - Or are calls from either carrier handled in the
>>exactly same manner?
>>
>>If the latter is true, then the Cingular network would obviously be
>>superior for customers in CA or NV. Right?
>>
>>3) How does overall nationwide service compare between the two
>>carriers? Which carrier has coverage in more markets in the United
>>States and is either carrier considered to have better service than the
>>other in certain parts of the country? (East coast for example)
>>
>>For customers in CA or NV:
>>The only factors I could up with where T-Mobile could excel:
>> - Customer Service
>> - I haven't done a detailed comparison but perhaps cheaper voice/data
>>plans
>> - T-Mobile Hotspot Service
>>
>>My apologies for the lengthy post. I don't have service yet with
>>either carrier so I just want to see if there is any real reason to
>>consider T-Mobile - and if so, WHY?
>

"Richie" <mbc@pcbell.net> wrote in message
news:SoBfe.14753$J12.2973@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> You're right, customers should make a choice based on the coverage at
> their location.
>
> For contracts, independent retailers have the best deals on Cingular.
> Online and in stores, they often push 2 year contacts for any kind of
> decent phone.
>
> I like T-Mobile a lot. The company is innovative and the price is right.
> If it weren't for the rollover minutes at Cingular I would have the
> T-Mobile Regional Plan for $49.99.
>
Doesn't that have like 3000 minutes or something? With that many minutes,
would rollover even matter?


> "SFB" <news@spenceburton.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
> news:7oKdnYV6E7OSRePfRVn-uw@comcast.com...
>> That was an excellent response... albeit I do disagree about generalizing
>> on Cingular vs TMobile in California. I have had BOTH here in Northern
>> California, and I am in a fringe area not near any MAJOR city.. TMobile
>> coverage is better in my neighborhood since they installed a new tower
>> about a year ago. Cingular has weaker coverage at my home by at least 2
>> bars.
>>
>> As for roaming on the old AT&T.. north of me (Ukiah to Eureka) has
>> coverage provided by another GSM company (Edge I believe is the name) and
>> you can roam on their network with either a Cingular or TMobible account
>> without being charged extra.
>>
>> My point is, like others have said, every situation is unique. You
>> cannot generalize that one area or city has better reception. You should
>> try BOTH companies before finally deciding. Rates here in California are
>> generally cheaper for both individual and family plans with TMobile, BUT
>> you do get rollover on Cingular that may or may not be a benefit to you
>> depending on your usage.
>>
>> Good luck!
>>
>> SFB
>>
>> PS I should say that TMobile has one year contracts and MOST (not all)
>> Cingular contracts are for 2 years. Also, Cingular currently has a
>> better selection in phones than TMobile (again only in my opinion).
>>
>> Richie wrote:
>>> <rishi@wheresmycell.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1115584123.016639.178000@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>>Being away from the US for sometime, I was aware that Cingular and AT&T
>>>>merged but I wasn't aware that Cingular & T-Mobiles' network sharing
>>>>deal ended and that Cingular actually sold their CA & NV networks to
>>>>T-Mobile, until recently.
>>>>
>>>>Given the fact that that Cingular customers are allowed to roam on the
>>>>legacy network (T-Mobile) for the next 4 years as well as having access
>>>>to the new network they acquired from AT&T, is there any real reason to
>>>>consider T-Mobile at all as far as network coverage is concerned?
>>>
>>>
>>> No. Especially if you want the best coverage. I'm in San Diego,
>>> California and I find that Cingular has better coverage than T-Mobile.
>>> With Cingular, you get access to the pre-merger infrastructure + the
>>> post merger Cingular/AT&T network. T-Mobile customers do not have
>>> access to the AT&T (Blue) network in California.
>>>
>>>
>>>>1) According to the press release last year, Cingular customers would
>>>>be able to roam on the old network for up to 4 years. Has this been
>>>>confirmed in the final terms of the deal?
>>>
>>>
>>> Correct.
>>>
>>>
>>>>2) If T-Mobile & Cingular are essentially the same network IN CA & NV
>>>>with the exception of AT&T Wireless - is it safe to say that calls from
>>>>T-Mobile customers would be given 'priority' when routed through the
>>>>network compared to Cingular users who are merely roaming on their
>>>>legacy network? - Or are calls from either carrier handled in the
>>>>exactly same manner?
>>>
>>>
>>> The network handles all calls the same way. There is no priority for
>>> native customers vs. roamers.
>>> I don't know about now, but before the sale of the network to T-Mobile,
>>> the infrastructure was operated by a jointly owned affiliate. T-Mobile
>>> and Cingular customers had equal access to the network.
>>>
>>>
>>>>If the latter is true, then the Cingular network would obviously be
>>>>superior for customers in CA or NV. Right?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I would think so.
>>>
>>>
>>>>3) How does overall nationwide service compare between the two
>>>>carriers? Which carrier has coverage in more markets in the United
>>>>States and is either carrier considered to have better service than the
>>>>other in certain parts of the country? (East coast for example)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nationwide coverage with Cingular is better. T-Mobile works well only
>>> in major markets. Cingular now has 850MHz and 1900MHz coverage in
>>> many areas of the country. T-Mobile does not have access to the 850MHz
>>> infrastructure.
>>>
>>>
>>>>For customers in CA or NV:
>>>>The only factors I could up with where T-Mobile could excel:
>>>>- Customer Service
>>>>- I haven't done a detailed comparison but perhaps cheaper voice/data
>>>>plans
>>>>- T-Mobile Hotspot Service
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If you need hotspot, then T-Mobile is a better choice. Or you can
>>> subscribe to hotspot separately.
>>> T-Mobile price plans are cheaper but if you factor in rollover minutes
>>> your cost per minute would be lower. Cingular allows you to start with
>>> any plan then change to any other plan that fits your needs without
>>> affecting the length of your contract.
>>>
>>>
>>>>My apologies for the lengthy post. I don't have service yet with
>>>>either carrier so I just want to see if there is any real reason to
>>>>consider T-Mobile - and if so, WHY?
>>>
>>>
>>> The only reason I would consider T-Mobile in California is if I get a
>>> substantially better deal in terms of cost per minute. The same would
>>> apply to Verizon or Sprint for that matter.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

On Mon, 9 May 2005 15:38:19 -0500, "Danska" <danskaNOSPAN@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Richie" <mbc@pcbell.net> wrote in message
>news:SoBfe.14753$J12.2973@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>> You're right, customers should make a choice based on the coverage at
>> their location.
>>
>> For contracts, independent retailers have the best deals on Cingular.
>> Online and in stores, they often push 2 year contacts for any kind of
>> decent phone.
>>
>> I like T-Mobile a lot. The company is innovative and the price is right.
>> If it weren't for the rollover minutes at Cingular I would have the
>> T-Mobile Regional Plan for $49.99.
>>
>Doesn't that have like 3000 minutes or something? With that many minutes,
>would rollover even matter?
>


I am not sure about the 49.99 plan but I do know they just started offering
1000 minutes, including free nights & weekends, for 45.99. With T-Mobile
you have to read the small print when it comes to these plans more than any
other provider. The plan I just mentioned does not include free M2M. I
think they want an extra 6.95 a month for that.


>> "SFB" <news@spenceburton.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
>> news:7oKdnYV6E7OSRePfRVn-uw@comcast.com...
>>> That was an excellent response... albeit I do disagree about generalizing
>>> on Cingular vs TMobile in California. I have had BOTH here in Northern
>>> California, and I am in a fringe area not near any MAJOR city.. TMobile
>>> coverage is better in my neighborhood since they installed a new tower
>>> about a year ago. Cingular has weaker coverage at my home by at least 2
>>> bars.
>>>
>>> As for roaming on the old AT&T.. north of me (Ukiah to Eureka) has
>>> coverage provided by another GSM company (Edge I believe is the name) and
>>> you can roam on their network with either a Cingular or TMobible account
>>> without being charged extra.
>>>
>>> My point is, like others have said, every situation is unique. You
>>> cannot generalize that one area or city has better reception. You should
>>> try BOTH companies before finally deciding. Rates here in California are
>>> generally cheaper for both individual and family plans with TMobile, BUT
>>> you do get rollover on Cingular that may or may not be a benefit to you
>>> depending on your usage.
>>>
>>> Good luck!
>>>
>>> SFB
>>>
>>> PS I should say that TMobile has one year contracts and MOST (not all)
>>> Cingular contracts are for 2 years. Also, Cingular currently has a
>>> better selection in phones than TMobile (again only in my opinion).
>>>
>>> Richie wrote:
>>>> <rishi@wheresmycell.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:1115584123.016639.178000@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>>Being away from the US for sometime, I was aware that Cingular and AT&T
>>>>>merged but I wasn't aware that Cingular & T-Mobiles' network sharing
>>>>>deal ended and that Cingular actually sold their CA & NV networks to
>>>>>T-Mobile, until recently.
>>>>>
>>>>>Given the fact that that Cingular customers are allowed to roam on the
>>>>>legacy network (T-Mobile) for the next 4 years as well as having access
>>>>>to the new network they acquired from AT&T, is there any real reason to
>>>>>consider T-Mobile at all as far as network coverage is concerned?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No. Especially if you want the best coverage. I'm in San Diego,
>>>> California and I find that Cingular has better coverage than T-Mobile.
>>>> With Cingular, you get access to the pre-merger infrastructure + the
>>>> post merger Cingular/AT&T network. T-Mobile customers do not have
>>>> access to the AT&T (Blue) network in California.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>1) According to the press release last year, Cingular customers would
>>>>>be able to roam on the old network for up to 4 years. Has this been
>>>>>confirmed in the final terms of the deal?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Correct.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>2) If T-Mobile & Cingular are essentially the same network IN CA & NV
>>>>>with the exception of AT&T Wireless - is it safe to say that calls from
>>>>>T-Mobile customers would be given 'priority' when routed through the
>>>>>network compared to Cingular users who are merely roaming on their
>>>>>legacy network? - Or are calls from either carrier handled in the
>>>>>exactly same manner?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The network handles all calls the same way. There is no priority for
>>>> native customers vs. roamers.
>>>> I don't know about now, but before the sale of the network to T-Mobile,
>>>> the infrastructure was operated by a jointly owned affiliate. T-Mobile
>>>> and Cingular customers had equal access to the network.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>If the latter is true, then the Cingular network would obviously be
>>>>>superior for customers in CA or NV. Right?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would think so.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>3) How does overall nationwide service compare between the two
>>>>>carriers? Which carrier has coverage in more markets in the United
>>>>>States and is either carrier considered to have better service than the
>>>>>other in certain parts of the country? (East coast for example)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nationwide coverage with Cingular is better. T-Mobile works well only
>>>> in major markets. Cingular now has 850MHz and 1900MHz coverage in
>>>> many areas of the country. T-Mobile does not have access to the 850MHz
>>>> infrastructure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>For customers in CA or NV:
>>>>>The only factors I could up with where T-Mobile could excel:
>>>>>- Customer Service
>>>>>- I haven't done a detailed comparison but perhaps cheaper voice/data
>>>>>plans
>>>>>- T-Mobile Hotspot Service
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you need hotspot, then T-Mobile is a better choice. Or you can
>>>> subscribe to hotspot separately.
>>>> T-Mobile price plans are cheaper but if you factor in rollover minutes
>>>> your cost per minute would be lower. Cingular allows you to start with
>>>> any plan then change to any other plan that fits your needs without
>>>> affecting the length of your contract.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>My apologies for the lengthy post. I don't have service yet with
>>>>>either carrier so I just want to see if there is any real reason to
>>>>>consider T-Mobile - and if so, WHY?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The only reason I would consider T-Mobile in California is if I get a
>>>> substantially better deal in terms of cost per minute. The same would
>>>> apply to Verizon or Sprint for that matter.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

<rishi@wheresmycell.com> wrote in message
news:1115584123.016639.178000@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Being away from the US for sometime, I was aware that Cingular and
AT&T
> merged but I wasn't aware that Cingular & T-Mobiles' network sharing
> deal ended and that Cingular actually sold their CA & NV networks to
> T-Mobile, until recently.
>
> Given the fact that that Cingular customers are allowed to roam on
the
> legacy network (T-Mobile) for the next 4 years as well as having
access
> to the new network they acquired from AT&T, is there any real reason
to
> consider T-Mobile at all as far as network coverage is concerned?
>
> 1) According to the press release last year, Cingular customers
would
> be able to roam on the old network for up to 4 years. Has this been
> confirmed in the final terms of the deal?
>
> 2) If T-Mobile & Cingular are essentially the same network IN CA &
NV
> with the exception of AT&T Wireless - is it safe to say that calls
from
> T-Mobile customers would be given 'priority' when routed through the
> network compared to Cingular users who are merely roaming on their
> legacy network? - Or are calls from either carrier handled in the
> exactly same manner?
>
> If the latter is true, then the Cingular network would obviously be
> superior for customers in CA or NV. Right?
>
> 3) How does overall nationwide service compare between the two
> carriers? Which carrier has coverage in more markets in the United
> States and is either carrier considered to have better service than
the
> other in certain parts of the country? (East coast for example)
>
> For customers in CA or NV:
> The only factors I could up with where T-Mobile could excel:
> - Customer Service
> - I haven't done a detailed comparison but perhaps cheaper
voice/data
> plans
> - T-Mobile Hotspot Service
>
> My apologies for the lengthy post. I don't have service yet with
> either carrier so I just want to see if there is any real reason to
> consider T-Mobile - and if so, WHY?
>

It depends on where you want to use your phone in both states. I live
in the SF Bay Area and had AT&TWS TDMA service until the end of
January. I was travelling a lot and it worked very well throughout
much of the country.... except around NYC, parts of NJ and most of
the west coast.

As recently as a year ago ALL cellular service was spotty at best in
Southern California. AT&TWS had no coverage in the LA basin until they
bought a 3rd rate cellular provider a few years ago. I was doing some
business consulting in San Diego and tested 5 different carriers for
my client. All were BAD and Nextel was the WORST!

In Northern CA, AT&TWS absorbed Cellular1's system several years ago.
I could look out my window and see downtown Oakland, SF, Mt. Tam and
the Golden Gate bridge but my phone would go to roam while sitting at
my desk.

Service in Northern Nevada was also very spotty. AT&TWS's GSM was
terrible in the Bay Area. I got burned out from 15 years of traveling
the country and I'm now just covering parts of Norcal. About a year
ago, I signed up with Verizon and I was very pleased with the service
until about a month and a half ago when I started having service
problems in the Oakland area where I make and receive about 25% of my
calls.

I've since been trying Cingular and Sprint. I tried a number of
Cingular phones and I'm currently using an older Nokia 6340i with
GAIT, 850/1900 GSM , 800/1900 TDMA, and 800 Mhz AMPS. The sound
quality varies from spot to spot but the service is acceptable plus it
works in my home where Verizon has ceased to function.

The best reception and sound has been from Sprint. I cover from San
Leandro north up 101 to Healdsburg and over to Napa and Sonoma. I use
up to 4000 minutes a month so I'm probably going to drop Verizon when
my contract expires in June and port my number over to Sprint. I'll
also keep a pay as you go Cingular account because a lot of people in
my company have Cingular service and I can save them money with MtoM.

You can try out all of the major carriers in California for 30 days
with no obligation except to pay for the minutes that you use.

The bottom line is what is the service coverage and sound quality in
the areas where you are going to use the phone?

Chas.

"* * Chas" <dnafutz@aol.spam.com> wrote in message news:JPudndHJa4rZfx3fRVn-2A@comcast.com...
>

> The best reception and sound has been from Sprint. I cover from San
> Leandro north up 101 to Healdsburg and over to Napa and Sonoma.

I use my SprintPCS phone mainly in the Vallejo/Napa/Sonoma/
Santa Rosa/Petaluma areas, and reception has been great.

--
John Richards

"John Richards" <jr70@blackhole.invalid> wrote in message
news:k07ge.552$Lu6.93@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
> "* * Chas" <dnafutz@aol.spam.com> wrote in message
news:JPudndHJa4rZfx3fRVn-2A@comcast.com...
> >
>
> > The best reception and sound has been from Sprint. I cover from
San
> > Leandro north up 101 to Healdsburg and over to Napa and Sonoma.
>
> I use my SprintPCS phone mainly in the Vallejo/Napa/Sonoma/
> Santa Rosa/Petaluma areas, and reception has been great.

Sprint even works on Mare Island where I've never had service before.

There's a few dead spots for every carrier: Hwy 121 between Sears
Point and Hwy 12, Hwy 12 heading into the backside of Santa Rosa, 101
between Petaluma and Novato at the dump and so on.

The power lines on McDowell Rd. mess up the coverage along 101 through
Petaluma at the Pengrove exit. Sprint seems to work ok there.

Cingular works great up in the Santa Rosa Airport area but there's not
much difference between Cingular and Verizon as far as reception goes
in most other areas except around Oakland.

Chas.

Thanks for the detailed responses everyone. I'll definitely try out
other carriers before making my final decision. I'm a bit confused as
to why one shouldn't generalize between T-Mobile & Cingular in CA. If
Cingular customers can roam on the legacy network which is now
T-Mobile, as well as their own, it would seem like the clear winner as
far as coverage throughout the state is concerned. Has T-Mobile
actually invested in the infrastructure while they were under the
network sharing agreement with Cingular? What about after they bought
Cingulars' CA & NV networks? It seems to me that if T-Mobile
continues to enhance their network and put up new towers in CA...
Cingular users would be benefit with current roaming agreements in
place. Or is this not the case?

Of course, I would imagine Cingular customers can only roam on T-Mobile
should there be no Cingular coverage available and then I wonder which
native network would have better coverage, reception, and reliability?


I am from the San Fernando Valley (Granada Hills, CA)... anyone have
any idea which GSM carrier would be my best option here and best
overall carrier. We're up in the hills so most cell carriers generally
don't fare too well in our area - especially indoors. I have read that
GSM 850 MHz signals travel further and penetrate deeper into
buildings... Does this finally mean being able to use my phone at home?



Rishi

"razor" <replyingroup@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:6dqv71l18gvm600ih92t7erdmm39gp4hmq@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 9 May 2005 15:38:19 -0500, "Danska" <danskaNOSPAN@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Richie" <mbc@pcbell.net> wrote in message
>>news:SoBfe.14753$J12.2973@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>>> You're right, customers should make a choice based on the coverage at
>>> their location.
>>>
>>> For contracts, independent retailers have the best deals on Cingular.
>>> Online and in stores, they often push 2 year contacts for any kind of
>>> decent phone.
>>>
>>> I like T-Mobile a lot. The company is innovative and the price is
>>> right.
>>> If it weren't for the rollover minutes at Cingular I would have the
>>> T-Mobile Regional Plan for $49.99.
>>>
>>Doesn't that have like 3000 minutes or something? With that many minutes,
>>would rollover even matter?
>>
>
>
> I am not sure about the 49.99 plan but I do know they just started
> offering
> 1000 minutes, including free nights & weekends, for 45.99. With T-Mobile
> you have to read the small print when it comes to these plans more than
> any
> other provider. The plan I just mentioned does not include free M2M. I
> think they want an extra 6.95 a month for that.
>
> I have the 45.99 plan. Yes it doesn't come with m2m. It is extra. The
> regional plan he mentioned is 3000 anytime minutes in your designated
> regional area. No m2m. Ld. chgs apply when calling out of your designated
> regional area. It's meant for people who don't use much l.d. and just use
> the phone locally. Im very happy with the 45.99 plan. Works very well. I
> always thought it was rather simple with t-mobile. The plan is advertised
> to have 1000 anytime minutes with no roaming fees. That's what it gives
> you. all ads ive seen have never mentioned anything about m2m. cingular on
> the other hand does mention m2m and rollover a lot.

this is the cingular comparable plan:
Monthly Cost: 69.99
Anytime Minutes: 1,100
Night and weekend minutes: Unlimited
m2m: unlimited
Contract Length: 2 years.

T-Mobile:
Monthly Cost: 45.99
Anytime Minutes: 1,000
Night and weekend minutes: Unlimited
m2m: Nope
Contract Length: 1 years.

It's worth losing the m2m (since i know nobody on cingular) to save the
$24.00

Besides. Unlimited mobile internet (wap) is only 4.99. Cingular is 24.99 for
unlimited use. Wow!