Cell phone bands (GSM 1900?) at Disney World

[email protected] wrote:
> To: all of you in the group i work for Cingular Wirless have for the last
> three years.

And...?

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

---

› See More: Cell phone bands (GSM 1900?) at Disney World

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 05:30:36 GMT, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>To: all of you in the group i work for Cingular Wirless have for the last
>three years.

Well, I don't. What's your point? Are we supposed to be impressed
now and be glad that we have other "experts" other than John H. and
John Navas?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:0sQ1d.93669$3l3.7787@attbi_s03...
> To: all of you in the group i work for Cingular Wirless have for the last
> three years.

Great, then tell us, what is the direct number to the tech assist?

"Bernard Farquart" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:iL_1d.10102$iS2.5759@trnddc09...
>
> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:0sQ1d.93669$3l3.7787@attbi_s03...
>> To: all of you in the group i work for Cingular Wirless have for the last
>> three years.

> Great, then tell us, what is the direct number to the tech assist?
>
>
>
Cingular WIRLESS?

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

In <[email protected]> on Tue, 14 Sep 2004 01:05:39 -0400,
Ralph Blach <[email protected]> wrote:

>Joseph wrote:
>> On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 12:00:04 -0400, Ralph Blach
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>I live in the Carolinas and only having a 1900 network is a pain.
>>
>> And why is it a "pain?"

>Because it leads to lower coverage because there have to be more towers.

It's the same number of towers for both bands -- both have the same range.

>Cingular has terrible mountain coverage because of this

The two bands do differ in certain propagation characteristics, but not in
mountain coverage.

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

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

In <[email protected]> on Tue, 14 Sep 2004 13:46:50 -0400,
Ralph Blach <[email protected]> wrote:

>Like it or not, people just expect there cell phone to work everywhere.

People *want* them to work everyone, but only the unrealistic *expect* them
to.

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

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

In <[email protected]> on Tue, 14 Sep 2004 16:01:03 -0400,
Ralph Blach <[email protected]> wrote:

>I wish, somebody would put an gsm 800, 850, or 1900 leo system in place.
>
>This would sort of remove the coverage issue.

Iridium still exists, if you need/want satellite coverage. But even with the
advantage of bankruptcy, it's expensive, and usable only outdoors. I'll
personally stick to GSM.

--
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]...
> It's the same number of towers for both bands -- both have the same range.
>
> The two bands do differ in certain propagation characteristics, but not in
> mountain coverage.

I agree that mountains ought not to affect the coverage much because the
signal is far more limited by the physical terrain than by the propogation
characteristics of the frequency, but 800-ish MHz signals do travel further
than 1900 MHz signals. The lower the frequency, the further, generally, it
will travel and still be able to be clearly received. As a simple example,
see how much easier it is to pick up distant AM radio signals at the 530 kHz
end of the band than it is at the 1700 kHz end.

Jim