ATT-Cingular Hell - Tower problem help needed

Mangus Pyke wrote:

>>While it's true that everyone will be forced to migrate eventually, there's no
>>truth to the rumor that Cingular isn't maintaining the ATTWS towers. In fact
>>they're being integrated into the Cingular network.
>
> Actually, this not true. They are converting a percentage of the TDMA
> towers to GSM. This results in less coverage for TDMA users.
>
> You can call that "integrating" into the Cingular network, but it's
> not a very honest claim.

Why is it not an honest claim? AT&T made no definitive committment to
continue the TDMA network, and in fact, they were migrating users as
well to GSM pre-merger. This is simply a continuation of that practice.
Seems like integration to me.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

---

› See More: ATT-Cingular Hell - Tower problem help needed

On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 12:26:54 -0400, Isaiah Beard
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Mangus Pyke wrote:
>> Actually, this not true. They are converting a percentage of the TDMA
>> towers to GSM. This results in less coverage for TDMA users.
>>
>> You can call that "integrating" into the Cingular network, but it's
>> not a very honest claim.
>
>Why is it not an honest claim? AT&T made no definitive committment to
>continue the TDMA network, and in fact, they were migrating users as
>well to GSM pre-merger. This is simply a continuation of that practice.
> Seems like integration to me.

Example: My girlfriend has a TDMA phone and a contract that runs
through the end of the year. She can no longer use the phone
reliably, as about 4 out of 5 calls drop upon connection. She has to
continue paying for service for another 5 months. In order to use
that service, she has to either sign a new contract for two more
years, or shell out $200 for a new phone.

I don't recall signing a contract that said, "You may use 75% of this
contract and then you must either extend by two more years or pay for
a new phone to use the remaining portion.. but you have to keep paying
for it."

The right thing to do, is either provide equipment that will work, or
wait until the last contract expires. Hell, I don't care if they shut
all the TDMA towers down with no notice.. provided it's the day after
the expiration of the last contract.

So essentially, she has a device that is no longer functioning a
reasonable percentage of the time, which means they are no longer
providing her the service she contracted for. But she still has to
pay her monthly bill.

MP-

--
"Learning is a behavior that results from consequences."
B.F. Skinner

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

In <[email protected]> on Sat, 16 Jul 2005 15:09:23
-0400, Mangus Pyke <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 00:52:58 GMT, John Navas
><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>The reason as I understand it is that they are not maintaining the ATT
>>>towers. You will be forced to migrate, trust me. I've migrated 3
>>>phones. It works out better in the long run. Just migrate.
>>
>>While it's true that everyone will be forced to migrate eventually, there's no
>>truth to the rumor that Cingular isn't maintaining the ATTWS towers. In fact
>>they're being integrated into the Cingular network.
>
>Actually, this not true. They are converting a percentage of the TDMA
>towers to GSM. This results in less coverage for TDMA users.

I know of no actual, verifiable case where a TDMA cell has been eliminated --
do you? What I know to be happening is network capacity being migrated from
TDMA to GSM, as ATTWS was doing pre-merger, to reflect the percentage of
customers using GSM as compared to TDMA.

>You can call that "integrating" into the Cingular network, but it's
>not a very honest claim.

I call "integrating" that (a) Cingular subscribers now have free roaming on
ATTWS and vice versa, and (b) technical preparations are being made to fully
integrate the two networks.

>Cingular should wait until the last TDMA contract ends, and then shut
>everyone's butt off.

Why? That makes no sense to me.

>But not during their contract where their only
>option is to sign a longer contract or not use their service.

If you actually do lose coverage, then IMHO you have a right to terminate
without penalty.

>I have trouble with telling a company that I'm displeased with the
>service it provides me, and then the only answer they can offer is
>that I sign up to stay longer.

Better to switch than fight.

--
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 Sun, 17 Jul 2005 15:38:58
-0400, Mangus Pyke <[email protected]> wrote:

>Example: My girlfriend has a TDMA phone and a contract that runs
>through the end of the year. She can no longer use the phone
>reliably, as about 4 out of 5 calls drop upon connection. She has to
>continue paying for service for another 5 months.

*If* that's *really* true, and it's not a handset fault, then I think she has
a right to terminate without penalty.

>In order to use
>that service, she has to either sign a new contract for two more
>years, or shell out $200 for a new phone.

She can switch with a 1-year contract and/or a cheaper phone.

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

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 00:43:24 GMT, John Navas
<[email protected]> wrote:
>In <[email protected]> on Sun, 17 Jul 2005 15:38:58
>-0400, Mangus Pyke <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Example: My girlfriend has a TDMA phone and a contract that runs
>>through the end of the year. She can no longer use the phone
>>reliably, as about 4 out of 5 calls drop upon connection. She has to
>>continue paying for service for another 5 months.
>
>*If* that's *really* true, and it's not a handset fault, then I think she has
>a right to terminate without penalty.

One would think. They've made it pretty clear that there are plenty
of towers, just none that she can use with a TDMA device. They made
it pretty clear that getting out of the contract was not an option.

>>In order to use
>>that service, she has to either sign a new contract for two more
>>years, or shell out $200 for a new phone.
>
>She can switch with a 1-year contract and/or a cheaper phone.

She's not happy with the wireless service, or the customer service
(not one phone call has gone less than two hours).. why would she
obligate to stay with the company longer?

She just wants what she paid for: Two years of service, in exchange
for two years of timely monthly payments. No extensions, no new
devices, no less-attractive calling plans. She signed a contract, she
has to hold up her end of it -- so should Cingular have to.

We'll determine at the end of her contract if we stay or not. My
contract has already ended, and with the exception of not getting the
roaming that my contract says I get, I haven't really had any
problems. The coverage is excellent here (I'm in a much larger city
than she is) and I don't know that I necessarily want to leave. But
the simple lack of ethics in their business model lead me to believe
that I might feel better taking my business elsewhere.

While she is stuck with Cingular as the only provider that has
coverage where she goes to school, I actually can pick from three
different major providers that have strong coverage in my area. I
just haven't made up my mind that Cingular has done enough to run
me/us off.

MP-
--
"Learning is a behavior that results from consequences."
B.F. Skinner

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 00:40:49 GMT, John Navas
<[email protected]> wrote:
>I know of no actual, verifiable case where a TDMA cell has been eliminated --
>do you? What I know to be happening is network capacity being migrated from
>TDMA to GSM, as ATTWS was doing pre-merger, to reflect the percentage of
>customers using GSM as compared to TDMA.

She had 14 months of strong service anywhere in here area, then within
3 months of the merger, only about 20% of her calls connect. That 20%
is plagued with signal strength issues.

Cingular was pretty straight forward with her about the fact that
they've adjusted their coverage to service GSM rather than TDMA in her
area. In two years, I've not had one dropped call (literally.. not
one) and I can't get a good signal there either.

This may not be indicative of technology changes in other areas, but
it sure seems overwhelmingly evident where she is.

>>You can call that "integrating" into the Cingular network, but it's
>>not a very honest claim.
>
>I call "integrating" that (a) Cingular subscribers now have free roaming on
>ATTWS and vice versa, and (b) technical preparations are being made to fully
>integrate the two networks.

Ok, I'll agree with you there. Except for the fact that she's unable
to get on most of the towers in her area now.

>>Cingular should wait until the last TDMA contract ends, and then shut
>>everyone's butt off.
>
>Why? That makes no sense to me.

Well, here's my theory. Let's say I own MangusComm (ya like that?)
and I have a million subscribers. I'd like to move to GSM and I've
recently picked up 250k of those subscribers from the acquisition of
Tele-Navas. If I alter the configuration of, say, 60% of my TDMA
towers to cover GSM devices, I've effectively cut off about 60% of my
TDMA customers, as they're not competing for a much smaller number of
towers.. if they can even reach them.

If they're on contracts that are still enduring, I'm not providing the
service they have contracted for. I owe them service, just as they
owe me a payment each month. It's not ethical for me to make them
obligate to a longer period in order to use a service I'm already
bound by contract to provide them, nor is it ethical for me to say
they can only use the remainder of their contract by buying a new
device, which many of them may not be able to afford. I'm obligated
to provide them new service, even if it means providing them with a
compatible device.

Now, I think you and I can agree that I would be a fool to start
handing out $200 phones for free, so the ethical thing to do would be
to leave the towers intact for the duration of the existing contracts.

Fast-forward to the day that the last contract expires. I now have no
obligation to provide them with crap. I send out a mailing that says
effective such-and-such date, TDMA devices will no longer work. We'd
love for you to stay with us, but you'll need a new device. You can
buy one and we'll migrate your account to use it or sign a contract
and we'll provide you a phone at a discounted rate, but one way or
another, TDMA is gone in __ days.

There's no contractual agreement on either side. Period. This is the
impact of "doing business". Not holding people hostage to finish out
their contracts only if they extend it to longer terms.

>>But not during their contract where their only
>>option is to sign a longer contract or not use their service.
>
>If you actually do lose coverage, then IMHO you have a right to terminate
>without penalty.

I agree, my friend. Cingular does not.

Personally, I think the right thing for Cingular to have done would
have been to offer the same 30-day guarantee they offer new customers
when the service changed. It would've been fair -- my girlfriend
would've left, as she gets poor service. I would've stayed, because
my service is strong. Now we're both considering leaving.. what good
does that do Cingular as a company?

>>I have trouble with telling a company that I'm displeased with the
>>service it provides me, and then the only answer they can offer is
>>that I sign up to stay longer.
>
>Better to switch than fight.

True. And as I mentioned, I'm not completely resigned to switching.
Overall, my service is spectacular. I've just never gotten my
national roaming (despite faxing them a contract numerous times that
says, "National Roaming: $0.00 (Included with plan)"

To their defense, they've made some rather extraordinary efforts to
ensure I do not get the roaming changes, such as putting me on plans
that are not susceptible to roaming changes during billing cycles in
which I was roaming, but (a) I was supposed to have this anyway and
(b) this was at my expense of 4-6 hours of holdtime every time this
happened. Why should I be punished to sitting in my house holding a
phone to my head for several hours at a stretch because they can't
seem to add roaming to my account? Mistakes happen. Once is
something I can tolerate. This was nearly a dozen incidents.

I'd say there's a better chance I'll stay than switch carriers.. I
just feel as though I'm violating my own principles by doing so
because of the way the company is doing business.

MP-

--
"Learning is a behavior that results from consequences."
B.F. Skinner

its called growing pains.

also a 64k sim will do nothing for you if you dont have an ens capable phone. it wont do anything for you if you do, depending on your prefered network. ens does nothing more than help with tower load balancing, it does not make your phone lock onto the strongest signal. if youre a blue customer ignore the above, it does not apply to you! lol

if you are orange and get a weak signal on your home network, do some searching and learn how to enable manual network selection on your phone.

if you have tdma you won't for long. Join the rest of the world and update to a new phone.

everything will improve as soon as the intergration is completed.

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 00:17:17 -0500, troyboy30
<[email protected]> wrote:
>its called growing pains.

No, it's called breach of contract. You can't ethically hold a
customer to a 24-month contract, but only allow them to use 18 months
of it without paying absorbant rates for equipment. You're still
obligated to provide 6 more months of service.

This is why class-action lawsuits exist.

>if you have tdma you won't for long. Join the rest of the world and
>update to a new phone.

The contract doesn't toss in a clause that says, "Oh, and you'll have
to buy some new equipment too!"

If the customer has to pay for service, the provider has to provide
service at a reasonable level. Period.

This doesn't come with the stipulation that the user has to extend a
contract in order to use it (but still pay for it if they cannot), nor
does it come with a stipulation that they would be able to use their
equipment for only 75% of the contract period.

>everything will improve as soon as the intergration is completed.

Everything will improve when Cingular honors the contracts into which
it or it's acquired companies has entered with customers.

MP-

--
"Learning is a behavior that results from consequences."
B.F. Skinner

pretty sure if you read you will find a clause that allows them to opt out anytime they want. there is nothing ethicall in business. you would not have to continue paying if they no longer provide the service! lol your contract would be null and void. they cannot make you upgrade or extend your contract but they can end your current one whenever they want.

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:lUCCe.4536$p%[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> I know of no actual, verifiable case where a TDMA cell has been
> eliminated --
> do you?

Not strictly TDMA but I do know of many sites that have been elimnated. The
sites were moved one or two miles (or less in some instances) to a Cingular
owned tower/site and new larger buildings were put in place to handle the
TDMA/AMPS and GSM equipment that was moved into the new buildings from the
old. In these instances the equipment for what both Cingular had AND AT&T
had were combined into one building. In every instance this also caused an
antenna change on the site to put on dual band antennas.

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:lUCCe.4536$p%[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
>What I know to be happening is network capacity being migrated from
> TDMA to GSM, as ATTWS was doing pre-merger, to reflect the percentage of
> customers using GSM as compared to TDMA.

They are definatly doing this all over the country. The result is that the
TDMA service is being degraded.

On a recent trip of about 600 miles by car, I found that I couldn't reliably
hold a TDMA call (on a major interstate) for more than a few miles/minutes.
I laiddown the TDMA phone and picked up the GSM phone and was connected for
well over 2 hours (Customer Service at an online ticketing agency) with no
issues of any kind!

John Navas wrote:

> I know of no actual, verifiable case where a TDMA cell has been eliminated --
> do you? What I know to be happening is network capacity being migrated from
> TDMA to GSM, as ATTWS was doing pre-merger, to reflect the percentage of
> customers using GSM as compared to TDMA.
>

According to my Cingular pals, there have been a number of TDMA cells
that went the way of the dodo bird, some orange, some blue, due to
duplicate coverages without enough demand to keep both. This doesn't
mean TDMA coverage has disappeared, only pared back where merged
capacity wasn't justified.


[....]


--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'

Mangus Pyke wrote:

[....]
>
> Now, I think you and I can agree that I would be a fool to start
> handing out $200 phones for free, so the ethical thing to do would be
> to leave the towers intact for the duration of the existing contracts.
>

One would presume there's a cost difference between these two choices,
and business being business, those costs would be a valid component of
any evaluation before a business decision is made.

I'm not excusing it, but like you, just trying to understand it.

[....]


--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 05:57:14 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"absorbant rates". That's a new one on me.
>
>Exorbitant rates.

::chukle::

It was late. Apparently I was more tired than I thought.

Though absorbant rates could be handy around the house.

MP-
--
"Learning is a behavior that results from consequences."
B.F. Skinner

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 03:59:56 -0500, troyboy30
<[email protected]> wrote:
>pretty sure if you read you will find a clause that allows them to opt
>out anytime they want. there is nothing ethicall in business. you
>would not have to continue paying if they no longer provide the
>service! lol your contract would be null and void. they cannot make
>you upgrade or extend your contract but they can end your current one
>whenever they want.

I'm confident that it would still impact her credit if she chose to
remove herself from the contract, and Cingular sure doesn't seem
inclined to tell her she can leave.

MP-

--
"Learning is a behavior that results from consequences."
B.F. Skinner