Results 31 to 45 of 95
- 03-25-2006, 03:08 AM #31SMSGuest
Re: JD Power Report on Call Quality
Cyrus Afzali wrote:
> On 24 Mar 2006 08:31:30 -0800, "fj" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> T-Mobile only has coverage along the major interstates in the
>> Southwest. This is akin to skewing the results.
>
> So you're saying they don't cover all major cities? You know this how?
> That's absolutely, patently false.
Well half-false anyway. On T-Mobile post-paid, you roam onto Cingular in
cities where T-Mobile has no coverage. If you sign up for T-Mobile
prepaid, which doesn't roam, the coverage is much worse.
> Most anywhere I've been in the
> country, if the city has somewhere near 50,000, it's covered.
Well covered somewhat. In my area, the T-Mobile coverage is spotty. They
took over Cingular's old 1900 Mhz network, which also had spotty
coverage, and they don't let you roam onto 800 Mhz in areas where they
have their own 1900 Mhz network, even if their network doesn't cover
your location. They do try to fix their spots with no coverage, but at
least where I live, there are a lot of NIMBY people when it comes to
cell phone towers, and you need a lot more 1900 Mhz towers to cover a
given area than you need 800 Mhz towers.
> T-Mobile
> doesn't lie to people about its coverage; in fact, they make it easier
> than anybody to check coverage before you buy. If you like their
> coverage, buy 'em, if you don't, don't.
Yes, this is one very good point about T-Mobile, and I know someone who
they advised to not sign up for service because of lack of coverage.
› See More: JD Power Report on Call Quality
- 03-25-2006, 04:41 PM #32IopsyGuest
Re: JD Power Report on Call Quality
"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>>>
>>> For all six regions of the country, the total spreads of call qualities
>>> were only from +/- 2% to +/- 5%.
>>> That tells me that call quality from all carriers is nearly equal.
>>
>>The scores are not percentages. A score less than 100 is bad.
>
> Not "bad" -- just lower than higher numbers. All these numbers are "good"
> as
> the text of the release makes clear:
>
> "It's clear that wireless providers have made great strides in improving
> the quality of calls, especially in those areas that impact customer
> churn
> the most, such as calls that are dropped or disconnected," said Kirk
> Parsons, senior director of wireless services at J.D. Power and
> Associates.
>
So now we have a news release about Cingular's last place performance in JD
Power's cellular horse race (most people don't read the fine print, they
glance at the list and see Cingular at the bottom). A few days ago Cingular
was the subject of an article about how it terminates customers who take
full advantage of its national plan. Yet you express confidence that all
this bad press has a negligible effect on Cingular's ability to retain
existing customers and attract new ones without slashing prices. I'm
wondering, John, at what point, if any, does this sort publicity finally
begin to hurt?
Cordially, Iopsy
- 03-26-2006, 12:49 AM #33Steve SobolGuest
Re: JD Power Report on Call Quality
Cyrus Afzali wrote:
> In *some* cases. Honestly, I've found ZERO benefit from any 850 mHz
> roaming partnership with Cingular or anyone else thusfar.
Here, there is some benefit to having roaming on Cingular. I can use Cingular
or T-Mobile here, and there are some outlying fringe areas covered by
Cingular and Verizon that aren't covered by Sprint and T-Mobile.
--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Apple Valley, CA ** 888.480.4NET (4638) ** [email protected]
Resident of Southern California -
the home of beautiful people and butt-ugly traffic jams
- 03-26-2006, 10:58 AM #34SMSGuest
Re: JD Power Report on Call Quality
Cyrus Afzali wrote:
> In *some* cases. Honestly, I've found ZERO benefit from any 850 mHz
> roaming partnership with Cingular or anyone else thusfar. I realize
> that T-Mobile claims to have expanded its network by a large amount
> through new roaming deals, but at least in the areas I've tried, which
> include areas of the Southeast served by Cingular 850, it's been a
> no-go.
OTOH, I have a Cingular network phone from a MVNO, which does roam onto
T-Mobile's 1900 Mhz network in the Bay Area. I thought that I'd _NEVER_
actually roam, but surprisingly I often find the phone (Motorola V180)
roaming onto T-Mobile.
If I had a T-Mobile GSM phone, I'd have no coverage in much of my own
neighborhood, and this is based on my experience when I had Cingular
1900 Mhz-only, T-Mobile's own maps, and the experiences of other
T-Mobile customers that I know in my neighborhood.
It all varies by area. In many areas of the east, Voicestream had a
pretty good 1900 Mhz network, while in the west, Cingular's 1900 Mhz
network, which T-Mobile now uses, was never very good.
- 03-26-2006, 08:38 PM #35Stanley ClineGuest
Re: JD Power Report on Call Quality
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 01:08:03 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Well half-false anyway. On T-Mobile post-paid, you roam onto Cingular in
>cities where T-Mobile has no coverage. If you sign up for T-Mobile
Unless you are in Knoxville, TN, where Cingular has the only GSM
coverage available (T-Mobile has licenses but no network as of yet),
you are much more likely to roam on a local or regional carrier than
Cingular.
-SC
--
Stanley Cline // Telco Boi // sc1 at roamer1 dot org // www.roamer1.org
"it seems like all you ever buy is Abercrombie and cell phones" --a friend
- 03-26-2006, 08:43 PM #36Stanley ClineGuest
Re: JD Power Report on Call Quality
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 00:56:35 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote:
>you try to negotiate a better deal, because they know that any customer
>that leaves in a huff for another carrier, will likely be back if they
>care about coverage at all.
That, of course, depends on the area. Cingular and T-Mobile generally
have better coverage and less congestion problems than VZW in most of
metro Atlanta; out of the dozens of people I know in Atlanta who have
switched from VZW to Cingular or T-Mobile, only a few have switched
back, and only because of a need for coverage in specific places in
south Georgia or the Carolinas where there is no GSM, only AMPS and
CDMA.
-SC
--
Stanley Cline // Telco Boi // sc1 at roamer1 dot org // www.roamer1.org
"it seems like all you ever buy is Abercrombie and cell phones" --a friend
- 03-26-2006, 08:51 PM #37DecaturTxCowboyGuest
Re: JD Power Report on Call Quality
Stanley Cline wrote:
> "it seems like all you ever buy is Abercrombie and cell phones" --a friend
Two of the three things you won't find at Tractor Supply....
- 03-26-2006, 09:05 PM #38Steve SobolGuest
Re: JD Power Report on Call Quality
Stanley Cline wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 01:04:36 -0500, Cyrus Afzali <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> In *some* cases. Honestly, I've found ZERO benefit from any 850 mHz
>> roaming partnership with Cingular or anyone else thusfar. I realize
>> that T-Mobile claims to have expanded its network by a large amount
>> through new roaming deals, but at least in the areas I've tried, which
>> include areas of the Southeast served by Cingular 850, it's been a
>> no-go.
>
> T-Mobile is being *extremely* stingy with allowing roaming onto
> Cingular in most areas
It sounds like that's because in most areas, they already have roaming
agreements with other carriers. Verizon has a sweetheart deal with Alltel. I
don't know if that's the norm between the big carriers.
--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Apple Valley, CA ** 888.480.4NET (4638) ** [email protected]
Resident of Southern California -
the home of beautiful people and butt-ugly traffic jams
- 03-26-2006, 10:55 PM #39Michael WiseGuest
Re: JD Power Report on Call Quality
In article
<[email protected]>,
John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:03:14
> -0800, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >George wrote:
> >
> >> I think they had to do it because they were annoying so many people.
> >
> >I'm sure that this was the reason, the fallout may be that there are a
> >lot less people with phones that don't have coverage in areas where
> >they're likely to use it the most, hence their good showing in that survey.
>
> Not even a good scramble. It can't be fun dealing with data that blows away
> what you've been saying.
You know that better than anybody else...isn't that right Mr. Navas?
After all, its why you never bothered responding to the facts (with
pics) I posted which clearly showed your little Corte Madera claim about
VZW coverage to be BS.
- 03-26-2006, 11:11 PM #40Bob the PrinterGuest
Re: JD Power Report on Call Quality
Why are you spamming the vzw wireless group with your useless messages??
Please confine them to the cingular group!
- 03-27-2006, 12:15 AM #41SMSGuest
Re: JD Power Report on Call Quality
Stanley Cline wrote:
> That, of course, depends on the area. Cingular and T-Mobile generally
> have better coverage and less congestion problems than VZW in most of
> metro Atlanta; out of the dozens of people I know in Atlanta who have
> switched from VZW to Cingular or T-Mobile, only a few have switched
> back, and only because of a need for coverage in specific places in
> south Georgia or the Carolinas where there is no GSM, only AMPS and
> CDMA.
I go to Atlanta occasionally. Where my sister and cousin live, near
Dunwoody High School, the Cingular GSM coverage is not good (at least
the last time I was there). It's a neighborhood where I'd expect a lot
of NIMBY concerns about towers. Verizon and Sprint coverage is fine.
It's been a few years though, so things may have changed.
- 03-27-2006, 09:05 AM #42SMSGuest
Re: JD Power Report on Call Quality
Cyrus Afzali wrote:
> I think T-Mobile should examine its pricing policies and implement a
> system similar to Verizon Wireless. Their America's Choice network
> gives you much less roaming ability than a true nationwide plan, but
> AC is priced quite a bit less.
Actually it's a little less coverage, not a lot less. I stuck with the
original AC plan which is a "true nationwide plan" and does allow paid
roaming, but in reality, the area where it makes a difference is quite
small. I still cannot roam onto Sprint in areas where Verizon has a
network. I suspect that there may be some small AMPS networks that AC2
doesn't cover.
Verizon used AC2 to pressure smaller carriers into signing roaming
agreements, with a very big stick--we won't let our customers roam onto
your networks anymore, so you'd better sign up with us and at least get
something out of the deal.
If I could keep my 8:01 p.m. off-peak, I'd probably switch to AC2. When
the TDMA network shuts down, I probably will go to a Verizon Family Plan
on AC2, since my kids TDMA prepaid phones will need to be replaced with
something.
- 03-27-2006, 12:12 PM #43Guest
Re: JD Power Report on Call Quality
DecaturTxCowboy wrote:
> SMS wrote:
> > "http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060316/lath057.html?.v=49"
>
> Looks like an average of only 8% difference between all the carriers.
> Given all the overall information, the report really isn't that significant.
Wonder what year this is for because a few years ago the Old Can you
hear me now has been replaced.... I had plans that were awful in call
quality. Now I have had Verizon for many years I do wonder how the
rest of the companies are for my particular area and the areas I go
- 03-27-2006, 01:26 PM #44John NavasGuest
Re: JD Power Report on Call Quality
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
In <[email protected]> on Sat, 25 Mar 2006 00:56:35
-0800, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>Isaiah Beard wrote:
>
>> So in other words, you admit that Cingular is neglecting maintenance on
>> their D-AMPS network. Seems to me they got the what they deserved then,
>> ratings-wise.
>
>Cingular stated that 95% of its customers are on GSM,
Wrong again. Cingular releases data on percentage of call completions, not
percentage of subscribers. (If you still claim otherwise, post a citation.)
>so even if the
>TDMA/AMPS network was neglected, it would have negligible effect on the
>ratings. ...
Nonsense. It's trivial to show that overall ratings can be affected this much
by D-AMPS ("TDMA"), single band GSM, and non-ENS GSM handsets.
>Cingular is very concerned about how far behind they've fallen in terms
>of customer satisfaction, call quality, their data network and their
>coverage.
Proof? Or yet another made up claim?
--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
- 03-27-2006, 01:30 PM #45John NavasGuest
Re: JD Power Report on Call Quality
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
In <[email protected]> on Sat, 25 Mar 2006 01:08:03
-0800, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>... you need a lot more 1900 Mhz towers to cover a
>given area than you need 800 Mhz towers.
Not true, as I've shown previously. In metro areas there is no significant
difference, and the difference, which results from lower permitted maximum
power for 1900 MHz, is relatively small even in non-metro areas.
--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
Similar Threads
- Bell Mobility
- alt.cellular.verizon
- alt.cellular.verizon
- alt.cellular.verizon
- Sony Ericsson
How to Network Unlock Your Samsung Galaxy S24 from Claro
in Samsung