Cingular GSM in Dallas

Any thoughts on how well Cingular 850 GSM covers Dallas? I noticed
that T-Mobile has very strong signal strength in Dallas. It would appear
AT&T Wireless' TDMA net at 850 is pretty close in signal strength to
T-Mobile. But Cingular's GSM signal strength has been a big mystery to
me.

RDT
--
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the
inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."
--- Sir Winston Churchill

---

› See More: Cingular GSM in Dallas

RDT wrote:
> Any thoughts on how well Cingular 850 GSM covers Dallas? I noticed
> that T-Mobile has very strong signal strength in Dallas. It would appear
> AT&T Wireless' TDMA net at 850 is pretty close in signal strength to
> T-Mobile. But Cingular's GSM signal strength has been a big mystery to
> me.
>
> RDT


Everytime I'm in the neighbourhood, Cingular 850 GSM is crawling all
over the place. Mysteriously, when visiting the lair of the parental
units, everyone had to stand on the north edge of the jacuzzi for a
usable TDMA signal. This was known as the NEJ Syndrome. Sadly, there's
no more hiding outside the NEJ Syndrome - Cingular GSM is now a regular
occupant in the jacuzzi. Anecdotal evidence would indicate similar
syndromes amoung their friends have also disappeared since the onset of
GSM. Some of these reports have included a radical shift from "I'm
sorry to have to keep calling you back..." to "Does s/he ever shut up?"
Some are considering giving their new GSM housemate a nickname. I'm
thinking of turning the parental units over to Cingular, maybe they
could use them for a commercial TV spot, they don't need rollover
minutes, they need rollover moments.


--
jer email reply - I am not a 'ten' ICQ = 35253273
"All that we do is touched with ocean, yet we remain on the shore of
what we know." -- Richard Wilbur

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> Any thoughts on how well Cingular 850 GSM covers Dallas? I noticed
> that T-Mobile has very strong signal strength in Dallas. It would appear
> AT&T Wireless' TDMA net at 850 is pretty close in signal strength to
> T-Mobile. But Cingular's GSM signal strength has been a big mystery to
> me.
>
> RDT
>

Cingular GSM coverage in DFW is VERY VERY good -- maybe even slightly
better than their TDMA coverage which was already significantly better
than ATTWS's.
--
Jud
Dallas TX USA

In article <[email protected]>,
Jud Hardcastle <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>> Any thoughts on how well Cingular 850 GSM covers Dallas? I noticed
>> that T-Mobile has very strong signal strength in Dallas. It would appear
>> AT&T Wireless' TDMA net at 850 is pretty close in signal strength to
>> T-Mobile. But Cingular's GSM signal strength has been a big mystery to
>> me.
>Cingular GSM coverage in DFW is VERY VERY good -- maybe even slightly
>better than their TDMA coverage which was already significantly better
>than ATTWS's.

That is very interesting and great news. Cingular used to have great
JD Power ratings in Dallas, but I noticed they've been slipping and
wondered why. Good to know their signal isn't the reason.

I took the plunge with Cingular, but they still haven't ported my old
number from ATT. It has been a nightmare. I've waited 2 weeks now and
still nothing.

RDT
--
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the
inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."
--- Sir Winston Churchill

>Cingular GSM coverage in DFW is VERY VERY good -- maybe even slightly
>better than their TDMA coverage which was already significantly better
>than ATTWS's.

Jud, In the metropolitan area of Dallas, I can't see a lot of difference in the
TDMA coverage of Cingular and AT&T WS. I have not tested or compared the
differences between the GSM offerings of the two companies immediatly in the
DFW area.

Out here on the outskirts of town where I live (way out) AT&T's GSM has about 2
bars on my Siemens M56 where there is no Cingular GSM on the same phone. So, my
conclusion based solely on this would be that AT&TWS GSM coverage is better.

--
John S.
e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net

RDT wrote:
> Any thoughts on how well Cingular 850 GSM covers Dallas? I noticed
> that T-Mobile has very strong signal strength in Dallas. It would appear
> AT&T Wireless' TDMA net at 850 is pretty close in signal strength to
> T-Mobile. But Cingular's GSM signal strength has been a big mystery to
> me.

Good question for Dallas coverage. I'm switching back to Cingular
with a month to month plan with a Nokia 3360 phone. Since the
Nationwide and Superhome plans will have me roaming in much of the
area I'm in, I'll go with the Statewide plan as it allows home
area usage all across Texas.

There isn't any GSM out there, so I don't need a GAIT phone; but if
TDMA service is being degraded as its being phased out, will I begin
to see problems in the upgraded GSM/TDMA areas over the next two years?
Should I ever roam into a Cingular GSM only area, like California,
would I be actualy roaming on AT&T's (or whomever's) TDMA service?

What about text paging? The area I'm in is out of range of my Weblink
Wireless two-way pager, so I might drop it and rely on Cingular text
messaging. The Text Messaging 250 plan would allow me 125 two way
mesages. How reliable is it? Sprint was hit and miss trying to log on
and the phone interface was horrible.

In article <[email protected]>,
no_addy@no_.com says...
> RDT wrote:
> > Any thoughts on how well Cingular 850 GSM covers Dallas? I noticed
> > that T-Mobile has very strong signal strength in Dallas. It would appear
> > AT&T Wireless' TDMA net at 850 is pretty close in signal strength to
> > T-Mobile. But Cingular's GSM signal strength has been a big mystery to
> > me.
>
> Good question for Dallas coverage. I'm switching back to Cingular
> with a month to month plan with a Nokia 3360 phone. Since the
> Nationwide and Superhome plans will have me roaming in much of the
> area I'm in, I'll go with the Statewide plan as it allows home
> area usage all across Texas.

Nokia 3360? That's a TDMA/analog phone. They may not allow you sign
you up for the statewide plan since it clearly states that it requires a
multi-network GAIT phone. The statewide plan was apparently introduced
specifically to encourage users to switch to GAIT and hence use GSM in
Cingular areas.

>
> There isn't any GSM out there, so I don't need a GAIT phone; but if
> TDMA service is being degraded as its being phased out, will I begin
> to see problems in the upgraded GSM/TDMA areas over the next two years?

Not sure what you mean by there isn't "any" GSM out there--all of
Cingular in Texas is now GSM and TDMA with all new subscribers being
"encouraged" to go GSM-only or GAIT. The TDMA plans are not longer on
the website although I suspect they're still available for anyone who
insists.

It will take years before Cingular could even consider degrading TDMA--
there must be at least a couple of million if not more TDMA handsets in
use in Texas. Once they do reach a point where GSM is the majority they
might be able to "tune" a site to more GSM and less TDMA.

Most other carriers in Texas have not even started GSM conversion yet.
T-Mobile is in some larger towns. Over the next two years some other
carriers are bound to convert to GSM but they're also likely to keep
TDMA.

> Should I ever roam into a Cingular GSM only area, like California,
> would I be actualy roaming on AT&T's (or whomever's) TDMA service?
>

Yes, a roaming TDMA/analog phone will roam on other TDMA carriers if
there is no Cingular TDMA. Unless that carrier is banned in the IRDB
but I believe others have said ATTWS is used okay in Calif.

A Cingular GAIT phone will look for Cingular digital first, with your
HOME system type preferred, before looking at other carriers. So in
California it would use Cingular GSM if available before ATTWS TDMA.

> What about text paging? The area I'm in is out of range of my Weblink
> Wireless two-way pager, so I might drop it and rely on Cingular text
> messaging. The Text Messaging 250 plan would allow me 125 two way
> mesages. How reliable is it? Sprint was hit and miss trying to log on
> and the phone interface was horrible.
>

There is no "logging on" to SMS on GSM or TDMA. Cingular in DFW is 2-
way SMS both on GSM and TDMA. The first time you turn the phone on it
takes "awhile" to start receiving messages--like a half hour or so.
Sometimes a phone call or an outgoing message helps to "wake" it up.
From then on it's very fast--basically instant. AFAIK, I have never
completely missed a message.

When roaming off Cingular: GSM carriers--2 way SMS. TDMA carriers--
apparently depends on the carrier--it's usually 1 way only but I have
seen rare 2 way (usually ATT).
--
Jud
Dallas TX USA

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected]pamfree says...
> >Cingular GSM coverage in DFW is VERY VERY good -- maybe even slightly
> >better than their TDMA coverage which was already significantly better
> >than ATTWS's.
>
> Jud, In the metropolitan area of Dallas, I can't see a lot of difference in the
> TDMA coverage of Cingular and AT&T WS. I have not tested or compared the
> differences between the GSM offerings of the two companies immediatly in the
> DFW area.

Then you've been lucky. My roommate's company mandates ATTWS
nationwide. You can't walk thru their office without hearing someone
*****ing about dropped calls, static, echos, calls going straight to
voicemail, system busy messages, etc. I can't even remember when the
last time I had a dropped call on Cingular in DFW. They use various
TDMA phones so it's not a phone problem. Another close friend switched
from Cingular to ATTWS about a year ago, mainly to get a "family-plan"
promotion, and all I've heard since then is "wish I hadn't done that"--
same complaints--dropped calls, poor call quality, system busy etc. And
I know of numerous others. To give ATT credit, it's a lot better than
it was when it was MetroCell (sp?). It will be interesting to see if
GSM fixes their problems. It should help the overloading but if it's
tower related....

>
> Out here on the outskirts of town where I live (way out) AT&T's GSM has about 2
> bars on my Siemens M56 where there is no Cingular GSM on the same phone. So, my
> conclusion based solely on this would be that AT&TWS GSM coverage is better.
>

Just how "way out" are you? :-) I'm seeing strong Cingular GSM all the
way to Texoma to the north, well past Glen Rose to the south, past
Weatherford to the west and Terrell to the east--plus basically
unlimited distance on Interstates in all directions. If ATTWS GSM is
better then I'm impressed.

> --
> John S.
> e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net
>

--
Jud
Dallas TX USA

>My roommate's company mandates ATTWS
>nationwide. You can't walk thru their office without hearing someone
>*****ing about dropped calls, static, echos, calls going straight to
>voicemail, system busy messages, etc.

I have had AT&T Wireless since they started service here in the DFW metromess.
When they were Metrocel, they had growing pains and still had good service.
When McCaw bought them, the service continued to improve and got even better.
When AT&T bought them improvements continued and still no problems.

I use AT&T Wireless all over the country and have had no problems at all. I
have had the same phone number with them since 1988 and wouldn't think of
switching carriers.

Of course I know how the technology works and my expectations are not the same
as if it were a wired land line phone.

And yours should be either.

--
John S.
e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net

>And yours should be either.

oops, this should have read -

And yours shouldn'd be either.

--
John S.
e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net

Jud Hardcastle wrote:

>>Good question for Dallas coverage. I'm switching back to Cingular
>>with a month to month plan with a Nokia 3360 phone. Since the
>>Nationwide and Superhome plans will have me roaming in much of the
>>area I'm in, I'll go with the Statewide plan as it allows home
>>area usage all across Texas.

> Nokia 3360? That's a TDMA/analog phone. .

I'd prefer the Nokia 5165 TDMA phone over the 3360 TDMA phone as it has
slightly better reception. I can take both phones to the bottom of a
creek bed six miles from the closest tower and the 5165 can still hold a
call to 611, but the 3360 may not.

> They may not allow you sign you up for the statewide plan since it
> clearly states that it requires a multi-network GAIT phone

Although the map for the Dallas Statewide area states it requires a
Multi-network (GAIT) handset, some Radio Shack/Cingular affiliate stores
offer the Statewide plans with TDMA phones. Maybe because its not a
Cingular company store.

>>There isn't any GSM out there, so I don't need a GAIT phone; but if
>>TDMA service is being degraded as its being phased out, will I begin
>>to see problems in the upgraded GSM/TDMA areas over the next two years?

> Not sure what you mean by there isn't "any" GSM out there--all of
> Cingular in Texas is now GSM and TDMA with all new subscribers being
> "encouraged" to go GSM-only or GAIT.

When I commented that there wasn't any GSM out there, I was referring to
that large areas in light yellow orange on their GSM map that shows "No
Service Area".

Now if Cingular is only licensed in the dark orange areas that show
current GSM coverage, but not licensed in the light yellow orange areas,
then you would be correct in saying Cingular is all GSM in Texas. The
point is, if a customer buys a Cingular GSM only phone, there will be
large areas where they won't be able to use it.

> The TDMA plans are not longer on the website although I suspect they're
> still available for anyone who insists.

Some Radio Shack/Cingular affiliate stores offer the Statewide plans
with TDMA phones. Maybe because they are not a Cingular company store.

> It will take years before Cingular could even consider degrading TDMA--
> there must be at least a couple of million if not more TDMA handsets in
> use in Texas. Once they do reach a point where GSM is the majority they
> might be able to "tune" a site to more GSM and less TDMA.

I would tend to agree with you. I was mainly referring to a post on the
AT&T Wireless NG that mentioned degrading TDMA service as GSM rolls out.

>>Should I ever roam into a Cingular GSM only area, like California,
>>would I be actually roaming on AT&T's (or whomever's) TDMA service?

> Yes, a roaming TDMA/analog phone will roam on other TDMA carriers if
> there is no Cingular TDMA.

I pretty much figured this would be the case.

>>What about text paging? The area I'm in is out of range of my Weblink
>>Wireless two-way pager, so I might drop it and rely on Cingular text
>>messaging. The Text Messaging 250 plan would allow me 125 two way
>>messages. How reliable is it? Sprint was hit and miss trying to log on
>>and the phone interface was horrible.

> There is no "logging on" to SMS on GSM or TDMA. Cingular in DFW is 2-
> way SMS both on GSM and TDMA. The first time you turn the phone on it
> takes "awhile" to start receiving messages--like a half hour or so.
> Sometimes a phone call or an outgoing message helps to "wake" it up.
> From then on it's very fast--basically instant.

I've used Cingular's text messaging back and forth from my pager and it
is indeed VERY fast! The phone's user interface is much better than
Sprint's web based client for SMS. No waiting to log on, you simply
menu down to Messages and select Send Message.

> When roaming off Cingular: GSM carriers--2 way SMS. TDMA carriers--
> apparently depends on the carrier--it's usually 1 way only but I have
> seen rare 2 way (usually ATT).

I don't think thats going to be an issue with me as I've decided to
keep my two-way pager. I know it will always work in any major city I
travel to without worrying which carriers have text message agreements
in place. As for pager coverage in the areas I work most in, I installed
a 5 dBd gain colinear antenna on my car and drop my pager in a cradle
and it works great - way past the published coverage maps.

Let me snip from a post I made last month:

Mark W. Oots wrote:
> Any passive system does little or nothing and active
> systems cost more than you want to spend (probably).

My passive repeater work extremely well.

18 dBd gain double bowtie arrays on chimney feeding a 12 dBd
colinear in hall closet with 30 feet of 3/8" Andrews Heliax.

Jud Hardcastle wrote:


>
> It will take years before Cingular could even consider degrading TDMA--
> there must be at least a couple of million if not more TDMA handsets in
> use in Texas. Once they do reach a point where GSM is the majority they
> might be able to "tune" a site to more GSM and less TDMA.

I'm not certain what criteria you use with 'degrading TDMA', but
Cingular isn't adding radio channels for the gSM overlay, they're
converting TDMA channels to GSM, reducing TDMA capacity at every site,
although the remaining TDMA still works pretty well.


>
> There is no "logging on" to SMS on GSM or TDMA. Cingular in DFW is 2-
> way SMS both on GSM and TDMA. The first time you turn the phone on it
> takes "awhile" to start receiving messages--like a half hour or so.
> Sometimes a phone call or an outgoing message helps to "wake" it up.
> From then on it's very fast--basically instant. AFAIK, I have never
> completely missed a message.


I don't think I've ever missed an SMS either. Often, when I get around
to turning The Beast on, sn SMS sent earlier comes through, apparently
having been stored until delivery was possible. Some folks have
actually complained of me not receiving an SMS from them, as they check
on the delivery status and are told 'not delivered yet'. This, of
course, compels me to explain that having a cell phone turned on and in
my pocket each and every minute of my day isn't something I consider all
that important. Then their mouths gape open as I say "I eventually
*got* their SMS when I and the phone were ready, so what's the problem?"
Some people still complain even if you hang 'em with a new rope.


--
jer email reply - I am not a 'ten' ICQ = 35253273
"All that we do is touched with ocean, yet we remain on the shore of
what we know." -- Richard Wilbur

"Jud Hardcastle" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> Just how "way out" are you? :-) I'm seeing strong Cingular GSM all the
> way to Texoma to the north, well past Glen Rose to the south, past
> Weatherford to the west and Terrell to the east--plus basically
> unlimited distance on Interstates in all directions. If ATTWS GSM is
> better then I'm impressed.

I can PROMISE you you won't see AT&T GSM along 80, especially East of
Terrell. My bloody phones lose service 1-2 miles north of I20.

That's what I went to Cingular.

Jud Hardcastle wrote:
>
> Just how "way out" are you? :-) I'm seeing strong Cingular GSM all the
> way to Texoma to the north, well past Glen Rose to the south, past
> Weatherford to the west and Terrell to the east--plus basically
> unlimited distance on Interstates in all directions. If ATTWS GSM is
> better then I'm impressed.


Unless john has moved lately, he's near Gun Barrel City.

mdh

>> Just how "way out" are you? :-)

> Unless john has moved lately, he's near Gun Barrel City.
>

Going South and East along Hwy 175 South, the signal pretty much runs out about
Kaufman (south and a bit West of Terrel). I am sure that the I-Roads are
covered pretty much.

And yes, I am "near" GBC.

--
John S.
e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net