Is the TDMA access provided by Cingular as bad as it is provided by AT&T?

"Al Klein" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> >Can't comment about AT&T TDMA in NYC, but AT&T's TDMA service is probably
> >the best coverage you'll find over most of the country. That's why most
of
> >the small independent prepaid resellers go with them.
>
> Not because it makes the best financial sense?

Mostly because of both- excellent coverage with roaming agreements already
in force for most of the country, and because AT&T at one time encouraged
resellers as a source of revenue. (AFAIK, they no longer seek out reseller
relationships, but entertain the existing ones out of contractual
obligation.)

> If AT&T is so great why are they losing so many customers since 11/24?

Because they are rushing the switch to GSM, and not focusing on maintaining
their once excellent reputation for coverage.

Cingular is in a similar boat, but doing a better job staying afloat- they
too are transitioning their TDMA customers to GSM. Unlike AT&T, however,
Cingular has relied heavily on GAIT phones- TDMA/GSM/analog combo units-
that allow their customers to reap the coverage benefits of the mature TDMA
network during the transition, and aren't going out of their way to wrench
TDMA phones out of customers hands- instead they are playing it much like
the analog to TDMA transition- they aren't forcing anyone to switch, rather
they "encourage" migration to GAIT by offering special rate plans available
to GAIT customers only, and figure the average customer's propensity to
upgrade phones every few years will take care of the conversion for them if
only they are patient.

AT&T, instead, pushed the "gee-whiz" of "mLife"- the wonderful advantages of
GSM picture phones and GPRS data, long before their GSM coverage was ready
for prime time, resulting in migrating customers losing a lot of coverage,
and new customers wondering where the reputation for ubiquitous coverage
came from.

---

› See More: Is the TDMA access provided by Cingular as bad as it is provided by AT&T?

"Steven M. Scharf" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Roopinder Randhawa" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Is the TDMA access provided by Cingular as bad as it is provided by
AT&T?
> > Here in NYC it (AT&T TDMA) sucks
>
> The reason TDMA sucks in NYC is because the inefficient spectrum
utilization
> of TDMA makes is particularly poorly suited for high density population
> areas. AT&T is not spending any money to expand their TDMA network, to the
> contrary, they are converting more and more of their spectrum to GSM.
Alas,
> GSM is not nearly as spectrum efficient as CDMA either, so Verizon will
> remain the number one carrier in NYC for the foreseeable future.
>
> Cingular TDMA does not suck, at least not yet. And of course there is no
> Cingular TDMA in NYC.
>
> You can see the relative spectral efficiencies of the different
technologies
> on page 51 of:
>
http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~paulet...90_WirelessCom
> m/2_Riseofthe3GEmpire.pdf
> and understand why that even the GSM carriers are eventually moving toward
a
> version of CDMA (W-CDMA)..
>
> In most areas the spectral inefficiency of TDMA doesn't manifest itself
> because the areas are not densely populated. But in crowded areas it is a
> problem. Even in the San Francisco Bay Area, the first GSM provider,
> Cingular, had severe network congestion problems due to over-selling their
> service, a situation that would have been avoided had they chosen a more
> spectrally efficient technology.
>
> Ten-twenty years from now all the carriers will be using CDMA and

Hardly. Possibly W-CDMA / 3G technologies, but not CDMA itself

"Steven M. Scharf" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Roopinder Randhawa" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Is the TDMA access provided by Cingular as bad as it is provided by
AT&T?
> > Here in NYC it (AT&T TDMA) sucks
>
> The reason TDMA sucks in NYC is because the inefficient spectrum
utilization
> of TDMA makes is particularly poorly suited for high density population
> areas. AT&T is not spending any money to expand their TDMA network, to the
> contrary, they are converting more and more of their spectrum to GSM.
Alas,
> GSM is not nearly as spectrum efficient as CDMA either, so Verizon will
> remain the number one carrier in NYC for the foreseeable future.
>
> Cingular TDMA does not suck, at least not yet. And of course there is no
> Cingular TDMA in NYC.
>
> You can see the relative spectral efficiencies of the different
technologies
> on page 51 of:
>
http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~paulet...90_WirelessCom
> m/2_Riseofthe3GEmpire.pdf
> and understand why that even the GSM carriers are eventually moving toward
a
> version of CDMA (W-CDMA)..
>
> In most areas the spectral inefficiency of TDMA doesn't manifest itself
> because the areas are not densely populated. But in crowded areas it is a
> problem. Even in the San Francisco Bay Area, the first GSM provider,
> Cingular, had severe network congestion problems due to over-selling their
> service, a situation that would have been avoided had they chosen a more
> spectrally efficient technology.
>
> Ten-twenty years from now all the carriers will be using CDMA and

Hardly. Possibly W-CDMA / 3G technologies, but not CDMA itself

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 08:03:14 GMT, "Todd Allcock" <[email protected]>
posted in alt.cellular.motorola:

>"Al Klein" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...

>> >Can't comment about AT&T TDMA in NYC, but AT&T's TDMA service is probably
>> >the best coverage you'll find over most of the country. That's why most of
>> >the small independent prepaid resellers tgo with them.

>> Not because it makes the best financial sense?

>Mostly because of both- excellent coverage with roaming agreements already
>in force for most of the country, and because AT&T at one time encouraged
>resellers as a source of revenue. (AFAIK, they no longer seek out reseller
>relationships, but entertain the existing ones out of contractual
>obligation.)

>> If AT&T is so great why are they losing so many customers since 11/24?

>Because they are rushing the switch to GSM, and not focusing on maintaining
>their once excellent reputation for coverage.

IOW they DON'T have the best service. No one really cares what they
used to have.

And in at least one market, NYC, they never did have anywhere near
best, or even excellent, coverage. It was more like "if you're not in
a dead spot ("spots" being miles in diameter), and it's not a heavy
usage time (like 5PM or the weather is bad), the signal doesn't suck
too badly" coverage. Which is why they lost me as a customer years
ago. And which is why they're losing customers in the NYC market to -
believe it or not - T-Mobile.
--
Al - rukbat at optonline dot net

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 08:03:14 GMT, "Todd Allcock" <[email protected]>
posted in alt.cellular.motorola:

>"Al Klein" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...

>> >Can't comment about AT&T TDMA in NYC, but AT&T's TDMA service is probably
>> >the best coverage you'll find over most of the country. That's why most of
>> >the small independent prepaid resellers tgo with them.

>> Not because it makes the best financial sense?

>Mostly because of both- excellent coverage with roaming agreements already
>in force for most of the country, and because AT&T at one time encouraged
>resellers as a source of revenue. (AFAIK, they no longer seek out reseller
>relationships, but entertain the existing ones out of contractual
>obligation.)

>> If AT&T is so great why are they losing so many customers since 11/24?

>Because they are rushing the switch to GSM, and not focusing on maintaining
>their once excellent reputation for coverage.

IOW they DON'T have the best service. No one really cares what they
used to have.

And in at least one market, NYC, they never did have anywhere near
best, or even excellent, coverage. It was more like "if you're not in
a dead spot ("spots" being miles in diameter), and it's not a heavy
usage time (like 5PM or the weather is bad), the signal doesn't suck
too badly" coverage. Which is why they lost me as a customer years
ago. And which is why they're losing customers in the NYC market to -
believe it or not - T-Mobile.
--
Al - rukbat at optonline dot net