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

Is the TDMA access provided by Cingular as bad as it is provided by AT&T?
Here in NYC it (AT&T TDMA) sucks

---

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

"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 network
congestion problems will not be as severe.

Steve
http://nyccell.com

"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 network
congestion problems will not be as severe.

Steve
http://nyccell.com

You've never used Sprint PCS in Chicago then!!
I have T-Mobile corrently... I've had every other carrier that's ever
marched in Chicago... They've all sucked in my opinion... As much as I use
the phone, I only have two dead zone, and 3 spots that are kinda shady...
But for the most part Crystal clear

Colby


"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 network
> congestion problems will not be as severe.
>
> Steve
> http://nyccell.com
>
>

You've never used Sprint PCS in Chicago then!!
I have T-Mobile corrently... I've had every other carrier that's ever
marched in Chicago... They've all sucked in my opinion... As much as I use
the phone, I only have two dead zone, and 3 spots that are kinda shady...
But for the most part Crystal clear

Colby


"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 network
> congestion problems will not be as severe.
>
> Steve
> http://nyccell.com
>
>

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 06:29:46 GMT, "Roopinder Randhawa"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Is the TDMA access provided by Cingular as bad as it is provided by AT&T?
>Here in NYC it (AT&T TDMA) sucks
>

Cingular's TDMA in the Dallas market is horrible. AT&T is better than
Cingular but then again even SprintPCS is better than Cingular in the
Dallas area.


Matthew

matthew at the dash stevens dot us

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 06:29:46 GMT, "Roopinder Randhawa"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Is the TDMA access provided by Cingular as bad as it is provided by AT&T?
>Here in NYC it (AT&T TDMA) sucks
>

Cingular's TDMA in the Dallas market is horrible. AT&T is better than
Cingular but then again even SprintPCS is better than Cingular in the
Dallas area.


Matthew

matthew at the dash stevens dot us

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 07:32:04 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"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.

The practicalities of spectrum aside, anyone who does a side-by-side
comparison of Verizon service and TM in NYC will be sorely
disappointed. There's becoming nothing more frustrating than a call on
the other end with a Verizon Wireless customer. It's becoming as bad
as AT&T's TDMA.

Now, many of the people I know who have Verizon don't have the latest
handsets and that may be part of the issue.

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.

"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

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.

"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

On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 15:02:13 -0600, "sonywega6"
<[email protected]> posted in alt.cellular.motorola:

>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?

If AT&T is so great why are they losing so many customers since 11/24?
--
Al - rukbat at optonline dot net

On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 15:02:13 -0600, "sonywega6"
<[email protected]> posted in alt.cellular.motorola:

>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?

If AT&T is so great why are they losing so many customers since 11/24?
--
Al - rukbat at optonline dot net

> Ten-twenty years from now all the carriers will be using CDMA and network
> congestion problems will not be as severe.

Yes, but you have to realize that many, many, technologically
incompatible (but based on similar ideas) versions, or flavours, of CDMA
can exist.

Technically speaking, the TDMA that Cingular/AT&T utilize is not the
same as GSM or iDEN, with are both technologies based on TDMA, yet
neither of the three are compatible with the other two.

One thing I have also noticed, is that when you call a Verizon Wireless
customer who you have talked to a lot, sometimes you can tell when they
have upgraded to a "1x" phone. Of the friends that I talk to on a
regular bases, those who have upgraded to a 1x phone sound farther away,
and thier voice is not as clear as it was on their old handset.

I have to admit, if cellular is going to get more efficient, but sound
quality is going to go down, it's going to start to defeat the purpose
of cellular. Ideally, there should be additional spectrum allocated to
data-only, while the current spectrum (850/1900) should be allocated to
voice only.

==AD

Al Klein wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 15:02:13 -0600, "sonywega6"
> <[email protected]> posted in alt.cellular.motorola:
>
>
>>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?
>
> If AT&T is so great why are they losing so many customers since 11/24?

How many customer have they lost? How many have they gained? What is
the net change since 24 November?

==AD

"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.