Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Steven M. Scharf
    Guest
    I revamped my cellular websites after complaints about the
    layout and load time. Sorry, but with DSL I didn't realize
    just how bloated they had become.

    Load time of the main page will be about 30 seconds rather
    than the previous 3 minutes (dial-up).

    I've also added a new section on "Voice Quality" after
    someone pointed out that I did not adequately address
    this issue.

    These sites are objective, non-commercial sites that
    are designed to help consumers choose a carrier.

    http://nycell.com New York City
    http://sfbacell.com San Francisco Bay Area
    http://socalcell.com Southern California

    Also:

    http://earthroam.com International Roaming

    The response and hit rate on this last site has been quite amazing.
    I created it after a few e-mails on questions of international roaming
    costs, and apparently there was a big demand for this sort of
    comparison between carriers.





    See More: Cellular Carrier Comparison Sites Revamped (NYC, Northern & Southern CA)




  2. #2
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Cellular Carrier Comparison Sites Revamped (NYC, Northern & Southern CA)

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

    In <i7s%[email protected]> on Sat, 16 Aug 2003
    15:31:26 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >These sites are objective, ...


    Not true.

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



  3. #3
    RDT
    Guest

    Re: Cellular Carrier Comparison Sites Revamped (NYC, Northern & Southern CA)

    In article <i7s%[email protected]>,
    Steven M. Scharf <[email protected]> wrote:
    >I've also added a new section on "Voice Quality" after
    >someone pointed out that I did not adequately address
    >this issue.


    Yep.

    >These sites are objective...


    Bull<cough>****.

    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




  4. #4
    Steven M. Scharf
    Guest

    Re: Cellular Carrier Comparison Sites Revamped (NYC, Northern & Southern CA)


    ""RDT"" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > In article <i7s%[email protected]>,
    > Steven M. Scharf <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >I've also added a new section on "Voice Quality" after
    > >someone pointed out that I did not adequately address
    > >this issue.

    >
    > Yep.
    >
    > >These sites are objective...

    >
    > Bull<cough>****.


    Come now, don't pull a Navas. I added the voice quality section based on
    your suggestion, if there is something you see that is incorrect, then speak
    up.





  5. #5
    RDT
    Guest

    Re: Cellular Carrier Comparison Sites Revamped (NYC, Northern & Southern CA)

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Steven M. Scharf <[email protected]> wrote:
    >Come now, don't pull a Navas. I added the voice quality section based on
    >your suggestion, if there is something you see that is incorrect, then speak
    >up.


    Most people don't buy based on what's the very best in the
    marketplace. They buy based on what is the best value for them. Without
    a doubt, T-Mobile is a very good value. It is a much better value than
    Verizon. I have a very good friend who lives in SoCal (works north of
    Sherman Oaks, lives in downtown LA off Sunset). His work phone is a
    Nextel. His personal phone up until recently was Verizon. He purchased
    the Verizon phone because he was led to believe it had the best coverage.
    His girlfriend purchased a T-Mobile phone because the phones looked cool
    and they would give her a lot of anytime minutes (3000) for an
    unbelievable price ($50). He tried her phone a few times and discovered
    that it sounds better and it works better in the mountains. In fact, he
    has found that the Verizon phone he owns is no better than the Nextel in
    the mountains. They both drop calls in different places. The T-Mobile
    phone appears to work better in the mountains, but has more dead spots in
    LA (than Verizon). Given that the performance of these three is roughly
    equivalent with Verizon costing much more per minute (during the daytime),
    he made the decision to go with the $40 for 1000 plan with T-Mobile.

    The voice quality is better. The dropped calls are fewer in the
    mountains which is a large part of his daily commute. The price is much
    cheaper. He doesn't ever worry that he's exceeded his daytime minutes
    since all minutes are the same price. And he gets LD and roaming. All
    for $0.04 a minute. And a note: he had Verizon so long he still has a
    handset (an old Startac) that was programmed with the much clearer 13k
    Qualcomm CDMA codec. He thinks the GSM EFR is better.

    By the way, I don't know why Nextel gets *****-slapped on voice
    quality. I think Nextel sounds fine. When he's on his Nextel phone, I
    really can't tell a difference from a landline. Although it is possible
    that incoming voice quality is pretty ****ty since I've never used a
    Nextel handset, outgoing voice quality is good (when he calls my
    landline). His Verizon phone does funny things with the letter "s"
    (sounds like a hissing snake) and occasionally chirps while he's talking.

    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




  6. #6
    m thaler
    Guest

    Re: Cellular Carrier Comparison Sites Revamped (NYC, Northern & Southern CA)

    In my experience, Nextel's voice quality, while it has improved over
    the last several years, still is not in a league w. other wireless
    protocols.
    I have a person I deal w. a lot who has Nextel. His voice quality is
    so bad, he knows that if he wants to talk w. me he needs to NOT use his
    Nextel.

    ...mike (in Northern Ca.)

    [email protected] ("RDT") wrote in article
    <[email protected]>:
    > In article <r
    > By the way, I don't know why Nextel gets *****-slapped on voice
    > quality. I think Nextel sounds fine. When he's on his Nextel phone, I
    > really can't tell a difference from a landline. Although it is possible
    > that incoming voice quality is pretty ****ty since I've never used a
    > Nextel handset, outgoing voice quality is good (when he calls my
    > landline). His Verizon phone does funny things with the letter "s"
    > (sounds like a hissing snake) and occasionally chirps while he's talking.
    >
    > RDT
    >


    [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]



  7. #7
    Mike D
    Guest

    Re: Cellular Carrier Comparison Sites Revamped (NYC, Northern & Southern CA)

    Steven M. Scharf <[email protected]> wrote:

    > ""RDT"" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > In article <i7s%[email protected]>,
    > > Steven M. Scharf <[email protected]> wrote:
    > > >I've also added a new section on "Voice Quality" after
    > > >someone pointed out that I did not adequately address
    > > >this issue.

    > >
    > > Yep.
    > >
    > > >These sites are objective...

    > >
    > > Bull<cough>****.

    >
    > Come now, don't pull a Navas. I added the voice quality section based on
    > your suggestion, if there is something you see that is incorrect, then speak
    > up.


    I found the voice quality section reasonablly even handed, although I
    would probably quibble with your conclusions.

    To my ear, when you have a perfect CDMA signal it often sounds as good
    as or very slightly better than GSM (providng a little more treble), but
    that in the real world, you more often have CDMA signal with
    significant error rates, so the overall quality is usually lower than
    the typical GSM call.

    But overall on that page, I thought you gave both sides of the argument.


    --
    To send email, remove the invalid and nospams.



  • Similar Threads