Results 16 to 30 of 33
- 09-07-2005, 10:18 AM #16Bob SmithGuest
Re: Amazing Sprint lapse in coverage in prime, heavily trafficed LA location - explanations ?
"Steve Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Jack Zwick wrote:
>
> > What is, you're full of ****e, Alex?
>
> No, YOU are, Mr. I'm-Never-Posting-To-Alt-Cellular-Sprintpcs-Again.
Amazing that ole Phillipe just can't keep his word ... isn't it?
Bob
› See More: Amazing Sprint lapse in coverage in prime, heavily trafficed LA location - explanations ?
- 09-07-2005, 01:09 PM #17=?ISO-8859-15?Q?O/Siris?=Guest
Re: Amazing Sprint lapse in coverage in prime, heavily trafficed LA location - explanations ?
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected]lid says...
> Rob, you may have moved on, but you still speak from a perspective of
> knowledge and experience that few can match. Nothing to be embarrassed
> about. :-)
>
Wow, Paul. Thanks. I just don't understand why that is. I was only
there 18 months. And I really don't think I did anything all that hard
in finding out what I know.
However unusual that might in fact, be though, I appreciate the
compliment *very* much.
--
RØß
O/Siris
-+-
A thing moderately good
is not so good as it ought to be.
Moderation in temper is always a virtue,
but moderation in principle is always a vice.
+Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+
- 09-07-2005, 01:11 PM #18=?ISO-8859-15?Q?O/Siris?=Guest
Re: Amazing Sprint lapse in coverage in prime, heavily trafficed LA location - explanations ?
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> Even better!! Sqeaky wheels get grease (unless you are one of those
> who enjoys a good wheel bearing freeze-up at 70 MPH).
>
But you get such pretty fireworks that way <g>.
It also occurs to me that if it's an infrastructure thing (I.e. a RBOC
T-1 line or fiber trunk cut), there's not much Sprint can do about it.
Here in Illinois, SBC fixes the line when they fix. Period.
--
RØß
O/Siris
-+-
A thing moderately good
is not so good as it ought to be.
Moderation in temper is always a virtue,
but moderation in principle is always a vice.
+Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+
- 09-07-2005, 04:33 PM #19VeronicaGuest
Re: Amazing Sprint lapse in coverage in prime, heavily trafficed LA location - explanations ?
On 6 Sep 2005 00:39:12 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
>Veronica wrote:
>> An area traveled by literally 40,000 - 50,000cars a week (as per the
>> LA Dept of Transportation count) - over Laurel Canyon, between Sunset
>> Blvd. And Ventura Blvd. In Los Angeles.
>> The fact of very good/nearly unique Sprint reception at the base of
>> the Sunset side and then through the canyon, is the reason we, and
>> others we know, originally switched to Sprint (from Nextel and AT&T,
>> etc.
>> Until this past week one cold maintain the reception, with a Sanyo
>> 4700 and Sanyo 4920, etc.. all the phones worked without hitch over
>> this landscape.
>> Presently, a short distance from Ventura Blvd., going south, the
>> signal/ reception gets sharply, then picked up spottily, and then
>> dropped and then after a pause, "Digital Roaming" shows up on the
>> phone with the suggestion for approval to use Digital Roaming.
>> (notably the reverse does not seem to happen when one goes in the
>> other direction north)
>>
>> Might this be a function of the Nextel merger ? I doubt it. A Tower
>> going down or being disallowed in the residential neighborhood ? This
>> is an extremely valuable and important area of Los Angeles, and the
>> reason that many folks I know switched to Sprint - so that they could
>> continue their calls uninterrupted on the way home or to work.
>> It amazes me that Sprint would let this area lapse or decide to
>> discontinue Sprint PCS coverage there. As it is enough to make many
>> users switch to other carriers.
>> Is there any explanation that anyone here could fathom ?
>
>
>I can tell you that it has absolutely nothing to do with the Nextel
>merger. Both companies run different technologies and frequencies and
>so they are not trying to combine the two together in any way.
>
>It is most likely a cell site went down. The cell sites along Laurel
>Canyon are microcells attached to power poles. I've seen them before.
>There could be problems with the T1's or some other type of hardware
>failure. Sprint most likely knows about it since it would show up at
>the NOC in Burbank as a red flag on their screen but it could take a
>little time to fix. Usually these outages won't last for longer than a
>couple of days though. There's a slim chance that their permit for the
>cell site expired and the city won't renew it. But that's unlikely.
Thanks all, I add this to a light thread line that has not evolved
into arguments....
The PCS outage condition continues today, Wednesday, September 07,
2005. I did finally reach someone at Sprint and was informed that the
area (between Lookout Mountain Road north almost to Ventura Blvd.) is
a "heavy/intense usage area" (as in cell phone usage). And that the
Nextel inclusion is a possible or likely reason that what was, for
years, a Sprint PCS "gold medal" road, is now reduced to Analog and
Digital roaming. Except at the base of the road on the city side,
north and south.
Again, this is the second most trafficked route through/over the hill
from LA to the San Fernando Valley, where one finds Studio City, etc.
Per the Dept of Transportation - over 50,000 cars per month.
He was friendly, but could not start to predict a resolution on a time
basis.
I can see that Digital Roaming is available on part of that stretch of
road. But that leads me to wonder to which carrier the roaming would
switch to. Presumably Verison. Which leads me to further wonder how it
is that Verison presumably has service but Sprint does not. He said
that 300,000 new Nextel users are now utilizing Sprint towers.
Presumably the 300,000 number is a national number. Also in that my
group/company had to switch from Nextel in order to have cell phone
access on this main artery in the year 2001. And that if Nextel users
had not gained the ability to use cell service on this main artery,
since then, that they would obviously not be now using the Sprint
towers.
Ooooppsss. Then again, perhaps that is exactly what is happening. All
those Nextel users in LA now find that they can jump on the Sprint
towers along this very busy road and the word is out and they are
using their Nextel phones on this road and thus overloading the Sprint
towers and PCS service basically crashes on this heavily trafficked
artery.
The Microcell element is interesting. I did not know about that, and
it makes sense. It also makes sense that these microcell units could
get more easily overloaded with new users, if the Rep is to be assumed
to be correct. Late last night I used voicemail up and down the road,
and the connection did not cut out. Thus I assumed it was resolved.
Today, total disaster. And thanks Bob, I did also send off an email as
per your link.
To have ones ongoing calls killed at a relatively important points in
the conversation and not be able to get the person back on the phone
for 10-20 minutes, is indeed frustrating.
Veronica.
- 09-07-2005, 06:07 PM #20Mij AdyawGuest
Re: Amazing Sprint lapse in coverage in prime, heavily trafficed LA location - explanations ?
Nextel users cannot use Sprint towers. Sprint towers use CDMA protocol
whereas Nextel towers use IDEN. The two protocols are not compatible.
"Veronica" <Veronica4-no [email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 6 Sep 2005 00:39:12 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>
>>Veronica wrote:
>>> An area traveled by literally 40,000 - 50,000cars a week (as per the
>>> LA Dept of Transportation count) - over Laurel Canyon, between Sunset
>>> Blvd. And Ventura Blvd. In Los Angeles.
>>> The fact of very good/nearly unique Sprint reception at the base of
>>> the Sunset side and then through the canyon, is the reason we, and
>>> others we know, originally switched to Sprint (from Nextel and AT&T,
>>> etc.
>>> Until this past week one cold maintain the reception, with a Sanyo
>>> 4700 and Sanyo 4920, etc.. all the phones worked without hitch over
>>> this landscape.
>>> Presently, a short distance from Ventura Blvd., going south, the
>>> signal/ reception gets sharply, then picked up spottily, and then
>>> dropped and then after a pause, "Digital Roaming" shows up on the
>>> phone with the suggestion for approval to use Digital Roaming.
>>> (notably the reverse does not seem to happen when one goes in the
>>> other direction north)
>>>
>>> Might this be a function of the Nextel merger ? I doubt it. A Tower
>>> going down or being disallowed in the residential neighborhood ? This
>>> is an extremely valuable and important area of Los Angeles, and the
>>> reason that many folks I know switched to Sprint - so that they could
>>> continue their calls uninterrupted on the way home or to work.
>>> It amazes me that Sprint would let this area lapse or decide to
>>> discontinue Sprint PCS coverage there. As it is enough to make many
>>> users switch to other carriers.
>>> Is there any explanation that anyone here could fathom ?
>>
>>
>>I can tell you that it has absolutely nothing to do with the Nextel
>>merger. Both companies run different technologies and frequencies and
>>so they are not trying to combine the two together in any way.
>>
>>It is most likely a cell site went down. The cell sites along Laurel
>>Canyon are microcells attached to power poles. I've seen them before.
>>There could be problems with the T1's or some other type of hardware
>>failure. Sprint most likely knows about it since it would show up at
>>the NOC in Burbank as a red flag on their screen but it could take a
>>little time to fix. Usually these outages won't last for longer than a
>>couple of days though. There's a slim chance that their permit for the
>>cell site expired and the city won't renew it. But that's unlikely.
>
> Thanks all, I add this to a light thread line that has not evolved
> into arguments....
>
> The PCS outage condition continues today, Wednesday, September 07,
> 2005. I did finally reach someone at Sprint and was informed that the
> area (between Lookout Mountain Road north almost to Ventura Blvd.) is
> a "heavy/intense usage area" (as in cell phone usage). And that the
> Nextel inclusion is a possible or likely reason that what was, for
> years, a Sprint PCS "gold medal" road, is now reduced to Analog and
> Digital roaming. Except at the base of the road on the city side,
> north and south.
>
> Again, this is the second most trafficked route through/over the hill
> from LA to the San Fernando Valley, where one finds Studio City, etc.
> Per the Dept of Transportation - over 50,000 cars per month.
>
> He was friendly, but could not start to predict a resolution on a time
> basis.
>
> I can see that Digital Roaming is available on part of that stretch of
> road. But that leads me to wonder to which carrier the roaming would
> switch to. Presumably Verison. Which leads me to further wonder how it
> is that Verison presumably has service but Sprint does not. He said
> that 300,000 new Nextel users are now utilizing Sprint towers.
> Presumably the 300,000 number is a national number. Also in that my
> group/company had to switch from Nextel in order to have cell phone
> access on this main artery in the year 2001. And that if Nextel users
> had not gained the ability to use cell service on this main artery,
> since then, that they would obviously not be now using the Sprint
> towers.
>
> Ooooppsss. Then again, perhaps that is exactly what is happening. All
> those Nextel users in LA now find that they can jump on the Sprint
> towers along this very busy road and the word is out and they are
> using their Nextel phones on this road and thus overloading the Sprint
> towers and PCS service basically crashes on this heavily trafficked
> artery.
>
> The Microcell element is interesting. I did not know about that, and
> it makes sense. It also makes sense that these microcell units could
> get more easily overloaded with new users, if the Rep is to be assumed
> to be correct. Late last night I used voicemail up and down the road,
> and the connection did not cut out. Thus I assumed it was resolved.
> Today, total disaster. And thanks Bob, I did also send off an email as
> per your link.
>
> To have ones ongoing calls killed at a relatively important points in
> the conversation and not be able to get the person back on the phone
> for 10-20 minutes, is indeed frustrating.
>
> Veronica.
>
- 09-07-2005, 06:09 PM #21Mij AdyawGuest
Re: Amazing Sprint lapse in coverage in prime, heavily trafficed LA location - explanations ?
I do not believe that the Sprint CS person that you talked with new what he
is talking about!! Many of them will say anything to get you off the phone
and half of them even believe the BS that they are spewing. It is really sad
but unfortunately very true.
-mij
"Mij Adyaw" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:ZgLTe.71940$Ji4.71581@fed1read03...
> Nextel users cannot use Sprint towers. Sprint towers use CDMA protocol
> whereas Nextel towers use IDEN. The two protocols are not compatible.
>
> "Veronica" <Veronica4-no [email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On 6 Sep 2005 00:39:12 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Veronica wrote:
>>>> An area traveled by literally 40,000 - 50,000cars a week (as per the
>>>> LA Dept of Transportation count) - over Laurel Canyon, between Sunset
>>>> Blvd. And Ventura Blvd. In Los Angeles.
>>>> The fact of very good/nearly unique Sprint reception at the base of
>>>> the Sunset side and then through the canyon, is the reason we, and
>>>> others we know, originally switched to Sprint (from Nextel and AT&T,
>>>> etc.
>>>> Until this past week one cold maintain the reception, with a Sanyo
>>>> 4700 and Sanyo 4920, etc.. all the phones worked without hitch over
>>>> this landscape.
>>>> Presently, a short distance from Ventura Blvd., going south, the
>>>> signal/ reception gets sharply, then picked up spottily, and then
>>>> dropped and then after a pause, "Digital Roaming" shows up on the
>>>> phone with the suggestion for approval to use Digital Roaming.
>>>> (notably the reverse does not seem to happen when one goes in the
>>>> other direction north)
>>>>
>>>> Might this be a function of the Nextel merger ? I doubt it. A Tower
>>>> going down or being disallowed in the residential neighborhood ? This
>>>> is an extremely valuable and important area of Los Angeles, and the
>>>> reason that many folks I know switched to Sprint - so that they could
>>>> continue their calls uninterrupted on the way home or to work.
>>>> It amazes me that Sprint would let this area lapse or decide to
>>>> discontinue Sprint PCS coverage there. As it is enough to make many
>>>> users switch to other carriers.
>>>> Is there any explanation that anyone here could fathom ?
>>>
>>>
>>>I can tell you that it has absolutely nothing to do with the Nextel
>>>merger. Both companies run different technologies and frequencies and
>>>so they are not trying to combine the two together in any way.
>>>
>>>It is most likely a cell site went down. The cell sites along Laurel
>>>Canyon are microcells attached to power poles. I've seen them before.
>>>There could be problems with the T1's or some other type of hardware
>>>failure. Sprint most likely knows about it since it would show up at
>>>the NOC in Burbank as a red flag on their screen but it could take a
>>>little time to fix. Usually these outages won't last for longer than a
>>>couple of days though. There's a slim chance that their permit for the
>>>cell site expired and the city won't renew it. But that's unlikely.
>>
>> Thanks all, I add this to a light thread line that has not evolved
>> into arguments....
>>
>> The PCS outage condition continues today, Wednesday, September 07,
>> 2005. I did finally reach someone at Sprint and was informed that the
>> area (between Lookout Mountain Road north almost to Ventura Blvd.) is
>> a "heavy/intense usage area" (as in cell phone usage). And that the
>> Nextel inclusion is a possible or likely reason that what was, for
>> years, a Sprint PCS "gold medal" road, is now reduced to Analog and
>> Digital roaming. Except at the base of the road on the city side,
>> north and south.
>>
>> Again, this is the second most trafficked route through/over the hill
>> from LA to the San Fernando Valley, where one finds Studio City, etc.
>> Per the Dept of Transportation - over 50,000 cars per month.
>>
>> He was friendly, but could not start to predict a resolution on a time
>> basis.
>>
>> I can see that Digital Roaming is available on part of that stretch of
>> road. But that leads me to wonder to which carrier the roaming would
>> switch to. Presumably Verison. Which leads me to further wonder how it
>> is that Verison presumably has service but Sprint does not. He said
>> that 300,000 new Nextel users are now utilizing Sprint towers.
>> Presumably the 300,000 number is a national number. Also in that my
>> group/company had to switch from Nextel in order to have cell phone
>> access on this main artery in the year 2001. And that if Nextel users
>> had not gained the ability to use cell service on this main artery,
>> since then, that they would obviously not be now using the Sprint
>> towers.
>>
>> Ooooppsss. Then again, perhaps that is exactly what is happening. All
>> those Nextel users in LA now find that they can jump on the Sprint
>> towers along this very busy road and the word is out and they are
>> using their Nextel phones on this road and thus overloading the Sprint
>> towers and PCS service basically crashes on this heavily trafficked
>> artery.
>>
>> The Microcell element is interesting. I did not know about that, and
>> it makes sense. It also makes sense that these microcell units could
>> get more easily overloaded with new users, if the Rep is to be assumed
>> to be correct. Late last night I used voicemail up and down the road,
>> and the connection did not cut out. Thus I assumed it was resolved.
>> Today, total disaster. And thanks Bob, I did also send off an email as
>> per your link.
>>
>> To have ones ongoing calls killed at a relatively important points in
>> the conversation and not be able to get the person back on the phone
>> for 10-20 minutes, is indeed frustrating.
>>
>> Veronica.
>>
>
>
- 09-07-2005, 07:36 PM #22VeronicaGuest
Re: Amazing Sprint lapse in coverage in prime, heavily trafficed LA location - explanations ?
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 17:07:16 -0700, "Mij Adyaw" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Nextel users cannot use Sprint towers. Sprint towers use CDMA protocol
>whereas Nextel towers use IDEN. The two protocols are not compatible.
Yes, I thought of that later.
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 17:09:47 -0700, "Mij Adyaw" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>I do not believe that the Sprint CS person that you talked with new what he
>is talking about!! Many of them will say anything to get you off the phone
>and half of them even believe the BS that they are spewing. It is really sad
>but unfortunately very true.
>
>-mij
It is quite frustrating. And after the large investment in Sprint
phones and new contracts a month ago. I do wonder if Verison provides
overall better service, if more expensive. The Rep gave me a code
number to reference the phone call. It remains to be seen if Sprint
will get with it and get those sites back up.
In that I/we here have never used roaming before, and the $5 a month
is no issue, so I don't even know if a call that was transpiring on
PCS would, if one had a roaming activated, simply seamlessly
transition to roaming and then back to PCS when the coverage picked
up. However, I consider it highly unlikely that that would take place.
Thanks,
V.
>
>
>
>"Mij Adyaw" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:ZgLTe.71940$Ji4.71581@fed1read03...
>> Nextel users cannot use Sprint towers. Sprint towers use CDMA protocol
>> whereas Nextel towers use IDEN. The two protocols are not compatible.
>>
>> "Veronica" <Veronica4-no [email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> On 6 Sep 2005 00:39:12 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Veronica wrote:
>>>>> An area traveled by literally 40,000 - 50,000cars a week (as per the
>>>>> LA Dept of Transportation count) - over Laurel Canyon, between Sunset
>>>>> Blvd. And Ventura Blvd. In Los Angeles.
>>>>> The fact of very good/nearly unique Sprint reception at the base of
>>>>> the Sunset side and then through the canyon, is the reason we, and
>>>>> others we know, originally switched to Sprint (from Nextel and AT&T,
>>>>> etc.
>>>>> Until this past week one cold maintain the reception, with a Sanyo
>>>>> 4700 and Sanyo 4920, etc.. all the phones worked without hitch over
>>>>> this landscape.
>>>>> Presently, a short distance from Ventura Blvd., going south, the
>>>>> signal/ reception gets sharply, then picked up spottily, and then
>>>>> dropped and then after a pause, "Digital Roaming" shows up on the
>>>>> phone with the suggestion for approval to use Digital Roaming.
>>>>> (notably the reverse does not seem to happen when one goes in the
>>>>> other direction north)
>>>>>
>>>>> Might this be a function of the Nextel merger ? I doubt it. A Tower
>>>>> going down or being disallowed in the residential neighborhood ? This
>>>>> is an extremely valuable and important area of Los Angeles, and the
>>>>> reason that many folks I know switched to Sprint - so that they could
>>>>> continue their calls uninterrupted on the way home or to work.
>>>>> It amazes me that Sprint would let this area lapse or decide to
>>>>> discontinue Sprint PCS coverage there. As it is enough to make many
>>>>> users switch to other carriers.
>>>>> Is there any explanation that anyone here could fathom ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I can tell you that it has absolutely nothing to do with the Nextel
>>>>merger. Both companies run different technologies and frequencies and
>>>>so they are not trying to combine the two together in any way.
>>>>
>>>>It is most likely a cell site went down. The cell sites along Laurel
>>>>Canyon are microcells attached to power poles. I've seen them before.
>>>>There could be problems with the T1's or some other type of hardware
>>>>failure. Sprint most likely knows about it since it would show up at
>>>>the NOC in Burbank as a red flag on their screen but it could take a
>>>>little time to fix. Usually these outages won't last for longer than a
>>>>couple of days though. There's a slim chance that their permit for the
>>>>cell site expired and the city won't renew it. But that's unlikely.
>>>
>>> Thanks all, I add this to a light thread line that has not evolved
>>> into arguments....
>>>
>>> The PCS outage condition continues today, Wednesday, September 07,
>>> 2005. I did finally reach someone at Sprint and was informed that the
>>> area (between Lookout Mountain Road north almost to Ventura Blvd.) is
>>> a "heavy/intense usage area" (as in cell phone usage). And that the
>>> Nextel inclusion is a possible or likely reason that what was, for
>>> years, a Sprint PCS "gold medal" road, is now reduced to Analog and
>>> Digital roaming. Except at the base of the road on the city side,
>>> north and south.
>>>
>>> Again, this is the second most trafficked route through/over the hill
>>> from LA to the San Fernando Valley, where one finds Studio City, etc.
>>> Per the Dept of Transportation - over 50,000 cars per month.
>>>
>>> He was friendly, but could not start to predict a resolution on a time
>>> basis.
>>>
>>> I can see that Digital Roaming is available on part of that stretch of
>>> road. But that leads me to wonder to which carrier the roaming would
>>> switch to. Presumably Verison. Which leads me to further wonder how it
>>> is that Verison presumably has service but Sprint does not. He said
>>> that 300,000 new Nextel users are now utilizing Sprint towers.
>>> Presumably the 300,000 number is a national number. Also in that my
>>> group/company had to switch from Nextel in order to have cell phone
>>> access on this main artery in the year 2001. And that if Nextel users
>>> had not gained the ability to use cell service on this main artery,
>>> since then, that they would obviously not be now using the Sprint
>>> towers.
>>>
>>> Ooooppsss. Then again, perhaps that is exactly what is happening. All
>>> those Nextel users in LA now find that they can jump on the Sprint
>>> towers along this very busy road and the word is out and they are
>>> using their Nextel phones on this road and thus overloading the Sprint
>>> towers and PCS service basically crashes on this heavily trafficked
>>> artery.
>>>
>>> The Microcell element is interesting. I did not know about that, and
>>> it makes sense. It also makes sense that these microcell units could
>>> get more easily overloaded with new users, if the Rep is to be assumed
>>> to be correct. Late last night I used voicemail up and down the road,
>>> and the connection did not cut out. Thus I assumed it was resolved.
>>> Today, total disaster. And thanks Bob, I did also send off an email as
>>> per your link.
>>>
>>> To have ones ongoing calls killed at a relatively important points in
>>> the conversation and not be able to get the person back on the phone
>>> for 10-20 minutes, is indeed frustrating.
>>>
>>> Veronica.
>>>
>>
>>
>
- 09-07-2005, 07:49 PM #23Steve SobolGuest
Re: Amazing Sprint lapse in coverage in prime, heavily trafficedLA location - explanations ?
Bob Smith wrote:
> Amazing that ole Phillipe just can't keep his word ... isn't it?
Well, apparently...
I did check the headers to make sure it wasn't a forgery, and it seems like
it's not..
--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: [email protected] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307
- 09-07-2005, 07:52 PM #24Steve SobolGuest
Re: Amazing Sprint lapse in coverage in prime, heavily trafficedLA location - explanations ?
Veronica wrote:
>>I can tell you that it has absolutely nothing to do with the Nextel
>>merger. Both companies run different technologies and frequencies and
>>so they are not trying to combine the two together in any way.
well, Nextel's iDEN technology is not going anywhere, and they *are*
supposed to be migrating to CDMA. But it definitely hasn't happened yet.
> I can see that Digital Roaming is available on part of that stretch of
> road. But that leads me to wonder to which carrier the roaming would
> switch to. Presumably Verison. Which leads me to further wonder how it
> is that Verison presumably has service but Sprint does not. He said
> that 300,000 new Nextel users are now utilizing Sprint towers.
I don't buy that, unless they've equipped those towers for iDEN. *Current*
Nextel phones can't use the 1900 MHz CDMA technology Sprint phones already do.
--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: [email protected] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307
- 09-07-2005, 07:55 PM #25Steve SobolGuest
Re: Amazing Sprint lapse in coverage in prime, heavily trafficedLA location - explanations ?
Veronica wrote:
> It is quite frustrating. And after the large investment in Sprint
> phones and new contracts a month ago. I do wonder if Verison provides
> overall better service, if more expensive.
Their coverage is probably better, yes. But... Are your phones set up for a
business? If so, do you do business with Sprint's retail division, or their
business division? If you use the phones for business purposes anyhow, you
may end up having more success talking to clued CSRs if you switch the
account over to a business account.
Barring that, Verizon should have solid coverage. Mij Adyaw has noted some
coverage issues with Verizon in southern Orange County, and I had repair
issues with Verizon that they didn't fix for some time in the High Desert. I
imagine you should be ok in the greater Los Angeles area, though.
--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: [email protected] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307
- 09-07-2005, 08:09 PM #26VeronicaGuest
Re: Amazing Sprint lapse in coverage in prime, heavily trafficed LA location - explanations ?
Our account is not transitioned over to a business account. But,
actually, this is like Times Square in NYC not having the coverage.
There are few more heavily trafficed areas in LA. It should not be a
matter of business or not, other than the CSR. Thanks for your
continued help, I will stay on this until coverage occurs or off we go
to Verison.
V.
On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 18:55:24 -0700, Steve Sobol <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Veronica wrote:
>
>> It is quite frustrating. And after the large investment in Sprint
>> phones and new contracts a month ago. I do wonder if Verison provides
>> overall better service, if more expensive.
>
>Their coverage is probably better, yes. But... Are your phones set up for a
>business? If so, do you do business with Sprint's retail division, or their
>business division? If you use the phones for business purposes anyhow, you
>may end up having more success talking to clued CSRs if you switch the
>account over to a business account.
>
>Barring that, Verizon should have solid coverage. Mij Adyaw has noted some
>coverage issues with Verizon in southern Orange County, and I had repair
>issues with Verizon that they didn't fix for some time in the High Desert. I
>imagine you should be ok in the greater Los Angeles area, though.
- 09-07-2005, 08:35 PM #27Steve SobolGuest
Re: Amazing Sprint lapse in coverage in prime, heavily trafficedLA location - explanations ?
Veronica wrote:
> Our account is not transitioned over to a business account. But,
> actually, this is like Times Square in NYC not having the coverage.
> There are few more heavily trafficed areas in LA. It should not be a
> matter of business or not, other than the CSR.
But that's my point. If the network is broken, it's broken, but you're more
likely to get a clued CSR if you have a business account (as I understand
it, the two departments have separate CS teams).
--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: [email protected] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307
- 09-07-2005, 08:53 PM #28Mij AdyawGuest
Re: Amazing Sprint lapse in coverage in prime, heavily trafficed LA location - explanations ?
I would suggest calling *2 and asking for "Technical Support" as you will
have a better chance with getting someone that is somewhat knowledgeable
rather than talking to a customer service person. I would give that a try.
It is also possible that they do not seriously look at a problem until
enough people complain. Unfortunately most people do not complain, they just
shrug it off and say "damn cell phone dropped the call again" because they
figure that is the nature of cell phones. Therein lies the root of the
problem.
"Veronica" <Veronica4-no [email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Our account is not transitioned over to a business account. But,
> actually, this is like Times Square in NYC not having the coverage.
> There are few more heavily trafficed areas in LA. It should not be a
> matter of business or not, other than the CSR. Thanks for your
> continued help, I will stay on this until coverage occurs or off we go
> to Verison.
> V.
>
>
> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 18:55:24 -0700, Steve Sobol <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>Veronica wrote:
>>
>>> It is quite frustrating. And after the large investment in Sprint
>>> phones and new contracts a month ago. I do wonder if Verison provides
>>> overall better service, if more expensive.
>>
>>Their coverage is probably better, yes. But... Are your phones set up for
>>a
>>business? If so, do you do business with Sprint's retail division, or
>>their
>>business division? If you use the phones for business purposes anyhow, you
>>may end up having more success talking to clued CSRs if you switch the
>>account over to a business account.
>>
>>Barring that, Verizon should have solid coverage. Mij Adyaw has noted some
>>coverage issues with Verizon in southern Orange County, and I had repair
>>issues with Verizon that they didn't fix for some time in the High Desert.
>>I
>>imagine you should be ok in the greater Los Angeles area, though.
>
- 09-08-2005, 01:17 AM #29Guest
Re: Amazing Sprint lapse in coverage in prime, heavily trafficed LA location - explanations ?
Good point Mij. You are right unless they get a good number of
complaints they likely will be slow to take action. Most people don't
take the time to file a formal complaint and take it to the next level
with an actual trouble ticket number where someone higher up has to
call you back on. Best thing to do is to be persistent, keep
complaining and not give up.
- 09-08-2005, 07:52 AM #30Bob SmithGuest
Re: Amazing Sprint lapse in coverage in prime, heavily trafficed LA location - explanations ?
"Veronica" <Veronica4-no [email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 6 Sep 2005 00:39:12 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
<snipped>
>
> The Microcell element is interesting. I did not know about that, and
> it makes sense. It also makes sense that these microcell units could
> get more easily overloaded with new users, if the Rep is to be assumed
> to be correct. Late last night I used voicemail up and down the road,
> and the connection did not cut out. Thus I assumed it was resolved.
> Today, total disaster. And thanks Bob, I did also send off an email as
> per your link.
>
> To have ones ongoing calls killed at a relatively important points in
> the conversation and not be able to get the person back on the phone
> for 10-20 minutes, is indeed frustrating.
>
> Veronica.
I agree that it would be frustrating. Definitely sounds like cell shrinkage
is happening during rush hour. What I would recommend till SPCS can get more
towers in the area, is to add the F & CA option to your account for $5/mo.
That will allow for roaming, up to 50% of your monthly usage @ N/C, save for
the monthly fee.
The problem with adding new towers is the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard)
effect, and it may take some time to add additional towers.
You should be receiving a reply email back from SPCS within the next day or
so. They should mention that the email has been forwarded to the appropriate
dept. If it doesn't say that, reply immediate and ask them to forward it to
the appropriate dept.
Keep that email handy, if the problem isn't solved within a month, to send a
reply back with the incident #, asking for an update.
Bob
Phones Discussed Above
More LG Prime topics | LG Forum | Reviews |
Similar Threads
- alt.cellular.sprintpcs
- alt.cellular.sprintpcs
- alt.cellular.sprintpcs
- alt.cellular.sprintpcs
- alt.cellular.sprintpcs
Creditare Eficientă
in Chit Chat