Consumer Reports Ratings are Out----Verizon top carrier in 14 outof 20 cities, T-Mobile top carrier in 3 cities

John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:24:34 -0500, "james g. keegan jr."
> <[email protected]> wrote in
> <[email protected]>:
>

>>
>>john, you're going to have a hard time shilling for cingular if you
>>continue to demonstrate your ignorance of statistics.
>
> Truth hurts that much?
>


You wouln't know the truth if it came up to you with a name tag on.

---

› See More: Consumer Reports Ratings are Out----Verizon top carrier in 14 outof 20 cities, T-Mobile top carrier in 3 cities

John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

..
>
> 'Those who have evidence will present their evidence,
> whereas those who do not have evidence will attack the man.'
>

Wait, Johnny- you forgot the rest of the quote:
"...and John Novice will continue to drink the kool-aid."

John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

...
>
> In fact that's still an issue -- lumping together different
> populations (ENS GSM, non-ENS GSM, single-band GSM, and D-AMPS
> ["TDMA"]) makes the overall results no more meaningful than the
> average of one breast per person. Likewise with Sprint Nextel --
> lumping iDEN and CDMA together is just as invalid.
>


Bull****, but keep grasping at those straws. And please don't bore us with
your google links to things you have no experience with.

John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 17:38:14 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
> wrote in <[email protected]>:
>
>>The January 2007 Consumer Reports has their annual survey of cellular
>>phone service out. They surveyed about 43,000 cellular subscribers and
>>rate the carriers in 20 metropolitan areas on metrics of coverage,
>>network congestion, dropped calls, and static.
>>
>>As in previous years, Verizon is the top carrier in most metro areas,
>>but T-Mobile and Alltel also did well in many areas.
>>
>>The most amusing part of the story is the sidebar about Cingular's
claim
>>of "fewest dropped calls." Consumer Reports states: "our own surveys
>>have found Cingular to be only about average when it comes to dropped
>>calls and one of the poorer performers in terms of overall
satisfaction."
>>
>>This annual survey is statistically the most accurate survey of
wireless
>>carriers,
>
> Actually not a good statistical sample, due to its self-selected
nature
> from a non-representative universe.

Bull****.

>
>>though J.D. Power's survey of about 24,000 users has a
>>similarly small margin of errer.
>
> Actually a fairly large margin of error, comparable in size to
> differences between carriers.


See previous comment.

>
>>JD Power reached essentially the same
>>conclusions as Consumer Reports, with Verizon and T-Mobile leading in
>>all regions.
>
> The conclusion actually reached was:
>
> As a group, the carriers still leave much to be desired, Consumer
> Reports editorialized.
>
> They scored only 66 on a scale of 100 for overall satisfaction. ...
>
> In other words, differences were relatively small and not terribly
> meaningful.
>


You forgot one other conclusion that was much clearer than those-
Cingular absolutely sucks at overall customer service.

Scott wrote:
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> ..
>> In fact that's still an issue -- lumping together different
>> populations (ENS GSM, non-ENS GSM, single-band GSM, and D-AMPS
>> ["TDMA"]) makes the overall results no more meaningful than the
>> average of one breast per person. Likewise with Sprint Nextel --
>> lumping iDEN and CDMA together is just as invalid.
>>
>
>
> Bull****, but keep grasping at those straws. And please don't bore us with
> your google links to things you have no experience with.

This one is really grasping too, since by Cingular's own admission,
there are very very few users still on TDMA, and the ones that remain
use very few minutes. Two years ago, the TDMA/AMPS users were dragging
the Cingular score up not down.

iDEN users probably do drag down Sprint's score slightly, but not all
that much since most iDEN users don't use their Nextel phones as their
primary phone. There are a lot of iDEN users with work-provided PTT
handsets, but these users know that the iDEN network is not something
that they can depend on for non-business use.

On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 20:09:53 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>
>> john, the cu report i have says otherwise.
>>
>> can you cite the source you are referring to.
>
>I have the Consumer Reports January 2007 issue in front of me.
>
>Out of 20 cities:
>
>Cingular was much worse than Verizon in Los Angeles, Miami,
>Minneapolis-St. Paul, Phoenix, San Diego, Tampa, and Washington D.C. (7
>cities).
>
>8 or more
>
>Cingular was significantly worse than Verizon in Boston, Cleveland,
>Detroit, Houston, Philadelphia, and San Francisco (6 cities).
>
>6-7
>
>Cingular was moderately worse than Verizon in Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas,
>New York, Seattle (5 cities)
>
>4-5
>
>Cingular was slightly worse than Verizon in Denver and Saint Louis (2
>cities).
>
>Obviously John is reading a different publication, or he is
>fictionalizing again.

Actually just reporting facts, instead of gross exaggerations.
Again:

As a group, the carriers still leave much to be desired, Consumer
Reports editorialized.

They scored only 66 on a scale of 100 for overall satisfaction. ...

Kindly take your inappropriate trolling to a more appropriate forum.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 19:55:37 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>
>> that's what my friend, a cingular user realized, when they needed to
>> borrow my (verizon) phone repeatedly to make calls.
>
>Yes, that often happens to me and other members of my family. It's most
>common when were in places like state and county parks, not far from our
>house, up in the Santa Cruz mountains, and at ski areas around Lake
>Tahoe.

If true, your phones need to be updated.

>However in the urban core, Cingular does okay now.

Actually the best of all carriers.

>>> No doubt Cingular wants people to think that "fewest dropped
>>> calls" means the same as "best coverage," but they never claimed to have
>>> the best coverage. Of course they don't have the fewest dropped calls
>>> either.
>>
>> and cu nailed them for that blatant misrepresentation.
>
>It was very nice to see CU nail them like that.

Hardly.

>Even though other
>reports took them to task for the lack of data from Telephia, as well as
> the Sprint lawsuit over the claim, a report like that from CU carries
>a lot more weight.

The Sprint lawsuit went nowhere.

And then we have Verizon's best network claims based solely on its own
secret internal testing, which of course lacks any credibility
whatsoever. So why not criticize Verizon?

Kindly take your Verizon trolling someplace more appropriate.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 20:48:31 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>Scott wrote:
>> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>> ..
>>> In fact that's still an issue -- lumping together different
>>> populations (ENS GSM, non-ENS GSM, single-band GSM, and D-AMPS
>>> ["TDMA"]) makes the overall results no more meaningful than the
>>> average of one breast per person. Likewise with Sprint Nextel --
>>> lumping iDEN and CDMA together is just as invalid.
>>
>> Bull****, but keep grasping at those straws. And please don't bore us with
>> your google links to things you have no experience with.
>
>This one is really grasping too, since by Cingular's own admission,
>there are very very few users still on TDMA, and the ones that remain
>use very few minutes. Two years ago, the TDMA/AMPS users were dragging
>the Cingular score up not down.
>
>iDEN users probably do drag down Sprint's score slightly, but not all
>that much since most iDEN users don't use their Nextel phones as their
>primary phone. There are a lot of iDEN users with work-provided PTT
>handsets, but these users know that the iDEN network is not something
>that they can depend on for non-business use.

Lumping together different populations (ENS GSM, non-ENS GSM,
single-band GSM, and D-AMPS ["TDMA"]) makes the overall results no more
meaningful than the average of one breast per person. Likewise iDEN and
CDMA2000.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 19:55:37 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
> wrote in <[email protected]>:
>
>>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>>
>>> that's what my friend, a cingular user realized, when they needed to
>>> borrow my (verizon) phone repeatedly to make calls.
>>
>>Yes, that often happens to me and other members of my family. It's
>>most common when were in places like state and county parks, not far
>>from our house, up in the Santa Cruz mountains, and at ski areas
>>around Lake Tahoe.
>
> If true, your phones need to be updated.

Wow- you haven't used that line in a couple of months. It used to be
your stock answer.


>
>>However in the urban core, Cingular does okay now.
>
> Actually the best of all carriers.

Source?

>
>>>> No doubt Cingular wants people to think that "fewest dropped
>>>> calls" means the same as "best coverage," but they never claimed to
>>>> have the best coverage. Of course they don't have the fewest
>>>> dropped calls either.
>>>
>>> and cu nailed them for that blatant misrepresentation.
>>
>>It was very nice to see CU nail them like that.
>
> Hardly.

Drink some more kool-aid, Johnny.

>
>>Even though other
>>reports took them to task for the lack of data from Telephia, as well
>>as
>> the Sprint lawsuit over the claim, a report like that from CU
>> carries
>>a lot more weight.
>
> The Sprint lawsuit went nowhere.
>
> And then we have Verizon's best network claims based solely on its own
> secret internal testing, which of course lacks any credibility
> whatsoever. So why not criticize Verizon?


How many times a day do you have to post this whining before it
qualifies as spam?

>
> Kindly take your Verizon trolling someplace more appropriate.

Kindly remove your head from the corporate Cingular ass.
>

In article <[email protected]>, John Navas wrote:

> And then we have Verizon's best network claims based solely on its own
> secret internal testing, which of course lacks any credibility
> whatsoever. So why not criticize Verizon?

Both companies suck, at least as far as advertising is concerned. John's
statement is true. Cingular's claim is based on an "independent report",
except that the report is from a company they paid to do the research!
Hardly independent. So they're no better.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Victorville, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED

It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.

SMS wrote:

> iDEN users probably do drag down Sprint's score slightly, but not all
> that much since most iDEN users don't use their Nextel phones as their
> primary phone. There are a lot of iDEN users with work-provided PTT
> handsets, but these users know that the iDEN network is not something
> that they can depend on for non-business use.

I saw in the CR article that they did not include iDEN customers in the
ratings, the Sprint results are solely for CDMA (and whatever AMPS
roaming Sprint customers engage in).

In article <[email protected]>,
SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

> james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>
> > john, the cu report i have says otherwise.
> >
> > can you cite the source you are referring to.
>
> I have the Consumer Reports January 2007 issue in front of me.
>
> Out of 20 cities:
>
> Cingular was much worse than Verizon in Los Angeles, Miami,
> Minneapolis-St. Paul, Phoenix, San Diego, Tampa, and Washington D.C. (7
> cities).
>
> 8 or more
>
> Cingular was significantly worse than Verizon in Boston, Cleveland,
> Detroit, Houston, Philadelphia, and San Francisco (6 cities).
>
> 6-7
>
> Cingular was moderately worse than Verizon in Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas,
> New York, Seattle (5 cities)
>
> 4-5
>
> Cingular was slightly worse than Verizon in Denver and Saint Louis (2
> cities).
>
> Obviously John is reading a different publication, or he is
> fictionalizing again.

yes, exactly my point.

On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 20:41:24 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>Steven J. Sobol wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>, John Navas wrote:
>>
>>> And then we have Verizon's best network claims based solely on its own
>>> secret internal testing, which of course lacks any credibility
>>> whatsoever. So why not criticize Verizon?
>>
>> Both companies suck, at least as far as advertising is concerned. John's
>> statement is true. Cingular's claim is based on an "independent report",
>> except that the report is from a company they paid to do the research!
>> Hardly independent. So they're no better.
>
>The difference is that Cingular's claim has no independent
>corroboration,

Data was gathered by a different company.

>and in fact has been proved to be false.

Not true.

Verizon has no corroboration at all.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 20:41:24 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
> wrote in <[email protected]>:
>
>>Steven J. Sobol wrote:
>>> In article <[email protected]>, John Navas
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> And then we have Verizon's best network claims based solely on its
>>>> own secret internal testing, which of course lacks any credibility
>>>> whatsoever. So why not criticize Verizon?
>>>
>>> Both companies suck, at least as far as advertising is concerned.
>>> John's statement is true. Cingular's claim is based on an
>>> "independent report", except that the report is from a company they
>>> paid to do the research! Hardly independent. So they're no better.
>>
>>The difference is that Cingular's claim has no independent
>>corroboration,
>
> Data was gathered by a different company.

Are you talking about the comapny paid by Cingular or another indepent
source free of the cingular pursestrings? If the latter, please provide a
name, as no source exists to back this claim up.

>
>>and in fact has been proved to be false.
>
> Not true.

Very true- read the CR report.

>
> Verizon has no corroboration at all.
>

And doesn't need it- they didn't attempt to mask the source of their data.

Steven J. Sobol wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, John Navas wrote:
>
>> And then we have Verizon's best network claims based solely on its own
>> secret internal testing, which of course lacks any credibility
>> whatsoever. So why not criticize Verizon?
>
> Both companies suck, at least as far as advertising is concerned. John's
> statement is true. Cingular's claim is based on an "independent report",
> except that the report is from a company they paid to do the research!
> Hardly independent. So they're no better.

The difference is that Cingular's claim has no independent
corroboration, and in fact has been proved to be false.

If Verizon had the coverage issues of Cingular, and claimed the most
coverage, then they'd deserve to be criticized if multiple independent
surveys found their claims to be false. If Verizon's statements about
coverage were not true, then they wouldn't have done so well in all the
independent surveys.

Sprint simply bypassed the whole issue, with their claim of "Most
Powerful Network." This was a better tactic than making unsupportable
claims about dropped calls or coverage. They used to make claims about
being "all digital" implying that this was a _good_ thing.