T-Mobile are they any good?

Huh...are they?

---

› See More: T-Mobile are they any good?

"Johnny "HitMan" Alto" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Huh...are they?
>
Why don't you ask a t-mobile group?
duh

"Johnny "HitMan" Alto" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Huh...are they?

Head to head: Cingular GSM vs T-Mobile GSM? Nope. They're no longer any good
since Cingular is now well into GSM rollout.

On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 23:52:24 -0400, "Johnny \"HitMan\" Alto"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Huh...are they?

They are terrible. For other opinions you might try the AT&T forum.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply

"Joseph" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 05:32:23 GMT, "BZP" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Johnny "HitMan" Alto" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> Huh...are they?
> >
> >Head to head: Cingular GSM vs T-Mobile GSM? Nope. They're no longer any
good
> >since Cingular is now well into GSM rollout.
>
> Which doesn't mean a thing for everyone. If you don't know you should
> know that what works for one person may not necessarily work well for
> another.

Nope. He's got a point but did not explain: Cingular coverage is now far
better than T-Mobile. Most GSM users would be better off with Cingular.

In California...T-mobile subscribers are Roaming on Cingular...as T-Mobile
HAS NO LICENSES in California..Eddie

"Johnny "HitMan" Alto" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Huh...are they?
>
>

On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 23:28:58 GMT, "Plumb Bob" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Joseph" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 05:32:23 GMT, "BZP" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Johnny "HitMan" Alto" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >news:[email protected]...
>> >> Huh...are they?
>> >
>> >Head to head: Cingular GSM vs T-Mobile GSM? Nope. They're no longer any
>good
>> >since Cingular is now well into GSM rollout.
>>
>> Which doesn't mean a thing for everyone. If you don't know you should
>> know that what works for one person may not necessarily work well for
>> another.
>
>Nope. He's got a point but did not explain: Cingular coverage is now far
>better than T-Mobile. Most GSM users would be better off with Cingular.

You evidently decided to ignore what I said in my message. I'll say
it again and it still applies. You get what works for you. Did you
get it that time? As it so happens cingular GSM in Seattle is far
worse than either T-Mobile or ATTWS. Coverage with cingular is akin
to Swiss Cheese. Blanket statements don't tend to work for everyone.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply

"Joseph" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 23:28:58 GMT, "Plumb Bob" <[email protected]> wrote:
>


> You evidently decided to ignore what I said in my message. I'll say
> it again and it still applies. You get what works for you. Did you
> get it that time? As it so happens cingular GSM in Seattle is far
> worse than either T-Mobile or ATTWS. Coverage with cingular is akin
> to Swiss Cheese.

What part of Seattle? the only bad spots I've seen were in the Rainer
valley, and a couple of holes in west Seattle. I've done well in
Ballard, Fremont, downtown, cap hill and the whole north end.

On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 07:21:04 GMT, "Bernard Farquart"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Joseph" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 23:28:58 GMT, "Plumb Bob" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>
>
>> You evidently decided to ignore what I said in my message. I'll say
>> it again and it still applies. You get what works for you. Did you
>> get it that time? As it so happens cingular GSM in Seattle is far
>> worse than either T-Mobile or ATTWS. Coverage with cingular is akin
>> to Swiss Cheese.
>
>What part of Seattle? the only bad spots I've seen were in the Rainer
>valley, and a couple of holes in west Seattle. I've done well in
>Ballard, Fremont, downtown, cap hill and the whole north end.

You just confirmed what I said again! What works for one may not work
for all. Wireless telephony is basically radio waves. If the radio
waves don't propagate well to an area you'll have problems. It
doesn't matter whether it's AT&T, cingular, Verizon or T-Mobile. All
the NIMBYs who hinder base station expansion don't help the situation
either. I know someone on Beacon Hill who gets marginal reception. A
wireless company wanted to have City Light replace a poll with an
extra tall one with mobile antennas on the taller pole. The neighbors
went into a tizzy claiming everything including the poor indigenous
critters would be harmed, etc. when it was all about their perception
that their property values would be harmed. When the wireless company
instead decided that they'd mount the mobile antennas on a high
tension transmission tower nearby they also went into fits even though
the electromagnetic radiation from the transmission lines was far
greater than anything that would be transmitted from the mobile
installation.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply

I don't know who the carrier is that has one of those high voltage tower top
installations here near Clemson, SC, but its amazing to me that even works
at all with the the electric and magnetic fields there already.

Do they turn the power off when installing the antenna array above the high
voltage lines?

I'm sure they don't turn power off when the antennas get serviced now.
Those cellphone tower companies and climbers earn their pay!

joshiii
upstate south carolina




"Joseph" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> <snip>
> When the wireless company
> instead decided that they'd mount the mobile antennas on a high
> tension transmission tower nearby they also went into fits even though
> the electromagnetic radiation from the transmission lines was far
> greater than anything that would be transmitted from the mobile
> installation.

t-mobile is ok, i noticed on my bill dey put alot of things on there that i never did, they screwed me over a couple times, but they also have some advantages to them too

T-mobile is the best!

t-mobile acquired all of cingulars california liscences, and t-mobile has by far the most advanced gsm network since heyve had it for seven years, whereas cinglar has had it for a few months with att. Cingular bought out att because they needed the expanded coverage and because of the tight agreements they had with att.
Still, like someone said before, it depends on what works for you, not just a general statement on whos better

I love T-Mobile!