Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

ATT/Cingular Coverage and QOS

Tags:
  • Verizon
  • At&T
  • Cingular
  • Internet Service Providers
Last response: in Network Providers
Share
Anonymous
November 30, 2004 3:48:54 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

ATT/Cingular is offering an inexpensive ($0 from Amazon and others),
well-reviewed, MS SmartPhone (the Audiovox 5600). Verizon's only
offering if the aging, overly expensive Samsung i600 for over $400 w/o
Bluetooth. I've been a Verizon customer for about 6 years now and wanted
to know from those of you in the know, if the Cingular GSM coverage is
good enough. I live in the Philly metro area and travel for work (NYC,
Orlando, Vega, etc.). Mostly metropolitan areas. Travel to the South
Jersey Shore in Summer near Cape May.

So how is their coverage, dropped calls, etc. Any thought appreciated.


--
David G.

More about : att cingular coverage qos

Anonymous
November 30, 2004 7:44:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

David G. wrote:
> ATT/Cingular is offering an inexpensive ($0 from Amazon and others),
> well-reviewed, MS SmartPhone (the Audiovox 5600). Verizon's only
> offering if the aging, overly expensive Samsung i600 for over $400 w/o
> Bluetooth. I've been a Verizon customer for about 6 years now and wanted
> to know from those of you in the know, if the Cingular GSM coverage is
> good enough. I live in the Philly metro area and travel for work (NYC,
> Orlando, Vega, etc.). Mostly metropolitan areas. Travel to the South
> Jersey Shore in Summer near Cape May.
>
> So how is their coverage, dropped calls, etc. Any thought appreciated.

Good luck getting service. Where you have service today, you probably
won't tomorrow.

That was my experience with Cingular. Your milage may vary.

JS
Anonymous
November 30, 2004 9:51:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"David G." <david_please_dont_email_me@i_hate_spam.com> wrote in message
news:m5WdnR2erZvlLzHcRVn-pA@comcast.com...
> ATT/Cingular is offering an inexpensive ($0 from Amazon and others),
> well-reviewed, MS SmartPhone (the Audiovox 5600). Verizon's only offering
> if the aging, overly expensive Samsung i600 for over $400 w/o Bluetooth.
> I've been a Verizon customer for about 6 years now and wanted to know from
> those of you in the know, if the Cingular GSM coverage is good enough. I
> live in the Philly metro area and travel for work (NYC, Orlando, Vega,
> etc.). Mostly metropolitan areas. Travel to the South Jersey Shore in
> Summer near Cape May.
>
> So how is their coverage, dropped calls, etc. Any thought appreciated.
>
>
> --
> David G.

And the reason you didn't post your query in the Cingular newsgroup
is.......................
Anonymous
November 30, 2004 9:51:40 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Special Ed wrote:
> "David G." <david_please_dont_email_me@i_hate_spam.com> wrote in
> message news:m5WdnR2erZvlLzHcRVn-pA@comcast.com...
>> ATT/Cingular is offering an inexpensive ($0 from Amazon and others),
>> well-reviewed, MS SmartPhone (the Audiovox 5600). Verizon's only
>> offering if the aging, overly expensive Samsung i600 for over $400
>> w/o Bluetooth. I've been a Verizon customer for about 6 years now
>> and wanted to know from those of you in the know, if the Cingular
>> GSM coverage is good enough. I live in the Philly metro area and
>> travel for work (NYC, Orlando, Vega, etc.). Mostly metropolitan
>> areas. Travel to the South Jersey Shore in Summer near Cape May.
>>
>> So how is their coverage, dropped calls, etc. Any thought
>> appreciated. --
>> David G.
>
> And the reason you didn't post your query in the Cingular newsgroup
> is.......................

To see if any Verizon customers had experience with ATT/Cingular. Were
you confused about that?

Not too smart are you.

--
David G.
December 1, 2004 10:09:56 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

I too have been a Verizon customer for about 6 years. I just signed with
Cingular to get the Motorola V3.

Over the Thanksgiving holiday I compared reception/coverage of both carriers
in New York, Denver, and on top of the continental divide.

I've had a couple of dropped calls on Cingular, which happens rarely with
Verizon, but all in all I have no problems to report. I also had a great
experience singing up with Cingular (no waiting and sat down! with an acutal
human professional). I also called tech support to get help setting up POP
email and had a good experience there.

The service quality is almost as good as Verizon but the technology of
Cingular's phones is really superior (bluetooth that actually works - ability
to transfer files without paying extra). So, I'm sticking with Cingular and
dumping Verizon.
Anonymous
December 1, 2004 11:15:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 14:09:56 -0500, bunny wrote
(in article <0001HW.BDD382BA001920D2F04075B0@news-server.nyc.rr.com>):

> Subject: Re: ATT/Cingular Coverage and QOS
> From: bunny <bunny@bunny.net>
> Date: Today 2:09 PM
> Newsgroups: alt.cellular.verizon
>
> I too have been a Verizon customer for about 6 years. I just signed with
> Cingular to get the Motorola V3.
>
> Over the Thanksgiving holiday I compared reception/coverage of both carriers
> in New York, Denver, and on top of the continental divide.
>
> I've had a couple of dropped calls on Cingular, which happens rarely with
> Verizon, but all in all I have no problems to report. I also had a great
> experience singing up with Cingular (no waiting and sat down! with an acutal
> human professional). I also called tech support to get help setting up POP
> email and had a good experience there.
>
> The service quality is almost as good as Verizon but the technology of
> Cingular's phones is really superior (bluetooth that actually works - ability

> to transfer files without paying extra). So, I'm sticking with Cingular and
> dumping Verizon.

Have you tried using the RAZR V3 with a Mac yet? (Curious how well it works)
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 6:04:46 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

bunny wrote:
> I too have been a Verizon customer for about 6 years. I just
> signed with Cingular to get the Motorola V3.
>
> Over the Thanksgiving holiday I compared reception/coverage of both
> carriers in New York, Denver, and on top of the continental divide.
>
> I've had a couple of dropped calls on Cingular, which happens
> rarely with Verizon, but all in all I have no problems to report.
> I also had a great experience singing up with Cingular (no waiting
> and sat down! with an acutal human professional). I also called
> tech support to get help setting up POP email and had a good
> experience there.
>
> The service quality is almost as good as Verizon but the technology
> of Cingular's phones is really superior (bluetooth that actually
> works - ability to transfer files without paying extra). So, I'm
> sticking with Cingular and dumping Verizon.

I'm continually amused by what is important to people in a phone. Having
the ability to auto synchronize or operate wirelessly some accessory is more
important than call performance ... (shakes head).

--

- Philip
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 6:04:47 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 22:04:46 -0500, Philip wrote
(in article <iDvrd.1078$Va5.213@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>):

> Subject: Re: ATT/Cingular Coverage and QOS
> From: "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net>
> Date: Yesterday 10:04 PM
> Newsgroups: alt.cellular.verizon
>
> bunny wrote:
>> I too have been a Verizon customer for about 6 years. I just
>> signed with Cingular to get the Motorola V3.
>>
>> Over the Thanksgiving holiday I compared reception/coverage of both
>> carriers in New York, Denver, and on top of the continental divide.
>>
>> I've had a couple of dropped calls on Cingular, which happens
>> rarely with Verizon, but all in all I have no problems to report.
>> I also had a great experience singing up with Cingular (no waiting
>> and sat down! with an acutal human professional). I also called
>> tech support to get help setting up POP email and had a good
>> experience there.
>>
>> The service quality is almost as good as Verizon but the technology
>> of Cingular's phones is really superior (bluetooth that actually
>> works - ability to transfer files without paying extra). So, I'm
>> sticking with Cingular and dumping Verizon.
>
> I'm continually amused by what is important to people in a phone. Having
> the ability to auto synchronize or operate wirelessly some accessory is more
> important than call performance ... (shakes head).

In all honesty I find the ability to check e-mail and SMS equally important
as call performance lately. I lecture for 8 - 12 hours per day. I can't
answer a call, but I can occasionally read a message or reply to one (usually
during breaks or when I have my students doing a lab or something.)
Just another perspective ...

My secondary importance is international roaming ... something that is a bit
of a challenge with an american CDMA telephone. It *is* something that I'm
going to have to address in the near future though. (My solution may be
something as non-elegant as buying a cheap GSM phone and a bunch of local SIM
cards.) We'll see ...
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 6:04:48 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

SinghaLvr wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 22:04:46 -0500, Philip wrote
> (in article <iDvrd.1078$Va5.213@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>):
>
>> Subject: Re: ATT/Cingular Coverage and QOS
>> From: "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net>
>> Date: Yesterday 10:04 PM
>> Newsgroups: alt.cellular.verizon
>>
>> bunny wrote:
>>> I too have been a Verizon customer for about 6 years. I just
>>> signed with Cingular to get the Motorola V3.
>>>
>>> Over the Thanksgiving holiday I compared reception/coverage of both
>>> carriers in New York, Denver, and on top of the continental divide.
>>>
>>> I've had a couple of dropped calls on Cingular, which happens
>>> rarely with Verizon, but all in all I have no problems to report.
>>> I also had a great experience singing up with Cingular (no waiting
>>> and sat down! with an acutal human professional). I also called
>>> tech support to get help setting up POP email and had a good
>>> experience there.
>>>
>>> The service quality is almost as good as Verizon but the technology
>>> of Cingular's phones is really superior (bluetooth that actually
>>> works - ability to transfer files without paying extra). So, I'm
>>> sticking with Cingular and dumping Verizon.
>>
>> I'm continually amused by what is important to people in a phone.
>> Having the ability to auto synchronize or operate wirelessly some
>> accessory is more important than call performance ... (shakes head).
>
> In all honesty I find the ability to check e-mail and SMS equally
> important as call performance lately. I lecture for 8 - 12 hours per
> day. I can't answer a call, but I can occasionally read a message or
> reply to one (usually during breaks or when I have my students doing
> a lab or something.)
> Just another perspective ...
>
> My secondary importance is international roaming ... something that
> is a bit of a challenge with an american CDMA telephone. It *is*
> something that I'm going to have to address in the near future
> though. (My solution may be something as non-elegant as buying a
> cheap GSM phone and a bunch of local SIM cards.) We'll see ...

I'm starting to think the cheapest way to make international calls is
with Vonage. Get a US number, get a virtual softphone/number from
Vonage, take it with you to Australia and as long as you have internet
access, you can talk all you want to the States - for free. The company
that makes the softphone for Vonage actually sells one for Pocket PCs,
so you could use your Pocket PC with wireless access as your phone. At
least it's lighter while you're roaming around a wireless enabled
campus.

I guess if you need to make local calls from the international location
a local phone may be the way to go.


--
David G.
December 2, 2004 2:26:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 20:15:42 -0500, SinghaLvr wrote
(in article <0001HW.BDD3D6EE000253DBF04075B0@news-50.giganews.com>):


>
> Have you tried using the RAZR V3 with a Mac yet? (Curious how well it works)
>

Yes, I use a Mac and it works just fine with iSync. You must use cable,
though (well documented nowhere but in the iSync forum on Apple's support
site).

Bluetooth works for file transfer between the phone and computer.
December 2, 2004 2:34:09 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 22:04:46 -0500, Philip wrote
(in article <iDvrd.1078$Va5.213@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>):


> I'm continually amused by what is important to people in a phone. Having
> the ability to auto synchronize or operate wirelessly some accessory is more
> important than call performance ... (shakes head).
>
>

Actually "call performance" IS quite important - which is why I've been a
Motorola user since the first Startac phone. Which is why I'm willing to
switch carriers (as long as the service in NYC is good) to get the best
Motorola phone available. (Sure they've had some clunkers but hold the V3 in
your hand for a while and you won't want to let go!)

Since most of my life is kept organized on my computer it's also important
that my phone - my second most-used technological tool - have the ability to
be up to date with my contacts and calendar.
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 3:06:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

SinghaLvr wrote:

> My secondary importance is international roaming ... something that is a bit
> of a challenge with an american CDMA telephone. It *is* something that I'm
> going to have to address in the near future though. (My solution may be
> something as non-elegant as buying a cheap GSM phone and a bunch of local SIM
> cards.) We'll see ...

Verizon now has at least one hybrid CDMA/GSM phone, but it might still be
cheaper to buy or rent a phone overseas, unless you need to have people reach
you on your US number.




--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 3:21:32 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Steve Sobol wrote:
> SinghaLvr wrote:
>
>> My secondary importance is international roaming ... something that is
>> a bit of a challenge with an american CDMA telephone. It *is*
>> something that I'm going to have to address in the near future
>> though. (My solution may be something as non-elegant as buying a
>> cheap GSM phone and a bunch of local SIM cards.) We'll see ...
>
>
> Verizon now has at least one hybrid CDMA/GSM phone,

FWIW: I believe that would be the Samsung SCH-A690.


--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 6:15:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 06:26:22 -0500, bunny wrote
(in article <0001HW.BDD466100022EF85F04075B0@news-server.nyc.rr.com>):

> Subject: Re: ATT/Cingular Coverage and QOS
> From: bunny <bunny@bunny.net>
> Date: Yesterday 6:26 AM
> Newsgroups: alt.cellular.verizon
>
> On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 20:15:42 -0500, SinghaLvr wrote
> (in article <0001HW.BDD3D6EE000253DBF04075B0@news-50.giganews.com>):
>
>
>>
>> Have you tried using the RAZR V3 with a Mac yet? (Curious how well it
>> works)
>>
>
> Yes, I use a Mac and it works just fine with iSync. You must use cable,
> though (well documented nowhere but in the iSync forum on Apple's support
> site).
>
> Bluetooth works for file transfer between the phone and computer.
>
>

Super! One last question:
Can you use Bluetooth as a wireless modem with the mac?
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 6:18:42 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 02:41:40 -0500, David G. wrote
(in article <ZNWdnbXKKb-uWjPcRVn-rw@comcast.com>):

>
> I'm starting to think the cheapest way to make international calls is
> with Vonage. Get a US number, get a virtual softphone/number from
> Vonage, take it with you to Australia and as long as you have internet
> access, you can talk all you want to the States - for free. The company
> that makes the softphone for Vonage actually sells one for Pocket PCs,
> so you could use your Pocket PC with wireless access as your phone. At
> least it's lighter while you're roaming around a wireless enabled
> campus.
>
> I guess if you need to make local calls from the international location
> a local phone may be the way to go.

.... which was my concern. (Local calls).

When I travel I'd prefer to "disappear" (even if only for a week)
Trust me ... folks will stress me out enough as soon as I get back. <sigh>
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 6:20:14 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 15:06:44 -0500, Steve Sobol wrote
(in article <consgt$ebs$1@ratbert.glorb.com>):

> Subject: Re: ATT/Cingular Coverage and QOS
> From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
> Date: Yesterday 3:06 PM
> Newsgroups: alt.cellular.verizon
>
> SinghaLvr wrote:
>
>> My secondary importance is international roaming ... something that is a
>> bit
>> of a challenge with an american CDMA telephone. It *is* something that I'm
>> going to have to address in the near future though. (My solution may be
>> something as non-elegant as buying a cheap GSM phone and a bunch of local
>> SIM
>> cards.) We'll see ...
>
> Verizon now has at least one hybrid CDMA/GSM phone, but it might still be
> cheaper to buy or rent a phone overseas, unless you need to have people reach

> you on your US number.

I thought about that phone. (It's by Samsung I think). But: Verizon wants
$1.25 per minute while roaming internationally, even for a local call. To
make matters worse they tell me that it's locked to the sim card that they
provide so I can't just pop in a local card for local calls. (Worst of both
worlds.)
Anonymous
December 6, 2004 2:26:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On 12/1/04 9:33 PM, in article 20041201213335.14386.00001263@mb-m13.aol.com,
"HHamp5246" <hhamp5246@aol.comnojunk> wrote:

> I was surprised how many blank spots ATT have out in the west.
>
> Verizon seems to have better coverage.
Not sure how accurate they are. For example, I was supposed to have little
or no ATT GSM service from Las Vegas to the Grand Canyon (if you look @
ATT's Maps). Yet I has solid service all the way to and from the Canyon...
Anonymous
December 6, 2004 2:28:17 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On 12/3/04 3:15 AM, in article
0001HW.BDD58AEC00058317F04075B0@news-50.giganews.com, "SinghaLvr"
<singhalvr@charter.net> wrote:

> Super! One last question:
> Can you use Bluetooth as a wireless modem with the mac?
Should be able to - it sets up as a Com port under the Bluetooth Setup
assistant...
Anonymous
December 6, 2004 2:29:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On 12/2/04 6:26 AM, in article
0001HW.BDD466100022EF85F04075B0@news-server.nyc.rr.com, "bunny"
<bunny@bunny.net> wrote:

> Yes, I use a Mac and it works just fine with iSync. You must use cable,
> though (well documented nowhere but in the iSync forum on Apple's support
> site).

www.apple.com/isync states that all Motorola phones need a USB cable. I
think Mot didn't support the sync profile.... One of the main reasons I got
a T637.
!