Honest Question

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

I'm going to try not to be a troll here, I swear...
I'd like to hear some feedback as to why you all chose Cingular over
services that have either a (proven) much larger network, (Verizon
Wireless), or a service that basically wrote the book (in the US at least)
on having the most advanced and data capable handsets on the market (Sprint
PCS)?

By the way, where did you make your purchase? Has anyone noticed that the
largest wireless phone retailer in the US (and has been since wireless came
about) carries prodominently Sprint PCS and Verizon? Wouldn't people take
advice from them rather than some no name booth in a mall somewhere?

Try not to flame me too much! :) I'm honestly just trying to start a topic.
42 answers Last reply
More about honest question
  1. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    One of the accounts I have with Cingular I've had for nine years. It was
    originally SNET out of CT. At that time there were only two services in
    western MA and SNET was the only one that covered my town. It became
    Cellular One and then Cingular. I've had great service from them since day
    one in my home area and traveling up and down the east coast. I wouldn't
    even consider leaving Cingular. I've also had a Sprint PCS account since
    last year and I've been very pleased with them to.

    As far as Verizon, although their maps show coverage where I live, putting
    in my zip code at their site says they don't cover my town. I wouldn't
    switch anyway. They are too expensive and I don't like their selection of
    phones.


    "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:ceGdnV6WsY3JIend4p2dnA@comcast.com...
    : I'm going to try not to be a troll here, I swear...
    : I'd like to hear some feedback as to why you all chose Cingular over
    : services that have either a (proven) much larger network, (Verizon
    : Wireless), or a service that basically wrote the book (in the US at
    least)
    : on having the most advanced and data capable handsets on the market
    (Sprint
    : PCS)?
    :
    : By the way, where did you make your purchase? Has anyone noticed that
    the
    : largest wireless phone retailer in the US (and has been since wireless
    came
    : about) carries prodominently Sprint PCS and Verizon? Wouldn't people
    take
    : advice from them rather than some no name booth in a mall somewhere?
    :
    : Try not to flame me too much! :) I'm honestly just trying to start a
    topic.
    :
    :
  2. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    Hmm...well I've been doing my business with RadioShack for years, and did in
    fact make my personal wireless purchase there. I can't think of any other
    electronics store that has been in business as long as them. 70 years is
    it? My point here is that I'm sure they more often than not, have the
    customer in mind, probably one of the ways that they've managed to stay
    alive through this economy.
    Take my word for it though folks, where you buy your phone makes a huge
    difference on owning your phone. The nearest Carrier owned store is a solid
    hour away, and typically has wait times. A sketchy kiosk in a mall doesn't
    have any interest in helping you out with any kind of hardware probs or
    questions you might have after you've signed up. All they do is tell you to
    call customer service. yuck.
    My point on the whole Radioshack discussion was that they have without a
    doubt the most credibility in the wireless industry, as they practically
    invented it. Does it not make sense to take a cue from them, at the very
    least?

    "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:ceGdnV6WsY3JIend4p2dnA@comcast.com...
    > I'm going to try not to be a troll here, I swear...
    > I'd like to hear some feedback as to why you all chose Cingular over
    > services that have either a (proven) much larger network, (Verizon
    > Wireless), or a service that basically wrote the book (in the US at least)
    > on having the most advanced and data capable handsets on the market
    (Sprint
    > PCS)?
    >
    > By the way, where did you make your purchase? Has anyone noticed that the
    > largest wireless phone retailer in the US (and has been since wireless
    came
    > about) carries prodominently Sprint PCS and Verizon? Wouldn't people
    take
    > advice from them rather than some no name booth in a mall somewhere?
    >
    > Try not to flame me too much! :) I'm honestly just trying to start a
    topic.
    >
    >
  3. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    In article <ceGdnV6WsY3JIend4p2dnA@comcast.com>,
    "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote:

    > I'm going to try not to be a troll here, I swear...
    > I'd like to hear some feedback as to why you all chose Cingular over
    > services that have either a (proven) much larger network, (Verizon
    > Wireless), or a service that basically wrote the book (in the US at least)
    > on having the most advanced and data capable handsets on the market (Sprint
    > PCS)?
    >
    > By the way, where did you make your purchase? Has anyone noticed that the
    > largest wireless phone retailer in the US (and has been since wireless came
    > about) carries prodominently Sprint PCS and Verizon? Wouldn't people take
    > advice from them rather than some no name booth in a mall somewhere?

    I am sure Radio Shack carries brands based on profittability for
    themselves not on any altruistic motives.
  4. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:ceGdnV6WsY3JIend4p2dnA@comcast.com...
    > I'm going to try not to be a troll here, I swear...
    > I'd like to hear some feedback as to why you all chose Cingular over
    > services that have either a (proven) much larger network, (Verizon
    > Wireless), or a service that basically wrote the book (in the US at least)
    > on having the most advanced and data capable handsets on the market
    (Sprint
    > PCS)?
    >
    > By the way, where did you make your purchase? Has anyone noticed that the
    > largest wireless phone retailer in the US (and has been since wireless
    came
    > about) carries prodominently Sprint PCS and Verizon? Wouldn't people
    take
    > advice from them rather than some no name booth in a mall somewhere?
    >
    > Try not to flame me too much! :) I'm honestly just trying to start a
    topic.

    To me, it does not matter where the purchase is made. It can be on the
    internet, at a mall kiosk, or a store. It does not matter. What counts is
    that the company must have a money back policy so I can try their service
    without obligation for at least two weeks. I was on SprintPCS once - but the
    coverage and voice quality was awful - with a really silly short message
    system where you had to basically log onto the internet to send a short
    message. Really STUPID.

    So I learnt that the fancy desk at Radio Shack does not impress me much. Buy
    it, try it. If you don't like it then return it...
  5. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:ceGdnV6WsY3JIend4p2dnA@comcast.com...
    > I'm going to try not to be a troll here, I swear...
    > I'd like to hear some feedback as to why you all chose Cingular over
    > services that have either a (proven) much larger network, (Verizon
    > Wireless), or a service that basically wrote the book (in the US at least)
    > on having the most advanced and data capable handsets on the market
    (Sprint
    > PCS)?
    >
    > By the way, where did you make your purchase? Has anyone noticed that the
    > largest wireless phone retailer in the US (and has been since wireless
    came
    > about) carries prodominently Sprint PCS and Verizon? Wouldn't people
    take
    > advice from them rather than some no name booth in a mall somewhere?
    >
    > Try not to flame me too much! :) I'm honestly just trying to start a
    topic.
    >
    I got cingular when they moved into the Seattle
    market because they had the lowest price, and I
    was waiting for cell phones to reach my personal
    price point.(at the time 29.99) I am nearing the end
    of my second contract (three 1/2 years later) I have
    had good coverage, no billing issues to speak of,
    and good coverage that seems to be improving
    as time goes on. I bought my phone at a corporate
    store, not a booth in a mall.

    Bernard
  6. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    Is it just me or has anyone else noticed how soon after a post
    Phillie, Robert M, etc of his 59_ names he uses.

    Kev wrote:
    > I'd like to hear some feedback as to why you all chose Cingular over
    > services that have either a (proven) much larger network, (Verizon
    > Wireless), or a service that basically wrote the book (in the US at least)
    > on having the most advanced and data capable handsets on the market (Sprint
    > PCS)?

    Those here that chose Cingular would be the same reason why people
    in the Sprint and AT&T NGs chose their respective carrier - whatever
    product works best for them.

    The size of a carrier's network is irrelevent as everyone partners
    coverage with each other and the customer could care less. All
    carriers blanket the NFL cities - a term used about 20 years ago
    to describe the initial rollouts in the top National Football League
    cities.

    It doesn't matter who "wrote the book", TDMA is TDMA and CDMA is CDMA.

    I use Cingular for work because parent company owns a Radio Shack
    franchise and sells Cingular which is the only carrier that offers
    local numbers in the county, but Sprint has better network coverage.

    I use Sprint for my personal use because I need the unlimited internet
    access and not have to pay $5 everytime I view a weather radar image

    > By the way, where did you make your purchase? Has anyone noticed that the
    > largest wireless phone retailer in the US (and has been since wireless came
    > about) carries prodominently Sprint PCS and Verizon?

    If you're referring to Radio Shack, they used to offer Cingular. And if
    they are the largest retailer, its because of store penetration.
  7. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    Hmmm. Over the years, I have used GTE (changed to Cingular here), ATTWS and
    Verizon. they all had their warts, as does Cingular. I just moved from
    ATTWS to Cingular, and strongly considered both Sprint and Verizon. For
    some reason, Verizon does not work in the building I work in. Spring has
    poor coverage near my house. ATTWS is too damn expensive (1-rate) and their
    GSM coverage is spotty in the area. Cingular works for me. In the end, it
    isn't the technology, it boils down to whether it works where you use it.
    Also, those rollover minutes are a pretty good deal!


    "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:ceGdnV6WsY3JIend4p2dnA@comcast.com...
    > I'm going to try not to be a troll here, I swear...
    > I'd like to hear some feedback as to why you all chose Cingular over
    > services that have either a (proven) much larger network, (Verizon
    > Wireless), or a service that basically wrote the book (in the US at least)
    > on having the most advanced and data capable handsets on the market
    (Sprint
    > PCS)?
    >
    > By the way, where did you make your purchase? Has anyone noticed that the
    > largest wireless phone retailer in the US (and has been since wireless
    came
    > about) carries prodominently Sprint PCS and Verizon? Wouldn't people
    take
    > advice from them rather than some no name booth in a mall somewhere?
    >
    > Try not to flame me too much! :) I'm honestly just trying to start a
    topic.
    >
    >
  8. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    "Kev" <Axekick> wrote in message news:ceGdnV6WsY3JIend4p2dnA@comcast.com...
    > I'm going to try not to be a troll here, I swear...
    > I'd like to hear some feedback as to why you all chose Cingular over
    > services that have either a (proven) much larger network, (Verizon
    > Wireless), or a service that basically wrote the book (in the US at least)
    > on having the most advanced and data capable handsets on the market
    (Sprint
    > PCS)?
    >
    > By the way, where did you make your purchase? Has anyone noticed that the
    > largest wireless phone retailer in the US (and has been since wireless
    came
    > about) carries prodominently Sprint PCS and Verizon? Wouldn't people
    take
    > advice from them rather than some no name booth in a mall somewhere?
    >
    > Try not to flame me too much! :) I'm honestly just trying to start a
    topic.
    >
    >

    I'd like to know how it's supposedly been "proven" that VZW has a much
    larger Network. I've had VZW for years. I'm currently a Cingular GSM
    Nation customer. I travel all over the country (required to, by work).
    Verizon has overall good coverage. But they do NOT have better coverage
    than Cingular GSM. At worst, the few dead spots I've noticed on Cingular
    were in the exact same areas that VZW has dead spots. Also on a recent road
    trip, we had to let a friend use our Cingular handset to make her phone
    calls as she had no signal on her VZW handset . . . anywhere in the state!!!
    If you compare VZW to Cingular GSM nation with an objective mind, there is
    no way you would state with a straight face that VZW has better coverage.
    Of course, either carrier might have better coverage in certain locations.
    So the more travelling you do, the more likely you are to conclude that they
    are equal, coverage wise.

    As for data services . . . I was reading an article recently about new data
    services technologies that are aimed at cellular phone users. The gist of
    the article was, these services are going to be a huge flop, as the vast
    majority of cellular phone users don't care about data services. I agree
    with that assessment. I'm addicted to the Internet, and I wouldn't want to
    use it on a cellular phone. Even most heavy Internet users would rather
    wait till they get home to their broadband (wired) connection to check their
    e-mail, etc. I had to laugh my ass off when Nokia recently upgraded some of
    their handsets to be AOL IM compatible. I'd gladly pay Nokia to REMOVE that
    particular bug, errrrr . . . feature. Of course, the obvious result of this
    is that now your movie is going to be interrupted by some teeny bopper not
    TALKING on the cell phone, but rather sending IM (brrrrring!!!!, pause pause
    pause, brrrrring!!!!, pause, brrrrring!!!!, pause pause pause pause pause
    pause pause pause, brrrrring!!!!)

    Oh, when I went to sign up for Cingular, I actually signed up at a local
    Mom&Pop type store that offers Cingular Wireless (plus all phones and tons
    of accessories) and Dish Network satellite TV (plus all hardware). I gave
    them my business as they were very patient in answering dozens of questions
    from both me and my wife about the Cingular service. Although we had to
    leave Verizon, we wanted to make SURE our new service (whoever that might
    be) was going to be right for us. After answering all of our detailled
    questions to our satisfaction, the free trial period was enough to convince
    us to go for it. No regrets.

    Oh, and we had to leave Verizon due to frequent, outrageous billing errors
    that were causing our monthly bill to be double or triple what it should be.
    The last straw for us was Verizon admitting that it was their problem and
    still refusing to correct it. Basically what it boiled down to is that
    certain calls made ON THE VERIZON WIRELESS NETWORK (not roaming) were being
    billed months later than they should have been. Thus, we would have very
    low minute usage in certain months and incredibly high minute usage in other
    months, because of Verizon billing errors. If it wasn't for these billing
    errors, we would never have gone over our "anytime" minutes. Verizon came
    right out and admitted to me that it was a billing problem on their end, and
    that they refused to fix it. So I had to fix it for them. I don't deal
    with Verizon's intentional billing errors anymore. I pity anybody who just
    signed a long-term contract with VZW. They'll getcha . . . just wait.
    (evil grin)

    -Dave
  9. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote
    > I'd like to hear some feedback as to why you all chose Cingular

    I chose Cingular for one reason: they prorate the cancellation penalty
    on the contract, whereas with all the others keep the full penalty to
    the end of the contract. Since it was my first cell phone, that was
    significant to me. (If it's significant to you, then obviously you
    have to check that it's true now in your location.)

    I didn't see anything else to choose among them. Then and now, I hear
    good things and horror stories about all of them. I have my own horror
    story about Cingular, but I don't have any illusion that any of the
    others would be better. Based on everything I read, all have highly
    variable support and plenty of horror stories.

    Edward
  10. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    In article <P5ednf61y4pw2OjdRVn-hQ@comcast.com>,
    "Dave C." <spammersdie@ahorribledeath.now> wrote:

    > If you compare VZW to Cingular GSM nation with an objective mind, there is
    > no way you would state with a straight face that VZW has better coverage.

    However a Verizon phone most likely would allow you to roam on in analog
    area, whereas Cingular GSM phones do not have analog capability at all.
    Next time suggest your friend with Verizon allow their phone to use
    roaming.
  11. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 12:55:22 GMT, "Robert M." <rmarkoff@msn.com>
    wrote:

    >In article <P5ednf61y4pw2OjdRVn-hQ@comcast.com>,
    > "Dave C." <spammersdie@ahorribledeath.now> wrote:
    >
    >> If you compare VZW to Cingular GSM nation with an objective mind, there is
    >> no way you would state with a straight face that VZW has better coverage.
    >
    >However a Verizon phone most likely would allow you to roam on in analog
    >area, whereas Cingular GSM phones do not have analog capability at all.
    >Next time suggest your friend with Verizon allow their phone to use
    >roaming.

    Verizon is now selling phones without analog AMPS.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
  12. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    Before you start making generalizations like the Verizon/Sprint comments you
    need to do more research!

    The reason I switched from Verizon, customer since they were formed from
    Airtouch about 6 yrs ago, was that Cingular had better phones feature wise
    (in my opinion), same quality of service in my area and a good family plan.


    "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:ceGdnV6WsY3JIend4p2dnA@comcast.com...
    > I'm going to try not to be a troll here, I swear...
    > I'd like to hear some feedback as to why you all chose Cingular over
    > services that have either a (proven) much larger network, (Verizon
    > Wireless), or a service that basically wrote the book (in the US at least)
    > on having the most advanced and data capable handsets on the market
    (Sprint
    > PCS)?
    >
    > By the way, where did you make your purchase? Has anyone noticed that the
    > largest wireless phone retailer in the US (and has been since wireless
    came
    > about) carries prodominently Sprint PCS and Verizon? Wouldn't people
    take
    > advice from them rather than some no name booth in a mall somewhere?
    >
    > Try not to flame me too much! :) I'm honestly just trying to start a
    topic.
    >
    >
  13. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    In article <h5la7092g0gontanirug6jufirvi54mqk4@4ax.com>,
    Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom> wrote:

    > On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 12:55:22 GMT, "Robert M." <rmarkoff@msn.com>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >In article <P5ednf61y4pw2OjdRVn-hQ@comcast.com>,
    > > "Dave C." <spammersdie@ahorribledeath.now> wrote:
    > >
    > >> If you compare VZW to Cingular GSM nation with an objective mind, there is
    > >> no way you would state with a straight face that VZW has better coverage.
    > >
    > >However a Verizon phone most likely would allow you to roam on in analog
    > >area, whereas Cingular GSM phones do not have analog capability at all.
    > >Next time suggest your friend with Verizon allow their phone to use
    > >roaming.
    >
    > Verizon is now selling phones without analog AMPS.

    just a few, and I did not say "ALL", I said "most likely".
  14. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    > I'd like to hear some feedback as to why you all chose Cingular over
    >services that have either a (proven) much larger network, (Verizon
    >Wireless), or a service that basically wrote the book (in the US at least)
    >on having the most advanced and data capable handsets on the market (Sprint
    PCS)

    Well, my wife and son both have Cingular. We live way out in the country about
    80 miles South East of Dallas.

    My wife was first and I got her phone from Cingular when they were SBMS because
    they were the only ones that had a tower withing 10 miles of our home. Since
    she works in the same general vicinity it made sense at the time to get her
    their service.

    When my son started driving, we wanted him to have a cell phone and he was
    added to her account.

    >By the way, where did you make your purchase?

    Directly from SBMS/Cingular. Upgrades over the years have typically come free
    of charge and both of their phones now are the 3560's with different faceplates
    to tell them apart.

    >Has anyone noticed that the
    >largest wireless phone retailer in the US (and has been since wireless came
    >about) carries prodominently Sprint PCS and Verizon?

    I have noticed that and quite often send people there to buy a phone because of
    the way that they handle warranty issues.

    >Wouldn't people take
    >advice from them rather than some no name booth in a mall somewhere?

    Maybe.... but then again, the Radio Shack people are little more than the same
    people that worked at the Kiosk in the mall last week.

    In our "family", we have the 2 Cingular phones mentioned above and my partners
    daughter has a 6340i, again because of where we live and travel. I have a
    Sprint PCS phone and my partner and his wife both have Sprint PCS phones on
    that same account. I have an AT&T WS TDMA DOR plan and more recently a $29.99
    GSM plan with AT&T WS. I also carry a GSM "Test Phone" provided by AT&T WS for
    the work I am doing for them at this time. Finally, I also have T-Mobile with
    their 1000 minute plan and use that SIM in a Merlin G100 air card as well.

    I have never had Verizon and probably won't ever have them. I have done a lot
    of work for Verizon over the years and most of the people that I know that have
    Verizon are currently having problems. ALL the people in my companies office in
    North Carolina have Verizon and you typically can't carry on a conversation
    with them without having to re-establish the connection 2 or 3 or more times
    depending on the length of the conversation.

    How do I rate the various services? Well, I would rate them based on MY
    experience over the years.

    1. would be Sprint PCS. The clarity of the calls is great and many times the
    people on the other end of the line can't even tell I am on a cell phone.
    Although much has been written about the poor customer service, I find that
    other than long hold times. once connected, it is ok. But then again I seldom
    call them.

    2. would be AT&T WS's TDMA/AMPS service and their DOR plan which seems to
    simply work all over the country. Working on and in their GSM system makes me
    know that it is great where they have coverage but if you are off the beaten
    path at all, the chances that you will have a signal are nill.

    3. would be T-Mobile. Where they haev service it is rock solid and their
    customer service is prompt and courteous.

    4. At the bottom of the list would be Cingular. Where they offer service that
    my family members use, the service is good. However I fault any company that
    only has customer service (611) available during "regular" business hours and
    not 24 hours a day every day of the year like everyone else.

    YMMV

    --
    John S.
    e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net
  15. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    > 2. would be AT&T WS's TDMA/AMPS service and their DOR plan which seems to
    > simply work all over the country. Working on and in their GSM system makes
    me
    > know that it is great where they have coverage but if you are off the
    beaten
    > path at all, the chances that you will have a signal are nill.
    >
    > 3. would be T-Mobile. Where they haev service it is rock solid and their
    > customer service is prompt and courteous.
    >
    > 4. At the bottom of the list would be Cingular.

    http://www.internetnews.com/wireless/article.php/3313351
  16. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    >Verizon is now selling phones without analog AMPS.

    They (and Sprint PCS) always has sold phones without AMPS.

    --
    John S.
    e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net
  17. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    In article <20040408110247.04031.00000010@mb-m01.aol.com>,
    sexyexotiche@aol.comspamfree (John S.) wrote:

    > >Verizon is now selling phones without analog AMPS.
    >
    > They (and Sprint PCS) always has sold phones without AMPS.

    90% of each of their phones models and absolute numbers are sold with
    Amps. I cant even recall a SprintPCS phone other than the Treo 600
    without amps.
  18. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    In article <20040408105645.04031.00000009@mb-m01.aol.com>,
    sexyexotiche@aol.comspamfree (John S.) wrote:

    > Maybe.... but then again, the Radio Shack people are little more than the same
    > people that worked at the Kiosk in the mall last week.

    Some Mall kiosks are in fact owned and operated by Radio Shack.
  19. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 03:00:57 GMT, "Robert M." <rmarkoff@msn.com>
    wrote:

    >In article <ceGdnV6WsY3JIend4p2dnA@comcast.com>,
    > "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote:
    >
    >> I'm going to try not to be a troll here, I swear...
    >> I'd like to hear some feedback as to why you all chose Cingular over
    >> services that have either a (proven) much larger network, (Verizon
    >> Wireless), or a service that basically wrote the book (in the US at least)
    >> on having the most advanced and data capable handsets on the market (Sprint
    >> PCS)?
    >>
    >> By the way, where did you make your purchase? Has anyone noticed that the
    >> largest wireless phone retailer in the US (and has been since wireless came
    >> about) carries prodominently Sprint PCS and Verizon? Wouldn't people take
    >> advice from them rather than some no name booth in a mall somewhere?
    >
    >I am sure Radio Shack carries brands based on profittability for
    >themselves not on any altruistic motives.

    Since you asked. First of all is will the phone work (can you make and
    receive calls) from where you are and where you normally go. I does
    not make any difference how great or cheap the plan is, if it won't
    work where you are you might as well not have it.

    Do some web research on any big company and you will see there are
    many people who got screwed by that company no matter what that
    company is. I love and have bought many sets of Michelin tires, but
    there are many people who have been screwed by them, same goes for
    Goodyear, Firestone or any other manufacturer. So, if i do enough
    research there are horrible stories about every tire company. Does
    this mean that I won't buy tires, hardly....

    Same with phones, but fortunately most of use do not have to have a
    wireless phone, makes life easier, in most cases.

    So, i talked to everyone I know and asked them what they had and how
    they like it. I visit a nearby city often and Sprint does not have
    coverage there at all... no point in getting a phone from sprint at
    this time. Borrowed a friends Cingular phone to make sure it worked
    where I live.... it is not on a cingular tower, so I can't dial all
    the quickie numbers like *MIN# and *BIL#, but i can call the 800
    number and find out the same things. I went with the shortest time I
    could find for a service agreement. The shorter the better. I bought
    my phone off of ebay for $24.99 plus shipping with no sim chip, extra
    battery and car charger and earpieceand home charger. Cingular dealer
    said that sometimes sim chip has previous owners charges in it. I
    think he charged me $21.20 for the new sim chip, price is in my
    checkbook and i'm not going to look it up.

    It is also my understanding that on June 11 Cingular is going to
    release 20 new smart phones and they will be GSM... at least that is
    what or nearly what several Cingular stores and dealers told me.

    I'll cut to the chase, if you poll all of your friends and see how
    happy they are with what they have then attempt to make a informed
    decision and get the shortest term of service you can.... If you
    screwed up then you can change carriers sooner.

    Good Luck (you will need it)

    painfully new
  20. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    In article <m4tb70tqlni5oh3fm0e1emquc0u1kfp47s@4ax.com>,
    painfully@a.noo.one wrote:

    > It is also my understanding that on June 11 Cingular is going to
    > release 20 new smart phones and they will be GSM... at least that is
    > what or nearly what several Cingular stores and dealers told me.


    Rule #1: Don't buy promises.
  21. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    >
    > I'll cut to the chase, if you poll all of your friends and see how
    > happy they are with what they have then attempt to make a informed
    > decision and get the shortest term of service you can.... If you
    > screwed up then you can change carriers sooner.
    >
    > Good Luck (you will need it)
    >
    > painfully new

    I don't think it's necessary to go for a short contract. Rule number one is
    to not sign any contract that you can't back out of within a free trial
    period. Use the heck out of the phone during the free trial period, making
    calls (even short ones) from everywhere you'd normally go in a typical week.
    If you don't encounter any dead zones or other problems you can't live with,
    you are probably good to go. -Dave
  22. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    In article <QZSdnT1vIauTzuvdRVn-ig@comcast.com>,
    "Dave C." <spammersdie@ahorribledeath.now> wrote:

    > I don't think it's necessary to go for a short contract. Rule number one is
    > to not sign any contract that you can't back out of within a free trial
    > period.

    There is no FREE TRIAL period. There is a trial period for the phone,
    but between activation and useage charges, your trial period in mosts
    cases ending up costing ~$100.
  23. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    On Fri, 9 Apr 2004 03:38:59 -0400, "Dave C."
    <spammersdie@ahorribledeath.now> wrote:

    >>
    >> I'll cut to the chase, if you poll all of your friends and see how
    >> happy they are with what they have then attempt to make a informed
    >> decision and get the shortest term of service you can.... If you
    >> screwed up then you can change carriers sooner.
    >>
    >> Good Luck (you will need it)
    >>
    >> painfully new
    >
    >I don't think it's necessary to go for a short contract. Rule number one is
    >to not sign any contract that you can't back out of within a free trial
    >period. Use the heck out of the phone during the free trial period, making
    >calls (even short ones) from everywhere you'd normally go in a typical week.
    >If you don't encounter any dead zones or other problems you can't live with,
    >you are probably good to go. -Dave

    I respect your opinion, but, The wireless phone market changes on a
    daily basis, what might be a good deal today even the best, might look
    pretty bad 18 months from now. The shorter the contract the better
    IMHO.

    painfully new
    >
  24. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    "> There is no FREE TRIAL period. There is a trial period for the phone,
    > but between activation and useage charges, your trial period in mosts
    > cases ending up costing ~$100."

    This is not the case at all....again, my local Radioshack offers a
    choice of Sprint PCS and Verizon Wireless. SprintPCS offers what they call
    their "Coverage Challange". Basically, the folks at RadioShack activate a
    wireless phone of your choice right there in the store for you, give you
    Instant Rebates on it, and Sprints STILL lets you try it for 2 weeks. If
    you can't get coverage in the places you work, live, etc, you can return it
    to any of over 7,000 RadioShack stores for a full refund on the phone, and
    accessories, and you are billed absolutely NOTHING. No activation fee! No
    usage fees!!! Not even any annoying taxes, etc!
    Verizon offers a similar trial. Same thing on RadioShacks end, but
    they may charge you a prorated fee for the 2 week trial. They don't however
    charge you the activation fee.


    "Robert M." <rmarkoff@msn.com> wrote in message
    news:rmarkoff-821318.05222609042004@news6.west.earthlink.net...
    > In article <QZSdnT1vIauTzuvdRVn-ig@comcast.com>,
    > "Dave C." <spammersdie@ahorribledeath.now> wrote:
    >
    > > I don't think it's necessary to go for a short contract. Rule number
    one is
    > > to not sign any contract that you can't back out of within a free trial
    > > period.
    >
    > There is no FREE TRIAL period. There is a trial period for the phone,
    > but between activation and useage charges, your trial period in mosts
    > cases ending up costing ~$100.
  25. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    Theer was like 2..maybe 3 models that didn't have analog access...Kinda
    makes my point though...The fact that Sprint and Verizon allow analog access
    along with their own (again superior, can't believe THAT point is even
    challanged) coverage, makes them more reliable for coverage than gsm could
    ever hope. Period.
    "Robert M." <rmarkoff@msn.com> wrote in message
    news:rmarkoff-7C7436.10434208042004@news6.west.earthlink.net...
    > In article <20040408110247.04031.00000010@mb-m01.aol.com>,
    > sexyexotiche@aol.comspamfree (John S.) wrote:
    >
    > > >Verizon is now selling phones without analog AMPS.
    > >
    > > They (and Sprint PCS) always has sold phones without AMPS.
    >
    > 90% of each of their phones models and absolute numbers are sold with
    > Amps. I cant even recall a SprintPCS phone other than the Treo 600
    > without amps.
  26. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    On Fri, 9 Apr 2004 18:20:52 -0400, "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote:

    >Theer was like 2..maybe 3 models that didn't have analog access...Kinda
    >makes my point though...The fact that Sprint and Verizon allow analog access
    >along with their own (again superior, can't believe THAT point is even
    >challanged) coverage, makes them more reliable for coverage than gsm could
    >ever hope. Period.

    Not unless analog AMPS backup is in the picture.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
  27. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    Awesome feedback from everyone! More posts coming?

    "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:ceGdnV6WsY3JIend4p2dnA@comcast.com...
    > I'm going to try not to be a troll here, I swear...
    > I'd like to hear some feedback as to why you all chose Cingular over
    > services that have either a (proven) much larger network, (Verizon
    > Wireless), or a service that basically wrote the book (in the US at least)
    > on having the most advanced and data capable handsets on the market
    (Sprint
    > PCS)?
    >
    > By the way, where did you make your purchase? Has anyone noticed that the
    > largest wireless phone retailer in the US (and has been since wireless
    came
    > about) carries prodominently Sprint PCS and Verizon? Wouldn't people
    take
    > advice from them rather than some no name booth in a mall somewhere?
    >
    > Try not to flame me too much! :) I'm honestly just trying to start a
    topic.
    >
    >
  28. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    In article <WeudnVlJDLWQverdRVn-sQ@comcast.com>,
    "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote:

    > "> There is no FREE TRIAL period. There is a trial period for the phone,
    > > but between activation and useage charges, your trial period in mosts
    > > cases ending up costing ~$100."
    >
    > This is not the case at all....again, my local Radioshack offers a
    > choice of Sprint PCS and Verizon Wireless. SprintPCS offers what they call
    > their "Coverage Challange".

    and the URL for this is where? Its not anywhere on the Sprint or
    RadioShack web site or anywhere that Google knows about.
  29. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    "Robert M." <rmarkoff@msn.com> wrote in message
    news:rmarkoff-96AD89.17232309042004@news6.west.earthlink.net...
    > In article <WeudnVlJDLWQverdRVn-sQ@comcast.com>,
    > "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote:
    >
    > > "> There is no FREE TRIAL period. There is a trial period for the phone,
    > > > but between activation and useage charges, your trial period in mosts
    > > > cases ending up costing ~$100."
    > >
    > > This is not the case at all....again, my local Radioshack offers a
    > > choice of Sprint PCS and Verizon Wireless. SprintPCS offers what they
    call
    > > their "Coverage Challange".
    >
    > and the URL for this is where? Its not anywhere on the Sprint or
    > RadioShack web site or anywhere that Google knows about.

    Why does there have to be a URL? Ever heard of local promotions?
  30. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    Scott Stephenson wrote:

    > Why does there have to be a URL? Ever heard of local promotions?

    Philipe, Robert M., Cell Merger, et all...must be doing a Google
    search with his apologist filter turned on, thus preventing him
    from finding anything good about Sprint.
  31. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    > and the URL for this is where? Its not anywhere on the Sprint or
    > RadioShack web site or anywhere that Google knows about.

    Do you have a car? Drive to RS, or if you actually have a Sprint corporate
    store in your neighborhood, drive there, and ask.... Better yet, try one
    out! Get one of the phones with Ready Link (sprints version of nextels
    walkie talkie) really cool feature...don't worry though, Cingular will
    probably get it eventually!
  32. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    Right, that's kinda what we're saying..cause it is in the picture on both
    services...Must be nice, huh?

    > Not unless analog AMPS backup is in the picture.
    >
    > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    > remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
  33. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    My local RS store was a Cingular dealer a few years ago. They told me they
    switched to Sprint because the corp struck a more lucrative deal with
    Sprint. Nothing to do with superior technology -- just a better financial
    arrangement. That's how business is usually conducted in this country.

    Also, when I go into an RS store to make a purchase, I am usually served by
    young fellas that know basically nothing about the technology other than the
    features they have been trained to sell. Because I have been an EE for
    nearly 30 years and know a lot about various technologies, I get a kick when
    I patiently listen to them try to sell me on technology they know nearly
    nothing about. I don't fault them. They are salespeople and not trained to
    know the underlying technologies.

    My point is, that despite 70 years having been a retailer of consumer
    electronics, RS is still simply a retailer just like the kiosks, corporate
    stores, etc. As anybody who frequents this group knows all too well, last
    year's technology is obsolete today. So longevity in retail electronics
    sales is not necessarily related to some advanced insight into most superior
    technology. If they had selected the best technology, they would have sold
    Betamax VCR's instead of VHS. VHS offered a better value proposition. So
    it won out in the marketplace, including RS's stores.

    My opinion is that, in the good ole' USof A, neither Sprint/Verizon's
    technology choice nor AWE/Cingular/Tmobile's choice have gained a clear
    marketable advantage. Both technologies work good enough. In terms of
    worldwide acceptance, GSM has a much larger foothold. I saw some recent
    announcements where one or both of the CDMA carriers (Verizon/Sprint) are
    going to offer phones that are GSM capable. Could this be a sign that the
    gobal marketplace pull is to great to ignore (forget the arguments about
    which is the superior technology)?

    "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:ceGdnV6WsY3JIend4p2dnA@comcast.com...
    > I'm going to try not to be a troll here, I swear...
    > I'd like to hear some feedback as to why you all chose Cingular over
    > services that have either a (proven) much larger network, (Verizon
    > Wireless), or a service that basically wrote the book (in the US at least)
    > on having the most advanced and data capable handsets on the market
    (Sprint
    > PCS)?
    >
    > By the way, where did you make your purchase? Has anyone noticed that the
    > largest wireless phone retailer in the US (and has been since wireless
    came
    > about) carries prodominently Sprint PCS and Verizon? Wouldn't people
    take
    > advice from them rather than some no name booth in a mall somewhere?
    >
    > Try not to flame me too much! :) I'm honestly just trying to start a
    topic.
    >
    >
  34. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 09:09:43 -0400, "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote:

    >Right, that's kinda what we're saying..cause it is in the picture on both
    >services...Must be nice, huh?
    >
    >> Not unless analog AMPS backup is in the picture.

    There are new phones being sold that do not have AMPS backup. All GSM
    phones except the GAIT models.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
  35. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    In article <_r_dc.8066$6C1.6920@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com>,
    "cledus" <cleadus@swbell.net> wrote:

    > My local RS store was a Cingular dealer a few years ago. They told me they
    > switched to Sprint because the corp struck a more lucrative deal with
    > Sprint. Nothing to do with superior technology -- just a better financial
    > arrangement. That's how business is usually conducted in this country.
    >
    > Also, when I go into an RS store to make a purchase, I am usually served by
    > young fellas that know basically nothing about the technology other than the
    > features they have been trained to sell. Because I have been an EE for
    > nearly 30 years and know a lot about various technologies, I get a kick when
    > I patiently listen to them try to sell me on technology they know nearly
    > nothing about. I don't fault them. They are salespeople and not trained to
    > know the underlying technologies.

    Reminds me of Radio Shacks' former venture: Computer City: if you asked
    a legitimate question like: "I was looking for a low priced laser
    printer, Is this Ricoh LED printer any good?"

    You'd get the full scope of training: One Sentence:

    "Well, we sell a lot of them".
  36. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    "Robert M." <rmarkoff@msn.com> wrote in message
    news:rmarkoff-48B1B9.18252310042004@news6.west.earthlink.net...
    > In article <_r_dc.8066$6C1.6920@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com>,
    > "cledus" <cleadus@swbell.net> wrote:
    >

    > You'd get the full scope of training: One Sentence:
    >
    > "Well, we sell a lot of them".

    Not the best example of a great salesman, but a great example of a good
    salesman. He doesn't make money by telling you dorky techy stuff that 99%
    of shoppers wouldn't understand...he makes money by putting one on your
    charge card. Any place that teaches you about technology and teaches you
    how to operate everthing you buy, should charge for that...just like "EE"
    schools do.... :)
  37. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    In article <_r_dc.8066$6C1.6920@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com>,
    "cledus" <cleadus@swbell.net> wrote:

    > I saw some recent
    > announcements where one or both of the CDMA carriers (Verizon/Sprint) are
    > going to offer phones that are GSM capable. Could this be a sign that the
    > gobal marketplace pull is to great to ignore (forget the arguments about
    > which is the superior technology)?

    Verizon is planning to do it as its British partner (Vodaphone) that
    owns 45% of Verizon Wireless is a GSM provider in the rest of the world,
    and would like for a Verizon Wireless phone that would work in Europe.
  38. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    In article <oPOdnevP8-_GA-XdRVn-gQ@comcast.com>,
    "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote:

    > "Robert M." <rmarkoff@msn.com> wrote in message
    > news:rmarkoff-48B1B9.18252310042004@news6.west.earthlink.net...
    > > In article <_r_dc.8066$6C1.6920@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com>,
    > > "cledus" <cleadus@swbell.net> wrote:
    > >
    >
    > > You'd get the full scope of training: One Sentence:
    > >
    > > "Well, we sell a lot of them".
    >
    > Not the best example of a great salesman, but a great example of a good
    > salesman. He doesn't make money by telling you dorky techy stuff that 99%
    > of shoppers wouldn't understand...he makes money by putting one on your
    > charge card. Any place that teaches you about technology and teaches you
    > how to operate everthing you buy, should charge for that...just like "EE"
    > schools do.... :)

    Except at Computer City, what they had in stock would widely vary from
    week to week. I considered it a high-end remainder store. So what the
    salesman would be touting would simmilarly vary from week to week, and
    it amazes me that folks would ask a salesperson who as you say is not
    trained for a recommendation on their purchase. Salesman will always
    recommend

    1: What is spiffed versus what is not spiffed.

    2: What is in stock versus what they are temporarily out of.

    3. The most expensive model they can talk you into.

    and Radio Shack is no exception. Anyone who buys batteries there anymore
    when they are far cheaper at a Walgreens is throwing money away.
  39. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    >They told me they
    >switched to Sprint because the corp struck a more lucrative deal with
    >Sprint. Nothing to do with superior technology

    No one but the un-informed said that it was because of superior technology
    (although CDMA is a better technology) except the uninformed that were trying
    to make a case for - "If Radio Shack sells it is has to be good!" which of
    course isn't necessarily true.

    --
    John S.
    e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net
  40. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    sexyexotiche@aol.comspamfree (John S.) wrote in message news:<20040411105855.12703.00000116@mb-m24.aol.com>...
    > >They told me they
    > >switched to Sprint because the corp struck a more lucrative deal with
    > >Sprint. Nothing to do with superior technology
    >
    > No one but the un-informed said that it was because of superior technology
    > (although CDMA is a better technology) except the uninformed that were trying
    > to make a case for - "If Radio Shack sells it is has to be good!" which of
    > course isn't necessarily true.

    But, in this case, the OP was making exactly that point- if the
    largest retailer of phones (RadioShack) sells it, it must, by
    definition, be the best.

    Using that logic, McDonald's sells the country's "best" food... ;-)
  41. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    "Kev" <Axekick@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:-MednROjyI_ivOrdRVn-jg@comcast.com...
    > Theer was like 2..maybe 3 models that didn't have analog access...Kinda
    > makes my point though...

    Not really- Sprint has NO native analog territory. They only have as good a
    "nationwide" coverage map as they do because of their roaming partners,
    namely Verizon. Which begs the obvious question (that you avoided when I
    asked it in another thread) why should anyone choose Sprint rather than just
    cut out the middleman and take Verizon? Sprint doesn't have "better"
    coverage than VZW- since much of their coverage outside of major metro areas
    IS actually Verizon, and they don't have "superior technology"- since they
    use the same voice and data technology as Verizon (CDMA). Why do you
    consistantly lump the two of them together when you ask these fairly
    trolling questions? (Other than the fact that YOU use Sprint, but need to
    use the perceived strength of Verizon's network to bolster your arguments!)

    > The fact that Sprint and Verizon allow analog access
    > along with their own (again superior, can't believe THAT point is even
    > challanged)

    Believe it. Just because some actor dressed as a geek stands in soundstage
    mocked up like a swamp and barks "Can you hear me now" into a prop phone
    doesn't make Verizon's coverage "superior". Sure, Verizon has the largest
    native US coverage in square miles, but that doesn't necessarily mean that
    each market area they operate in has superior coverage to all other carriers
    in THAT market. The last two places I've lived, (by coincidence, I'm sure)
    Lake Lotawana, MO (a Kansas City suburb) and Ken Carly, CO (a subburb of
    Denver) had little or no Verizon coverage. Purely anecdotally (for me)
    Verizon has the worst coverage! Let's just say Verizon won't be shooting
    any commercials in my subdivision anytime soon.

    > ...coverage, makes them more reliable for coverage than gsm could
    > ever hope. Period.

    Ever here of GAIT? Cingular offers phones that are GSM, TDMA and analog,
    with cheaper no-roam (regardless of whether you're on network or off) plans
    than Verizon or Sprint. Given those points, the question posed in this
    thread perhaps should be "why aren't YOU with Cingular?"
  42. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    rmarkoff@msn.com (Robert M.) wrote:
    <<and Radio Shack is no exception. Anyone who buys batteries there
    anymore when they are far cheaper at a Walgreens is throwing money away.
    >>

    Radio Shack is one of the biggest ripoff specialty stores around.
Ask a new question

Read More

Cingular Wireless Internet Service Providers