ATT allowing connection into Cingular?

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

Today couple of my friends who are ATTWS
customers in SF bay area, reported that now
they are able to connect using Cingular.
They are local to SF Bay area and before
today (?) they could not use Cingular.

I am on Cingular but as always I am not
able to connect to ATTWS.

Any one else noticed this?

-akm
25 answers Last reply
More about allowing connection cingular
  1. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    CIngular and AT&T have been roaming partners for a while now, but would
    only use each other network only when really nessasary. Everytime a
    Cingular or an AT&T customer use another carrier cell site. It cost the
    company money that they have to pay out for the usage. AT&T and
    Cingular have quitely already ready begun opening up each others cell
    sites to each other in certian markets to improve coverage and to help
    prevent customers that may be touted to leave by other carrrier claming
    that thier will be utter chaos with the merger. This will improve
    service, not just in areas that they have low coverage. Mostly customer
    with both carriers will begin to see the coverage locally and
    Nationally change over the next few months.


    --
    Wireless Guy

    The Cellphone Guy..
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    http://cellphoneforums.netView this thread: http://cellphoneforums.net/t117056.html
  2. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    "AKM" <akmu@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:b7c95829.0404131325.64094971@posting.google.com...
    > Today couple of my friends who are ATTWS
    > customers in SF bay area, reported that now
    > they are able to connect using Cingular.
    > They are local to SF Bay area and before
    > today (?) they could not use Cingular.
    >
    > I am on Cingular but as always I am not
    > able to connect to ATTWS.
    >
    > Any one else noticed this?
    >
    > -akm

    Are you sure it just started today, or did they just get 'cingular' on their
    handset today? There's a huge difference. I travel all over the U.S. Long
    before Cingular considered placing a bid for ATT, I would know that I was ON
    ATT (with my cingular handset) as the handset would display "cingular
    extend" rather than just "cingular". Oh, and if I dialed 611 while my
    cingular handset said "cingular extend", I'd get an ATT recording. I never
    got hit with roaming charges for using ATT's towers with a cingular handset.

    I guess my point is, why would ATT allow Cingular customers to place calls
    (since LONG before the merger), but not the other way around? I very much
    doubt if your friends on ATT got access to Cingular TODAY. So probably one
    of two things happened:

    1) Your friends always had access to cingular where available, but some new
    cingular towers went live in their area recently, so now they have more
    coverage, and (coincidentally) that extra coverage is cingular OR

    2) Maybe ATT changed their firmware to reflect 'cingular' (which makes
    sense as ATT is now Cingular!) instead of 'roaming' or 'ATT extend' or
    whatever the ATT handset would display while on a cingular tower. Thus,
    your friends are now AWARE that the towers they've been using are cingular.

    My best guesses, anyway. -Dave
  3. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    akmu@hotmail.com (AKM) wrote in message news:<b7c95829.0404131325.64094971@posting.google.com>...
    > Today couple of my friends who are ATTWS
    > customers in SF bay area, reported that now
    > they are able to connect using Cingular.
    > They are local to SF Bay area and before
    > today (?) they could not use Cingular.
    >
    > I am on Cingular but as always I am not
    > able to connect to ATTWS.
    >
    > Any one else noticed this?
    >
    > -akm

    The GSM MAP is quite promptly & elegantly malleable in its controls
    over network selection. GSM network-side roaming administration is
    largely transparent to the mobile. Via relatively simple updates
    pushed down through the network, Location Areas may be added or
    subtracted at will from various roaming agreements. In a nutshell,
    each GSM network is intelligently informed about whom (i.e. which
    other carriers' roamers) may roam where (i.e. in which Location
    Areas). Thus, Cingular & AT&TWS could begin - and apparently have
    begun - almost immediately to open their respective GSM networks -
    for manual network selection at the very least - to all subs of both
    carriers w/o requiring any handset intervention. On the other hand,
    the integration of two merged IS-41 networks (e.g. CDMA, TDMA, AMPS) -
    as will be the case w/ the merged Cingular-AT&TWS TDMA/AMPS footprints
    - requires SID transitions &/or dissemination of an entirely new PRL -
    the latter most certainly requiring handset intervention for each
    affected sub.

    Andrew
    --
    Andrew Shepherd
    cinema@ku.edu
    cinema@sprintpcs.com
    http://www.ku.edu/home/cinema/
  4. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    It's been happening to me here in Philly for the past week. Sometimes my
    phone says Cingular. ATTWS is now sharing towers here in the Philly area.


    "Dave C." <spammersdie@ahorribledeath.now> wrote in message
    news:ELCdnXGifp_J6-HdRVn-gw@comcast.com...
    >
    > "AKM" <akmu@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:b7c95829.0404131325.64094971@posting.google.com...
    > > Today couple of my friends who are ATTWS
    > > customers in SF bay area, reported that now
    > > they are able to connect using Cingular.
    > > They are local to SF Bay area and before
    > > today (?) they could not use Cingular.
    > >
    > > I am on Cingular but as always I am not
    > > able to connect to ATTWS.
    > >
    > > Any one else noticed this?
    > >
    > > -akm
    >
    > Are you sure it just started today, or did they just get 'cingular' on
    their
    > handset today? There's a huge difference. I travel all over the U.S.
    Long
    > before Cingular considered placing a bid for ATT, I would know that I was
    ON
    > ATT (with my cingular handset) as the handset would display "cingular
    > extend" rather than just "cingular". Oh, and if I dialed 611 while my
    > cingular handset said "cingular extend", I'd get an ATT recording. I
    never
    > got hit with roaming charges for using ATT's towers with a cingular
    handset.
    >
    > I guess my point is, why would ATT allow Cingular customers to place calls
    > (since LONG before the merger), but not the other way around? I very much
    > doubt if your friends on ATT got access to Cingular TODAY. So probably
    one
    > of two things happened:
    >
    > 1) Your friends always had access to cingular where available, but some
    new
    > cingular towers went live in their area recently, so now they have more
    > coverage, and (coincidentally) that extra coverage is cingular OR
    >
    > 2) Maybe ATT changed their firmware to reflect 'cingular' (which makes
    > sense as ATT is now Cingular!) instead of 'roaming' or 'ATT extend' or
    > whatever the ATT handset would display while on a cingular tower. Thus,
    > your friends are now AWARE that the towers they've been using are
    cingular.
    >
    > My best guesses, anyway. -Dave
    >
    >
  5. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    I just forced a manual selection of Cingular with my ATT GSM phone in
    Detroit. It worked. ATT covers Detroit and I've never had access to the
    Cingular network on GSM before. Back on TDMA, Cingular and ATT had some
    backup coverage agreements in Detroit.

    I'll let you know at the end of the month whether this gets billed as a
    roaming call.

    Stu


    "Dave C." <spammersdie@ahorribledeath.now> wrote in message
    news:ELCdnXGifp_J6-HdRVn-gw@comcast.com...
    >
    > "AKM" <akmu@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:b7c95829.0404131325.64094971@posting.google.com...
    > > Today couple of my friends who are ATTWS
    > > customers in SF bay area, reported that now
    > > they are able to connect using Cingular.
    > > They are local to SF Bay area and before
    > > today (?) they could not use Cingular.
    > >
    > > I am on Cingular but as always I am not
    > > able to connect to ATTWS.
    > >
    > > Any one else noticed this?
    > >
    > > -akm
    >
    > Are you sure it just started today, or did they just get 'cingular' on
    their
    > handset today? There's a huge difference. I travel all over the U.S.
    Long
    > before Cingular considered placing a bid for ATT, I would know that I was
    ON
    > ATT (with my cingular handset) as the handset would display "cingular
    > extend" rather than just "cingular". Oh, and if I dialed 611 while my
    > cingular handset said "cingular extend", I'd get an ATT recording. I
    never
    > got hit with roaming charges for using ATT's towers with a cingular
    handset.
    >
    > I guess my point is, why would ATT allow Cingular customers to place calls
    > (since LONG before the merger), but not the other way around? I very much
    > doubt if your friends on ATT got access to Cingular TODAY. So probably
    one
    > of two things happened:
    >
    > 1) Your friends always had access to cingular where available, but some
    new
    > cingular towers went live in their area recently, so now they have more
    > coverage, and (coincidentally) that extra coverage is cingular OR
    >
    > 2) Maybe ATT changed their firmware to reflect 'cingular' (which makes
    > sense as ATT is now Cingular!) instead of 'roaming' or 'ATT extend' or
    > whatever the ATT handset would display while on a cingular tower. Thus,
    > your friends are now AWARE that the towers they've been using are
    cingular.
    >
    > My best guesses, anyway. -Dave
    >
    >
  6. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    >> Today couple of my friends who are ATTWS
    >> customers in SF bay area, reported that now
    >> they are able to connect using Cingular.

    And as a Cingular customer, I recently used AT&T in northern Indiana.

    (I also had to reinitialize my voicemail last night.)

    --kyler
  7. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    "Stuart Friedman" <stu@nospam.na> wrote in message
    news:mL_ec.136$vk1.27@newssvr32.news.prodigy.com...
    > I just forced a manual selection of Cingular with my ATT GSM phone in
    > Detroit. It worked. ATT covers Detroit and I've never had access to the
    > Cingular network on GSM before. Back on TDMA, Cingular and ATT had some
    > backup coverage agreements in Detroit.
    >
    > I'll let you know at the end of the month whether this gets billed as a
    > roaming call.
    >
    > Stu

    It shouldn't, as the opposite wouldn't happen. That is, if you forced your
    cingular handset to use ATT, cingular wouldn't charge you for roaming (on
    the nation plan, anyway)

    But again, I fail to see how this could possibly be a new development, as
    cingular/att have had a cooperative agreement since long before the merger
    was even considered. -Dave
  8. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    "ben skversky" <bskversky@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:meCdnV0vS6LPBuHdRVn-hQ@comcast.com...
    > It's been happening to me here in Philly for the past week. Sometimes my
    > phone says Cingular. ATTWS is now sharing towers here in the Philly area.
    >

    Hasn't it always been that way, though? It doesn't make sense, logically,
    that ATT would allow cingular users to use their towers, but not the other
    way around. I was using ATT with a cingular handset long before the merger
    was considered. -Dave
  9. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    confirmed with customer service, for customers with certain plans,
    now we are on "expanded home area". it basically covers the central
    california for the bay area customer. we can use cingular network
    without roaming charges. this means better signal in my office and in
    my apartment. please confirm that your plan has this feature with attws.

    AKM wrote:
    > Today couple of my friends who are ATTWS
    > customers in SF bay area, reported that now
    > they are able to connect using Cingular.
    > They are local to SF Bay area and before
    > today (?) they could not use Cingular.
    >
    > I am on Cingular but as always I am not
    > able to connect to ATTWS.
    >
    > Any one else noticed this?
    >
    > -akm
  10. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    I never had Cingular coverage in the Detroit market before on GSM. On TDMA,
    there was a similar arrangement. This makes me happy because ATT has
    virtually no coverage at the University of Michigan and Cingular has pretty
    good coverage there.

    Stu

    "Dave C." <spammersdie@ahorribledeath.now> wrote in message
    news:tYGdnfw4q-zvC-DdRVn-gw@comcast.com...
    >
    > "Stuart Friedman" <stu@nospam.na> wrote in message
    > news:mL_ec.136$vk1.27@newssvr32.news.prodigy.com...
    > > I just forced a manual selection of Cingular with my ATT GSM phone in
    > > Detroit. It worked. ATT covers Detroit and I've never had access to the
    > > Cingular network on GSM before. Back on TDMA, Cingular and ATT had some
    > > backup coverage agreements in Detroit.
    > >
    > > I'll let you know at the end of the month whether this gets billed as a
    > > roaming call.
    > >
    > > Stu
    >
    > It shouldn't, as the opposite wouldn't happen. That is, if you forced
    your
    > cingular handset to use ATT, cingular wouldn't charge you for roaming (on
    > the nation plan, anyway)
    >
    > But again, I fail to see how this could possibly be a new development, as
    > cingular/att have had a cooperative agreement since long before the merger
    > was even considered. -Dave
    >
    >
  11. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    "AKM" <akmu@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:b7c95829.0404131325.64094971@posting.google.com...
    > Today couple of my friends who are ATTWS
    > customers in SF bay area, reported that now
    > they are able to connect using Cingular.
    > They are local to SF Bay area and before
    > today (?) they could not use Cingular.
    >
    > I am on Cingular but as always I am not
    > able to connect to ATTWS.
    >
    > Any one else noticed this?
    >
    > -akm

    Back in the fall of last year, AT&T Wireless instituted Best in
    Class service. With this service in certain markets, if AT&T has
    a weak signal, AT&T will let you roam on Cingular or T-Mobile
    without roaming charges. This has nothing to do with the
    unaccomplished merger. AT&T had that in North and South Carolina
    for a long while. Although you might be on Cingular towers, the
    phone might still show AT&T Wireless.

    --
    Earl F. Parrish
  12. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    "Dave C." wrote:
    >
    > It shouldn't, as the opposite wouldn't happen. That is, if you forced your
    > cingular handset to use ATT, cingular wouldn't charge you for roaming (on
    > the nation plan, anyway)
    >
    > But again, I fail to see how this could possibly be a new development, as
    > cingular/att have had a cooperative agreement since long before the merger
    > was even considered. -Dave

    While the two companies have had a reciprocal roaming agreement for some
    time, they didn't offer the same level of service to their respective
    customers. While Cingular customers have always (well, for a long time
    anyway) been able to roam on all (or most) of ATTWS' system for free,
    ATTWS has charged its customers to roam on Cingular's (and anyone
    else's) network unless they had subscribed to a Digital One Rate plan.

    A roaming agreement between two companies does not guarantee that one
    company will include the other company's network into their preferred
    provider plan for no extra charge, and while Cingular has opted to do
    so, ATTWS has not (until now apparently).

    In general, ATTWS' nation plans have been pure on-network plans for a
    while and didn't offer any free off-network roaming whatsoever. This
    has been true for both the Digital Nation and the Next Generation Nation
    plans. I hear that ATTWS will start offering new nation plans with free
    roaming on preferred partner networks starting 04/18/04 (see
    http://www.wirelessweek.com/index.asp?layout=document&doc_id=132540&verticalID=34&vertical=Business+and+Finance&industry=).
  13. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    >
    > While the two companies have had a reciprocal roaming agreement for some
    > time, they didn't offer the same level of service to their respective
    > customers. While Cingular customers have always (well, for a long time
    > anyway) been able to roam on all (or most) of ATTWS' system for free,
    > ATTWS has charged its customers to roam on Cingular's (and anyone
    > else's) network unless they had subscribed to a Digital One Rate plan.

    Awww . . . that explains my confusion. So it seems some ATT customers did
    get more coverage recently, but Cingular customers always had the expanded
    coverage. -Dave
  14. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.attws,alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    Kyler Laird wrote:

    >>> Today couple of my friends who are ATTWS
    >>> customers in SF bay area, reported that now
    >>> they are able to connect using Cingular.
    >
    > And as a Cingular customer, I recently used AT&T in northern Indiana.
    >

    Likewise in Maui, HI with my 8390.
  15. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <Wireless.Guy.14oa82@nospam.cellphoneforums.net> on Tue, 13 Apr 2004
    17:28:28 -0500, Wireless Guy <Wireless.Guy.14oa82@nospam.cellphoneforums.net>
    wrote:

    >CIngular and AT&T have been roaming partners for a while now, but would
    >only use each other network only when really nessasary. Everytime a
    >Cingular or an AT&T customer use another carrier cell site. It cost the
    >company money that they have to pay out for the usage. AT&T and
    >Cingular have quitely already ready begun opening up each others cell
    >sites to each other in certian markets to improve coverage and to help
    >prevent customers that may be touted to leave by other carrrier claming
    >that thier will be utter chaos with the merger. This will improve
    >service, not just in areas that they have low coverage. Mostly customer
    >with both carriers will begin to see the coverage locally and
    >Nationally change over the next few months.

    Not here in Northern California. My unlocked Sony Ericsson Z600 (tri-band
    world phone) works fine on Cingular 1900, but is barred from ATTWS 1900 (red
    crossed circle in Select Network), in ZIP code 94404 at least, annoying
    because I'm getting no Cingular signal but a decent ATTWS signal. My SIM
    doesn't show ATTWS as a Preferred Net. This might be a unique provisioning
    problem, but I doubt it, since this phone has successfully received at least
    two OTA updates recently. (I'm checking this with Cingular, but haven't
    gotten a meaningful response yet.)

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>
  16. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    Maybe its one way? AWS to Cingluar but not the reverse? I can literally
    switch between the 2 now, here in South Florida.
    Ben

    "John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
    news:10gucr09jurd7c0@corp.supernews.com...
    > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >
    > In <Wireless.Guy.14oa82@nospam.cellphoneforums.net> on Tue, 13 Apr 2004
    > 17:28:28 -0500, Wireless Guy
    <Wireless.Guy.14oa82@nospam.cellphoneforums.net>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >CIngular and AT&T have been roaming partners for a while now, but would
    > >only use each other network only when really nessasary. Everytime a
    > >Cingular or an AT&T customer use another carrier cell site. It cost the
    > >company money that they have to pay out for the usage. AT&T and
    > >Cingular have quitely already ready begun opening up each others cell
    > >sites to each other in certian markets to improve coverage and to help
    > >prevent customers that may be touted to leave by other carrrier claming
    > >that thier will be utter chaos with the merger. This will improve
    > >service, not just in areas that they have low coverage. Mostly customer
    > >with both carriers will begin to see the coverage locally and
    > >Nationally change over the next few months.
    >
    > Not here in Northern California. My unlocked Sony Ericsson Z600 (tri-band
    > world phone) works fine on Cingular 1900, but is barred from ATTWS 1900
    (red
    > crossed circle in Select Network), in ZIP code 94404 at least, annoying
    > because I'm getting no Cingular signal but a decent ATTWS signal. My SIM
    > doesn't show ATTWS as a Preferred Net. This might be a unique
    provisioning
    > problem, but I doubt it, since this phone has successfully received at
    least
    > two OTA updates recently. (I'm checking this with Cingular, but haven't
    > gotten a meaningful response yet.)
    >
    > --
    > Best regards,
    > John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>
  17. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    >I'm getting no Cingular signal but a decent ATTWS signal.

    Well, I had the opposite situation - no AT&T signal yet a pretty good to very
    strong Cingular signal. What did I do?

    My situation involved 2 locations, one was my home in Texas. I was on the
    extreme edge of AT&T coverage with 1 bar of signal but only in y home office in
    front of the North facing window - sometimes not that good.

    The second location was here at my office in Lafayette, LA where there is a
    Cingular tower just across our office property fence line.

    I called AT&T and asked them about these two specific locations giving them the
    Zip code's as well as the locations of the local Cingular towers.

    Although I can't say 100%, but within a week of my call my AT&T GSM phone had
    full bars here at my office in LA and when I went home to Texas the next time I
    had full bars on my AT&T GSM phone there as well.

    Sometimes it might help to complain.

    On the other hand, I can't go to "Manual" system selection and select Cingular
    manually in either location.

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

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <20040803103410.04869.00000803@mb-m05.aol.com> on 03 Aug 2004 14:34:10 GMT,
    sexyexotiche@aol.comspamfree (John S.) wrote:

    >>I'm getting no Cingular signal but a decent ATTWS signal.
    >
    >Well, I had the opposite situation - no AT&T signal yet a pretty good to very
    >strong Cingular signal. What did I do?
    >
    >My situation involved 2 locations, one was my home in Texas. I was on the
    >extreme edge of AT&T coverage with 1 bar of signal but only in y home office in
    >front of the North facing window - sometimes not that good.
    >
    >The second location was here at my office in Lafayette, LA where there is a
    >Cingular tower just across our office property fence line.
    >
    >I called AT&T and asked them about these two specific locations giving them the
    >Zip code's as well as the locations of the local Cingular towers.
    >
    >Although I can't say 100%, but within a week of my call my AT&T GSM phone had
    >full bars here at my office in LA and when I went home to Texas the next time I
    >had full bars on my AT&T GSM phone there as well.
    >
    >Sometimes it might help to complain.

    Indeed. And as I wrote, I'm checking this with Cingular. A Network Trouble
    Ticket was generated yesterday to have coverage checked in this location (a
    reasonable first step). This is known to be a problem service area --
    coverage is listed as "low" and "Medium" depending on the specific location.

    My phone is GSM 1900 but not GSM 850. The problem there is that Cingular has
    sold its 1900 spectrum to T-Mobile, and I doubt Cingular will now have much
    interest in improving 1900 coverage. I may be out of luck with that phone
    unless Cingular enables use of ATTWS 1900 coverage by Cingular subscribers.

    Thus, to get good GSM coverage in this area, I may be forced to look into
    replacement of my (relatively new and otherwise terrific) phone with one that
    supports GSM 850. [sigh] But first I'm going to do some testing with an
    ATTWS SIM, since another option is to switch from Cingular (where I'm
    month-to-month) to ATTWS.

    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>
  19. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    In article <d%NPc.5359$54.89121@typhoon.sonic.net>,
    John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

    > My phone is GSM 1900 but not GSM 850. The problem there is that Cingular has
    > sold its 1900 spectrum to T-Mobile, and I doubt Cingular will now have much
    > interest in improving 1900 coverage.

    No, Cingular has not sold it! It has agreed to sell it after the AT&T
    merger goes through. Get your facts straight.
  20. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <RM143-A2068D.12030803082004@news04.east.earthlink.net> on Tue, 03 Aug 2004
    17:03:08 GMT, Robert <RM143@ret.com> wrote:

    >In article <d%NPc.5359$54.89121@typhoon.sonic.net>,
    > John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
    >
    >> My phone is GSM 1900 but not GSM 850. The problem there is that Cingular has
    >> sold its 1900 spectrum to T-Mobile, and I doubt Cingular will now have much
    >> interest in improving 1900 coverage.
    >
    >No, Cingular has not sold it! It has agreed to sell it after the AT&T
    >merger goes through. Get your facts straight.

    My facts are straight. To be precise
    <http://www.t-mobile.com/company/pressroom/pressrelease100.asp>:

    T-Mobile USA, Inc. ("T-Mobile USA"), the U.S. operating subsidiary of
    T-Mobile International AG & Co. KG ("T-Mobile International"), the
    mobile communications subsidiary of Deutsche Telekom AG (NYSE: DT)
    ("Deutsche Telekom"), today announced it HAS ENTERED INTO agreements
    with Cingular Wireless LLC ("Cingular") to terminate their wireless
    network sharing joint venture and for T-Mobile USA to acquire 100%
    ownership of the shared networks in California and Nevada for $2.5
    billion. [emphasis added]

    In other words, the deal has been done.

    The transaction is subject to the approval of Cingular's acquisition
    of AT&T Wireless by U.S. anti-trust authorities and the Federal
    Communications Commission (FCC), and other regulatory approvals.
    Closing of the transaction is expected for the beginning of 2005.

    In other words, the deal has contingencies, as is common.

    That the deal hasn't yet closed doesn't invalidate what I wrote (as anyone
    with real experience in this area knows).

    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>
  21. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws (More info?)

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <d%NPc.5359$54.89121@typhoon.sonic.net> on Tue, 03 Aug 2004 15:16:25 GMT,
    John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

    >My phone is GSM 1900 but not GSM 850. The problem there is that Cingular has
    >sold its 1900 spectrum to T-Mobile, and I doubt Cingular will now have much
    >interest in improving 1900 coverage. I may be out of luck with that phone
    >unless Cingular enables use of ATTWS 1900 coverage by Cingular subscribers.
    >
    >Thus, to get good GSM coverage in this area, I may be forced to look into
    >replacement of my (relatively new and otherwise terrific) phone with one that
    >supports GSM 850. [sigh] But first I'm going to do some testing with an
    >ATTWS SIM, since another option is to switch from Cingular (where I'm
    >month-to-month) to ATTWS.

    Confirmed today that here in Northern California:

    * ATTWS GSM subscribers may now roam freely on Cingular, giving them the
    combined coverage of ATTWS and Cingular.

    * Cingular subscribers are prohibited from roaming on ATTWS (which I frankly
    think is a bit shabby).

    That makes a big difference in (say) Foster City, where ATTWS has pretty good
    coverage, whereas Cingular has a fairly large coverage hole south of 92, as
    shown in my own tests of both carriers. Although there are other areas where
    the reverse is true, likewise as shown in my own tests, ATTWS now avoids that
    problem by allowing roaming on Cingular.

    That difference, plus some nice incentives (discounted bundle of voice +
    unlimited night&weekend + 7pm nights + data + free incoming messages + text
    messages + picture messages), pushed me into switching from Cingular to ATTWS.
    Since I have an unlocked phone and month-to-month service, the switch was
    relatively easy, and my number should be ported by early tomorrow morning.
    In the meantime, I'm already enjoying the benefits of ATTWS coverage in places
    like Foster City, and the ability to roam on Cingular where ATTWS has holes.

    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>
  22. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws (More info?)

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <d%NPc.5359$54.89121@typhoon.sonic.net> on Tue, 03 Aug 2004 15:16:25 GMT,
    John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

    >My phone is GSM 1900 but not GSM 850. The problem there is that Cingular has
    >sold its 1900 spectrum to T-Mobile, and I doubt Cingular will now have much
    >interest in improving 1900 coverage. I may be out of luck with that phone
    >unless Cingular enables use of ATTWS 1900 coverage by Cingular subscribers.
    >
    >Thus, to get good GSM coverage in this area, I may be forced to look into
    >replacement of my (relatively new and otherwise terrific) phone with one that
    >supports GSM 850. [sigh] But first I'm going to do some testing with an
    >ATTWS SIM, since another option is to switch from Cingular (where I'm
    >month-to-month) to ATTWS.

    Confirmed today that here in Northern California:

    * ATTWS GSM subscribers may now roam freely on Cingular, giving them the
    combined coverage of ATTWS and Cingular.

    * Cingular subscribers are prohibited from roaming on ATTWS (which I frankly
    think is a bit shabby).

    That makes a big difference in (say) Foster City, where ATTWS has pretty good
    coverage, whereas Cingular has a fairly large coverage hole south of 92, as
    shown in my own tests of both carriers. Although there are other areas where
    the reverse is true, likewise as shown in my own tests, ATTWS now avoids that
    problem by allowing roaming on Cingular.

    That difference, plus some nice incentives (discounted bundle of voice +
    unlimited night&weekend + 7pm nights + data + free incoming messages + text
    messages + picture messages), pushed me into switching from Cingular to ATTWS.
    Since I have an unlocked phone and month-to-month service, the switch was
    relatively easy, and my number should be ported by early tomorrow morning.
    In the meantime, I'm already enjoying the benefits of ATTWS coverage in places
    like Foster City, and the ability to roam on Cingular where ATTWS has holes.

    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>
  23. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws (More info?)

    I have found ATTWS coverage to be FAR superior to that of Cingular (big
    signal versus none at all) in my area of suburban LA.

    George


    "John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
    news:2BYPc.5561$54.89959@typhoon.sonic.net...
    > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >
    > In <d%NPc.5359$54.89121@typhoon.sonic.net> on Tue, 03 Aug 2004 15:16:25
    GMT,
    > John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
    >
    > >My phone is GSM 1900 but not GSM 850. The problem there is that Cingular
    has
    > >sold its 1900 spectrum to T-Mobile, and I doubt Cingular will now have
    much
    > >interest in improving 1900 coverage. I may be out of luck with that
    phone
    > >unless Cingular enables use of ATTWS 1900 coverage by Cingular
    subscribers.
    > >
    > >Thus, to get good GSM coverage in this area, I may be forced to look into
    > >replacement of my (relatively new and otherwise terrific) phone with one
    that
    > >supports GSM 850. [sigh] But first I'm going to do some testing with an
    > >ATTWS SIM, since another option is to switch from Cingular (where I'm
    > >month-to-month) to ATTWS.
    >
    > Confirmed today that here in Northern California:
    >
    > * ATTWS GSM subscribers may now roam freely on Cingular, giving them the
    > combined coverage of ATTWS and Cingular.
    >
    > * Cingular subscribers are prohibited from roaming on ATTWS (which I
    frankly
    > think is a bit shabby).
    >
    > That makes a big difference in (say) Foster City, where ATTWS has pretty
    good
    > coverage, whereas Cingular has a fairly large coverage hole south of 92,
    as
    > shown in my own tests of both carriers. Although there are other areas
    where
    > the reverse is true, likewise as shown in my own tests, ATTWS now avoids
    that
    > problem by allowing roaming on Cingular.
    >
    > That difference, plus some nice incentives (discounted bundle of voice +
    > unlimited night&weekend + 7pm nights + data + free incoming messages +
    text
    > messages + picture messages), pushed me into switching from Cingular to
    ATTWS.
    > Since I have an unlocked phone and month-to-month service, the switch was
    > relatively easy, and my number should be ported by early tomorrow morning.
    > In the meantime, I'm already enjoying the benefits of ATTWS coverage in
    places
    > like Foster City, and the ability to roam on Cingular where ATTWS has
    holes.
    >
    > --
    > Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    > John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>
  24. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws (More info?)

    I have also noticed the same issue with Cingular in Foster City.
    Only reason I am sticking to Cingular is because of CSD (Circuit
    Switch Data). ATT does not have CSD and then they force people
    to use GPRS/UMTS and pay 1/3 cents/K byes. With CSD, even though
    slower, I only consume my voice minutee.

    -a

    > That makes a big difference in (say) Foster City, where ATTWS has pretty good
    > coverage, whereas Cingular has a fairly large coverage hole south of 92, as
    > shown in my own tests of both carriers. Although there are other areas where
    > the reverse is true, likewise as shown in my own tests, ATTWS now avoids that
    > problem by allowing roaming on Cingular.
    >
  25. Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws (More info?)

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    I agree that the lack of CSD is a drawback to ATTWS (likewise the refusal to
    unlock phones), but on balance I'm now happier with ATTWS than with Cingular.
    I expect to be using both EDGE and UMTS soon, which beats the c&%$&^ out of
    CSD!

    In <JdlQc.91293$eM2.11844@attbi_s51> on Thu, 05 Aug 2004 07:21:13 GMT, akmu
    <akmu@hotmail.com> wrote:

    >I have also noticed the same issue with Cingular in Foster City.
    >Only reason I am sticking to Cingular is because of CSD (Circuit
    >Switch Data). ATT does not have CSD and then they force people
    >to use GPRS/UMTS and pay 1/3 cents/K byes. With CSD, even though
    >slower, I only consume my voice minutee.
    >
    >-a
    >
    >> That makes a big difference in (say) Foster City, where ATTWS has pretty good
    >> coverage, whereas Cingular has a fairly large coverage hole south of 92, as
    >> shown in my own tests of both carriers. Although there are other areas where
    >> the reverse is true, likewise as shown in my own tests, ATTWS now avoids that
    >> problem by allowing roaming on Cingular.
    >>

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>
Ask a new question

Read More

Cingular At&T Connection Internet Service Providers