Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Cingular vs. SprintPCS in San Francisco?

Last response: in Network Providers
Share
April 22, 2004 11:15:29 PM

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

I live in San Francisco and am considering moving from SprintPCS to
Cingular. Which is supposed to be better these days?

TIA,
Robert
Anonymous
April 23, 2004 4:07:10 AM

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

Cingular coverage in San Francisco is a joke!! It's terrible. It's bad. It
doesn't work!!!
(Sorry, I am extremely frustrated with Cingular in SF). You would be lucky
if you can get a good signal in Noe Valley, Twin Peaks, Diamond Heights &
Castro. Maybe they are ok downtown.

Sprint has excellent coverage in San Francisco and if you don't get a sprint
signal, your phone will use verizon digital service (or at&t/verizon analog)
with no charges if you sign up for their Free & Clear America ($5 bucks
option). So basically you can't go wrong there. I am switching as soon as my
contract is over.

AT&T TDMA used to be fine (I heard horror stories about AT&T GSM). Verizon
seems to work well. No idea about Nextel.

I wouldn't switch to cingular if I lived in San Francisco
"Robert" <rrwolf22@nospamyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:lRUhc.7166$e4.696@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> I live in San Francisco and am considering moving from SprintPCS to
> Cingular. Which is supposed to be better these days?
>
> TIA,
> Robert
>
>
Anonymous
April 23, 2004 10:08:22 AM

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

I travel to SF very often and found that Cingular was spotty there but has
improved a lot lately. With the Nation plan you can roam on other GSM
networks like AT&T and T-Mobile. I'm satified with Cingular's service in
SF.

The price with Cingular is right so why not give it a try in San Francisco.

My friends claim that Verizon is best in SF. But, in my view, Verizon is
too expensive. I don't make a living being on the phone so I don't need to
pay the premium. I also like GSM phones because I can change handset
whenever I like.

In Southern California (where i live) Cingular is excellent.


"Topguy" <topguyNOSPAM@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:N6Zhc.40073$OX1.11123@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...
> Cingular coverage in San Francisco is a joke!! It's terrible. It's bad. It
> doesn't work!!!
> (Sorry, I am extremely frustrated with Cingular in SF). You would be lucky
> if you can get a good signal in Noe Valley, Twin Peaks, Diamond Heights &
> Castro. Maybe they are ok downtown.
>
> Sprint has excellent coverage in San Francisco and if you don't get a
sprint
> signal, your phone will use verizon digital service (or at&t/verizon
analog)
> with no charges if you sign up for their Free & Clear America ($5 bucks
> option). So basically you can't go wrong there. I am switching as soon as
my
> contract is over.
>
> AT&T TDMA used to be fine (I heard horror stories about AT&T GSM). Verizon
> seems to work well. No idea about Nextel.
>
> I wouldn't switch to cingular if I lived in San Francisco
> "Robert" <rrwolf22@nospamyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:lRUhc.7166$e4.696@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > I live in San Francisco and am considering moving from SprintPCS to
> > Cingular. Which is supposed to be better these days?
> >
> > TIA,
> > Robert
> >
> >
>
>
Related resources
Anonymous
April 23, 2004 10:51:14 AM

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

I have both services. Not sure what your requirements are but in my opinion
Sprint has the better coverage in the Bay Area.


"Robert" <rrwolf22@nospamyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:lRUhc.7166$e4.696@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> I live in San Francisco and am considering moving from SprintPCS to
> Cingular. Which is supposed to be better these days?
>
> TIA,
> Robert
>
>
Anonymous
April 23, 2004 11:27:22 PM

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

Nice, everyone agreed! That''s unusual these days.
BTW, T-Mobile uses Cingular towers here in SF so that will not get you
better coverage.
True, it has improved but it is still VERY bad!
I haven't been able to use the AT&T towers with Cingular yet but that should
change by the end of the year.
Again, as much as I hate Sprint CSR, sprint is better in SFO.
"RonInCal" <NoSpam@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:C13ic.5981$eZ5.2614@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> I have both services. Not sure what your requirements are but in my
opinion
> Sprint has the better coverage in the Bay Area.
>
>
> "Robert" <rrwolf22@nospamyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:lRUhc.7166$e4.696@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > I live in San Francisco and am considering moving from SprintPCS to
> > Cingular. Which is supposed to be better these days?
> >
> > TIA,
> > Robert
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
April 27, 2004 1:47:35 AM

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

True that Sprint is good in SF. A friend of mine from SF calls me everyday
on Sprint while communiting and we get good connection. Also Sprint CSR is
good about making accommodations to retain customers.

"Topguy" <TopGuyNOSPAM@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:o KSdnXk3gbAVTRTdRVn-sQ@comcast.com...
> Nice, everyone agreed! That''s unusual these days.
> BTW, T-Mobile uses Cingular towers here in SF so that will not get you
> better coverage.
> True, it has improved but it is still VERY bad!
> I haven't been able to use the AT&T towers with Cingular yet but that
should
> change by the end of the year.
> Again, as much as I hate Sprint CSR, sprint is better in SFO.
> "RonInCal" <NoSpam@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:C13ic.5981$eZ5.2614@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > I have both services. Not sure what your requirements are but in my
> opinion
> > Sprint has the better coverage in the Bay Area.
> >
> >
> > "Robert" <rrwolf22@nospamyahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:lRUhc.7166$e4.696@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > > I live in San Francisco and am considering moving from SprintPCS to
> > > Cingular. Which is supposed to be better these days?
> > >
> > > TIA,
> > > Robert
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
!