Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

GSM network question (T226 and T637 or AT&T vs Cingular)

Last response: in Network Providers
Share
Anonymous
August 14, 2004 3:58:08 AM

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

I am in bayarea.
I have had AT&T GSM for over an year on my T226. I could go to
Connect->GSM Networks, and the phone would show the available
networks. I get AT&T, Cingular and sometimes Tmobile networks listed
in the available NW list.
I get excellent signal strength at both home and inside office bulding
with my AT&T GSM. Note that T226 works in GSM 850 and GSM 1900

Recently I bought T637 and signed up with Cingular. But the reception
has gone down considerably with this new device + service. My
understanding is that AT&T and Cingular share the same network for GSM
and the signal strength should be the same. Why is there a difference?

Also, unlike in T226, I am not able to see the available neworks with
my T637. In T637, if I go to Connect->GSM Networks I only see an empty
list. There is not even an entry for Cingular!
With the T226, I had the flexibility to switch between Cingular and
AT&T and pick the one with the better signal in a particular area..
and this seems to be missing in T637! Is there any way to enable it?
Or Is there something fishy happening here?

Btw, I got the Cingular phone from Amazon unlocked.

thanks,
driz
August 14, 2004 10:57:17 AM

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

On 13 Aug 2004 23:58:08 -0700, drizaii@yahoo.com (DRIZAII) wrote:

>Recently I bought T637 and signed up with Cingular. But the reception
>has gone down considerably with this new device + service. My
>understanding is that AT&T and Cingular share the same network for GSM
>and the signal strength should be the same. Why is there a difference?

You assumed incorrectly. cingular and AT&T Wireless *will* be one
network at some future time. They are not completely united yet.

>Also, unlike in T226, I am not able to see the available neworks with
>my T637. In T637, if I go to Connect->GSM Networks I only see an empty
>list. There is not even an entry for Cingular!
>With the T226, I had the flexibility to switch between Cingular and
>AT&T and pick the one with the better signal in a particular area..
>and this seems to be missing in T637! Is there any way to enable it?
>Or Is there something fishy happening here?

cingular has disabled the ability to see other networks on their
phones.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply
Anonymous
August 14, 2004 11:44:02 AM

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

"DRIZAII" <drizaii@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:D 17b26b5.0408132258.179a8945@posting.google.com...
> Also, unlike in T226, I am not able to see the available neworks with
> my T637. In T637, if I go to Connect->GSM Networks I only see an empty
> list. There is not even an entry for Cingular!

Have you performed a "New Search" ?
Related resources
Anonymous
August 14, 2004 12:47:07 PM

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

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

In <d17b26b5.0408132258.179a8945@posting.google.com> on 13 Aug 2004 23:58:08
-0700, drizaii@yahoo.com (DRIZAII) wrote:

>I am in bayarea.
>I have had AT&T GSM for over an year on my T226. I could go to
>Connect->GSM Networks, and the phone would show the available
>networks. I get AT&T, Cingular and sometimes Tmobile networks listed
>in the available NW list.
>I get excellent signal strength at both home and inside office bulding
>with my AT&T GSM. Note that T226 works in GSM 850 and GSM 1900
>
>Recently I bought T637 and signed up with Cingular. But the reception
>has gone down considerably with this new device + service. My
>understanding is that AT&T and Cingular share the same network for GSM
>and the signal strength should be the same. Why is there a difference?

Because that's not correct -- Cingular shares network infrastructure with
T-Mobile, not ATTWS.

>Also, unlike in T226, I am not able to see the available neworks with
>my T637. In T637, if I go to Connect->GSM Networks I only see an empty
>list. There is not even an entry for Cingular!
>With the T226, I had the flexibility to switch between Cingular and
>AT&T and pick the one with the better signal in a particular area..
>and this seems to be missing in T637! Is there any way to enable it?
>Or Is there something fishy happening here?

Not if Cingular has blocked it in the SIM.

>Btw, I got the Cingular phone from Amazon unlocked.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/&gt;
Anonymous
August 14, 2004 1:55:12 PM

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

"P T Wang" <news1003@paultwang.com> wrote in message news:<6pjTc.196$HO2.38@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com>...
> "DRIZAII" <drizaii@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:D 17b26b5.0408132258.179a8945@posting.google.com...
> > Also, unlike in T226, I am not able to see the available neworks with
> > my T637. In T637, if I go to Connect->GSM Networks I only see an empty
> > list. There is not even an entry for Cingular!
>
> Have you performed a "New Search" ?

There is no option to do a "new search"...

Both my previous SE phones (T226 and T68i) had it..
Anonymous
August 17, 2004 9:21:19 AM

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

> Because that's not correct -- Cingular shares network infrastructure with
> T-Mobile, not ATTWS.

??? My AT&T GSM phones read either AT&T or Cingular, *never* T-Mobile. I'm
in the San Francisco Bay Area, which may make a difference? The phones (an
SE 226 and T68i) don't seem to care which, they just grab onto whichever has
the strongest signal. Never a roaming charge.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
Anonymous
August 17, 2004 5:59:45 PM

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

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

In <jBgUc.5059$eV.3281@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com> on Tue, 17 Aug 2004
05:21:19 GMT, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <mikej1@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>> Because that's not correct -- Cingular shares network infrastructure with
>> T-Mobile, not ATTWS.
>
>??? My AT&T GSM phones read either AT&T or Cingular, *never* T-Mobile. I'm
>in the San Francisco Bay Area, which may make a difference?

That's because you're an ATTWS subscriber, and ATTWS now has free *roaming* on
Cingular. But that Cingular network is shared with T-Mobile -- you just see
Cingular and not T-Mobile because ATTWS has roaming in that area on the
former, but not the latter, although it's the same network infrastructure in
either case.

If you were a Cingular subscriber, you would be sharing the same network
infrastructure with T-Mobile, even though you wouldn't see the T-Mobile name
since Cingular has blocked roaming on T-Mobile, which makes sense because it's
the same network. You also wouldn't see ATTWS because Cingular blocks roaming
on ATTWS.

>The phones (an
>SE 226 and T68i) don't seem to care which, they just grab onto whichever has
>the strongest signal. Never a roaming charge.

That's called free roaming, but still roaming nonetheless.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/&gt;
Anonymous
August 17, 2004 7:31:52 PM

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

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:lboUc.8119$54.120950@typhoon.sonic.net...

>
> If you were a Cingular subscriber, you would be sharing the same network
> infrastructure with T-Mobile, even though you wouldn't see the T-Mobile
name
> since Cingular has blocked roaming on T-Mobile, which makes sense because
it's
> the same network. You also wouldn't see ATTWS because Cingular blocks
roaming
> on ATTWS.
>

In the Seattle market, ATT is who you roam to, and I have never
seen "cingular extend" either, so things must be a bit different here.

Bernard
Anonymous
August 18, 2004 12:42:01 AM

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

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:

>>Because that's not correct -- Cingular shares network infrastructure with
>>T-Mobile, not ATTWS.
>
>
> ??? My AT&T GSM phones read either AT&T or Cingular, *never* T-Mobile. I'm
> in the San Francisco Bay Area, which may make a difference? The phones (an
> SE 226 and T68i) don't seem to care which, they just grab onto whichever has
> the strongest signal. Never a roaming charge.


Bad example.

T-Mobile has NO network infrastructure in California and piggyback off
AT&T Wireless!
August 18, 2004 2:12:38 AM

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

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:42:01 -0400, incumbent <incumbent@gmail.com>
wrote:

>T-Mobile has NO network infrastructure in California and piggyback off
>AT&T Wireless!

You are absolutely *wrong.!* T-Mobile has been using cingular's GSM
network in California and has been ever since they were sharing
networks in New York. Once the cingular/AT&T deal goes through
cingular is selling the network in California to T-Mobile. Why don't
you make up some other stuff as well, eh?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anonymous
August 18, 2004 5:31:11 AM

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

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

In <rBxUc.29450$Bb.18746@lakeread08> on Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:42:01 -0400,
incumbent <incumbent@gmail.com> wrote:

>Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>
>>>Because that's not correct -- Cingular shares network infrastructure with
>>>T-Mobile, not ATTWS.
>>
>> ??? My AT&T GSM phones read either AT&T or Cingular, *never* T-Mobile. I'm
>> in the San Francisco Bay Area, which may make a difference? The phones (an
>> SE 226 and T68i) don't seem to care which, they just grab onto whichever has
>> the strongest signal. Never a roaming charge.
>
>Bad example.
>
>T-Mobile has NO network infrastructure in California and piggyback off
>AT&T Wireless!

T-Mobile currently shares network infrastructure with Cingular, not ATTWS, and
will buy ownership of that infrastructure from Cingular when the Cingular
acquisition of ATTWS closes.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/&gt;
Anonymous
August 18, 2004 9:56:50 AM

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

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

In <47p5i0h93qpjor7nkfr08faqkco4hc2qts@4ax.com> on Tue, 17 Aug 2004 22:12:38
-0700, Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:42:01 -0400, incumbent <incumbent@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>T-Mobile has NO network infrastructure in California and piggyback off
>>AT&T Wireless!
>
>You are absolutely *wrong.!* T-Mobile has been using cingular's GSM
>network in California ...

It's actually a joint venture.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/&gt;
!