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

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
11 answers Last reply
More about network question t226 t637 cingular
  1. 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
  2. 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:d17b26b5.0408132258.179a8945@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" ?
  3. 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/>
  4. 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:d17b26b5.0408132258.179a8945@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..
  5. 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
  6. 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/>
  7. 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
  8. 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!
  9. 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?

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  10. 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/>
  11. 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/>
Ask a new question

Read More

Cingular At&T GSM Internet Service Providers