Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

TDMA coverage getting WORSE??

Last response: in Network Providers
Share
Anonymous
March 27, 2005 7:55:26 PM

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

I've got an old Ericsson T19LX (actually a couple for family members too)
and I could swear the reception is getting worse on all of them.
Are the shutting down TDMA towers or something now that Cingular has
bought AT&T and doesn't use it?

--
_____________________________________________________
For email response, or CC, please mailto:see.my.sig.4.addr(at)bigfoot.com.
Yeah, it's really a real address :) 

More about : tdma coverage worse

Anonymous
March 27, 2005 11:27:58 PM

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

<see.my.sig.4.addr@nowhere.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:muhe411g2pv3djjq8gkhqhak4s9st9lv4h@4ax.com...
> I've got an old Ericsson T19LX (actually a couple for family members too)
> and I could swear the reception is getting worse on all of them.
> Are the shutting down TDMA towers or something now that Cingular has
> bought AT&T and doesn't use it?

Yep, it happened to us over a year ago. They are switching to GSM it isn't
just the AT & T thing. We always had our phone with the same service and
started in 1999. It got worse and worse and we were reassured it was going
to get better. Our phones stopped working at our house.

It is a long story and it was a long battle. We paid lots of bucks to
Cingular for over a year for their service. We complained to the BBB.
One of the CS reps in Arkansas told us the FCC wouldn't let them use the
towers anymore. This was a lie.

We eventually ported to Verizon as each phone went out of contract. And
after communication with someone in Altlanta they bought back a GSM phone
that never worked in our house that we had to bite the bullet on when we
ported our last phone.

A friend of mine who lives 500 miles away is now going through the same
thing that we did. Our problems started over 2 years ago.



T
>
> --
> _____________________________________________________
> For email response, or CC, please mailto:see.my.sig.4.addr(at)bigfoot.com.
> Yeah, it's really a real address :) 
Anonymous
March 28, 2005 8:04:06 AM

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

> The safe thing for Cingular to have done would be to monitor usage.
Over
> time and as less folks use TDMA they could migrate that capacity to
the GSM
> system.

Perhaps they were monitoring it, and when there was just one family
using the cell, it was time to cut it over :-)

tg.
Related resources
Anonymous
March 28, 2005 11:28:25 AM

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

"tom glaab" <tomglaab@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1112011446.398950.153590@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>> The safe thing for Cingular to have done would be to monitor usage.
> Over
>> time and as less folks use TDMA they could migrate that capacity to
> the GSM
>> system.
>
> Perhaps they were monitoring it, and when there was just one family
> using the cell, it was time to cut it over :-)
>
> tg.

Where we are they screwed up a whole street and with no warning. They
should at least notify people their phones will no longer work and notify CS
that it is a permanent thing not a temporary aberration. Also GSM did not
work at our home. They should have let us out of our contracts.
>
Anonymous
March 28, 2005 6:46:36 PM

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

"Safe"? What should cingular be safe from? As soon as any areas are
completely overlaid with gsm, and I think they all are, cingular can
stop maintaining the tdma equipment and/or allocate more spectrum to gsm
and/or just turn the tdma off, in those areas. All of cingular's
customers have been and all of their future customers are being told for
a long time now, that cingular is a gsm service. Tdma is deader than
analog. At least around here, there are no stores where you can go in
and buy an analog or a tdma phone.
March 29, 2005 3:50:14 AM

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

"Jerome Zelinske" <jeromez1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:gNU1e.6477$H06.6381@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "Safe"? What should cingular be safe from? As soon as any areas are
> completely overlaid with gsm, and I think they all are, cingular can
> stop maintaining the tdma equipment and/or allocate more spectrum to gsm
> and/or just turn the tdma off, in those areas. All of cingular's
> customers have been and all of their future customers are being told for
> a long time now, that cingular is a gsm service. Tdma is deader than
> analog. At least around here, there are no stores where you can go in
> and buy an analog or a tdma phone.

I'm not sure what you consider "overlaid" but in my area the GSM coverage is
much worse than TDMA. I get a great TDMA signal at my desk while the GSM
users have to go over to the window to get a signal. I realize that's not a
very scientific comparison but what it comes down to one works for me and
the other doesn't. I don't consider that completely overlaid.
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 7:26:07 AM

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

What I understood it to mean was that all the tdma antenna sites had
gsm equipment/antennas added to them.
None of the carriers, gsm, tdma, CDMA, claim coverage inside buildings.
Unless of course the building owner/management have contracted with
the carrier to have an interior antenna micro network site installed.
If almost all the same outside areas are covered, which they likely are
if all the tdma sites have had gsm added, that means overlaid to me.
Within the next two years, there likely will be fill-in sites added.
When you are at your desks, use your desk phones.
Enjoy what works for you while you can. Soon it won't work anywhere.
March 29, 2005 11:58:01 PM

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

"Jerome Zelinske" <jeromez1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:jV32e.1510$x4.50@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> When you are at your desks, use your desk phones.

Nice thought but I try not to make it a habit of giving out my work phone
for personal business and if I did I won't always be there so I'd rather
they just call my cell phone.

> Enjoy what works for you while you can. Soon it won't work anywhere.

If at some time TDMA actually does get worse and doesn't work "anywhere"
I'll re-evaluate Cingular's GSM with other carriers and see which company
fits my needs. But to answer the original posters question, TDMA has not
gotten worse in my area and still has better coverage than GSM. I currently
have no reason to switch and I'm hoping by the time I'm forced to switch
they'll have gotten the GSM coverage solved and it'll be a non-issue. I
think it's a bit early to be worrying about it though.
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 4:55:20 PM

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

Of course, since all personal calls are made before work, after work,
during breaks, and during lunch, one doesn't need to be at their desk to
make them. Therefore having one's wireless carrier's signal reach
inside to their desk is not needed.
"If at some time tdma actually does get worse"? Off would be certainly
worse, but there is no "if" just when. Again, if almost everywhere
outside there is coverage, then the carriers don't feel there is a
problem.
March 30, 2005 6:51:32 PM

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

"Jerome Zelinske" <jeromez1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Ykx2e.686$EE2.413@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Of course, since all personal calls are made before work, after work,
> during breaks, and during lunch, one doesn't need to be at their desk to
> make them. Therefore having one's wireless carrier's signal reach inside
> to their desk is not needed.

Where did you come up with the idea that ALL personal calls are made before
or after work? I don't think I implied that anywhere and I'm not going to
assume that for anyone. Taking a personal call during work is not a problem.
When I do get a call I want it to go through. If I can't receive calls
what's the point in even having a cell phone? If the cell phone is just for
outgoing calls then in your example I'd just use whatever phone was
available and I wouldn't even need a cell phone. Since I use my cell phone
primarily to receive calls it's not feasible to use whatever phone is
available. Even if it's just to take a voice mail when I'm in the middle of
something I want it to work where I spend a majority of my time. My main
goal is simply to not to have to tie up company resources for personal use.
How and when I spend my time is not an issue.

> "If at some time tdma actually does get worse"? Off would be certainly
> worse, but there is no "if" just when. Again, if almost everywhere
> outside there is coverage, then the carriers don't feel there is a
> problem.

I can't argue that "off would be worse". But again, I think that's going to
be far enough in the future that it's not worth worrying about right now.
Certainly not soon enough to jump to a service that has less coverage in my
area.

Why are you so hot on wanting people to change to GSM before there's a need
to? I give you one example of one person where moving to GSM would provide
worse service and you make up reasons why that's not a problem or why YOU
think I shouldn't be using it then anyway. If someone starts getting worse
service with TDMA then it's time to start considering something else. The
point of this thread was to enquire if TDMA service was getting worse. My
answer is "no, not in all areas". That fallacy seems to be rampant in this
newsgroup. In fact GSM worse in some areas. Until it's at least equal, where
a person needs it, then there's no need to switch.
March 31, 2005 3:39:52 AM

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

JohnF wrote:


>
> Where did you come up with the idea that ALL personal calls are made before
> or after work? I don't think I implied that anywhere and I'm not going to
> assume that for anyone. Taking a personal call during work is not a problem.
> When I do get a call I want it to go through. If I can't receive calls
> what's the point in even having a cell phone? If the cell phone is just for
> outgoing calls then in your example I'd just use whatever phone was
> available and I wouldn't even need a cell phone. Since I use my cell phone
> primarily to receive calls it's not feasible to use whatever phone is
> available. Even if it's just to take a voice mail when I'm in the middle of
> something I want it to work where I spend a majority of my time. My main
> goal is simply to not to have to tie up company resources for personal use.
> How and when I spend my time is not an issue.

Unless you're on a break, allocating your time during a work day for
personal calls *is* tying up company resources for personal use, but
it's good that you'd prefer to not add their phone lines to the mix
because they can bug those. Truth is, the phone lines are a renewable
resource, but wasted time is not. OTOH, you're probably not chronic
about it so luck with all that.


[....]


--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
March 31, 2005 8:24:12 PM

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

Per Jer:
>Unless you're on a break, allocating your time during a work day for
>personal calls *is* tying up company resources for personal use,

Maybe back in the days when people mostly worked 40 hours a week, and got paid
for overtime; but in today's context of people having to work 50-55 hours a week
for forty hours pay in order to keep their jobs - can anybody really afford to
care?
--
PeteCresswell
March 31, 2005 8:47:57 PM

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

"Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote in message
news:114n3987f7aoabb@corp.supernews.com...
> Unless you're on a break, allocating your time during a work day for
> personal calls *is* tying up company resources for personal use, but
> it's good that you'd prefer to not add their phone lines to the mix
> because they can bug those. Truth is, the phone lines are a renewable
> resource, but wasted time is not. OTOH, you're probably not chronic
> about it so luck with all that.

This has gotten way off topic but since you seem to want to make an issue of
it; I put in way more time than is required so a few minutes on a personal
call does *not* tie up company resources. Don't assume what my companies
policies are. Just because your fast food job won't let you take a personal
call don't assume that all professional jobs have those same policies. Just
trust me that this is not an issue. If this is still a problem for you then
imagine that I'm on break or eating lunch sitting at my desk on my own time.
I still can't receive or make a call. Continuing this discussion in no way
contributes to the original question.

Trying to change the subject or trying to convince me that I shouldn't be
using it anyway doesn't change the fact TDMA still has better coverage in
some areas than GSM. My point is to simply warn people to make sure GSM has
coverage where they need it before making the jump. I lot of people I know
in my area are regretting the change. This may not be the case in all areas
but it's worth investigating first. The blanket statement that GSM coverage
is as good as TDMA is just not true.
March 31, 2005 11:07:32 PM

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

(Pete Cresswell) wrote:

> Per Jer:
>
>>Unless you're on a break, allocating your time during a work day for
>>personal calls *is* tying up company resources for personal use,
>
>
> Maybe back in the days when people mostly worked 40 hours a week, and got paid
> for overtime; but in today's context of people having to work 50-55 hours a week
> for forty hours pay in order to keep their jobs - can anybody really afford to
> care?


You must work for Wal-Mart. You have my sympathy.

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 5:21:12 AM

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

(Pete Cresswell) wrote:
> Per Jer:
>
>>Unless you're on a break, allocating your time during a work day for
>>personal calls *is* tying up company resources for personal use,
>
>
> Maybe back in the days when people mostly worked 40 hours a week, and got paid
> for overtime; but in today's context of people having to work 50-55 hours a week
> for forty hours pay in order to keep their jobs - can anybody really afford to
> care?

Yeah, and that lovely new thing where some jobs are now exempt from
overtime pay "to stimulate" the economy...
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 5:21:59 AM

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

Jer wrote:
> (Pete Cresswell) wrote:
>
>> Per Jer:
>>
>>> Unless you're on a break, allocating your time during a work day for
>>> personal calls *is* tying up company resources for personal use,
>>
>>
>>
>> Maybe back in the days when people mostly worked 40 hours a week, and
>> got paid
>> for overtime; but in today's context of people having to work 50-55
>> hours a week
>> for forty hours pay in order to keep their jobs - can anybody really
>> afford to
>> care?
>
>
>
> You must work for Wal-Mart. You have my sympathy.

Or K-Mart, or Target, or Sears, or McDonald's, or any other corporation.
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 3:27:20 PM

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

So, you have a job where they will let you work for free to them on
your own time, that is your problem. That you try to even it out in
your mind by cheating your company by doing personal business when you
are being paid to work, is also your problem. Which your company may
quite specifically point out to some day. The point was that when you
are on your break or eating lunch, you do not have to be at your desk,
so your wireless signal does not have to reach it, for you to make
personal calls on your own time.
The blanket statement is that gsm coverage where it matters to the
carrier is in most cases as good or better than tdma coverage. Again
the carriers do not care about indoor coverage.
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 4:37:14 PM

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

> The blanket statement is that gsm coverage where it matters to the
> carrier is in most cases as good or better than tdma coverage. Again
> the carriers do not care about indoor coverage.

It's not that they don't care about it, it's that they don't guarantee
it. There is a difference. Doctors care about saving your life if the
opportunity arises, but they don't guarantee it, either.

TH
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 6:21:27 PM

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

"Tropical Haven" <user@example.net> wrote in message
news:424CA20A.7050503@example.net...
>
>
> (Pete Cresswell) wrote:
>> Per Jer:
>>
>>>Unless you're on a break, allocating your time during a work day for
>>>personal calls *is* tying up company resources for personal use,
>>
>>
>> Maybe back in the days when people mostly worked 40 hours a week, and got
>> paid
>> for overtime; but in today's context of people having to work 50-55 hours
>> a week
>> for forty hours pay in order to keep their jobs - can anybody really
>> afford to
>> care?
>
> Yeah, and that lovely new thing where some jobs are now exempt from
> overtime pay "to stimulate" the economy...


To answer the original question, TDMA has gotten much worse in Hazen, AR.
Cingular has a 360' tower within sight of my home. To get a TDMA signal you
have to go outside and try to find a place to talk. That's why I switched to
GSM, I can talk from anywhere in my home, I have a radio shop out back, a
steel building and can use my phone there.

Before the "change" I could use my TDMA phone in these same places.

bamp
April 1, 2005 10:21:50 PM

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

bamp wrote:

> "Tropical Haven" <user@example.net> wrote in message
> news:424CA20A.7050503@example.net...
>
>>
>>(Pete Cresswell) wrote:
>>
>>>Per Jer:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Unless you're on a break, allocating your time during a work day for
>>>>personal calls *is* tying up company resources for personal use,
>>>
>>>
>>>Maybe back in the days when people mostly worked 40 hours a week, and got
>>>paid
>>>for overtime; but in today's context of people having to work 50-55 hours
>>>a week
>>>for forty hours pay in order to keep their jobs - can anybody really
>>>afford to
>>>care?
>>
>>Yeah, and that lovely new thing where some jobs are now exempt from
>>overtime pay "to stimulate" the economy...
>
>
>
> To answer the original question, TDMA has gotten much worse in Hazen, AR.
> Cingular has a 360' tower within sight of my home. To get a TDMA signal you
> have to go outside and try to find a place to talk. That's why I switched to
> GSM, I can talk from anywhere in my home, I have a radio shop out back, a
> steel building and can use my phone there.
>
> Before the "change" I could use my TDMA phone in these same places.
>
> bamp
>
>


Based on the limited information from your comment, I'd guess that TDMA
is no longer offered from that tower. If that seems odd, one needs to
understand that TDMA (and AMPS for that matter) aren't offered from each
and every tower site.

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
April 2, 2005 12:29:32 AM

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

Per Jer:
>You must work for Wal-Mart. You have my sympathy.

Nope. IT department of a major electric company until 10 years ago. Now I'm
a so-called independent contractor.
--
PeteCresswell
April 2, 2005 1:40:30 AM

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

Per (Pete Cresswell):
>IT department of a major electric company until 10 years ago. Now I'm
>a so-called independent contractor.

And, I should add, my observation about the uncompensated hours is based on the
many regular employees I've worked with at a couple of major financial
institutions over the past 10 years, NOT on my own experience.

I get paid for every minute I work. No work, no pay. Extra work, extra
pay.... And that's the way it should be. I feel sorry for the others.
--
PeteCresswell
Anonymous
April 2, 2005 12:40:15 PM

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

Well, for that matter they do not guarantee outdoor coverage either.
However, if you complain about an outdoor location within their coverage
area, they will look at filling it. But, if you complain about an
indoor location, they will say sorry building penetration is beyond our
control.
Anonymous
April 3, 2005 7:42:14 PM

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

> You must work for Wal-Mart. You have my sympathy.

In no way was it indicated whether the OP was salaried or hourly. Many
salaried positions allow certain personal interruptions during the day
as long as the necessary work is completed.

TH
April 3, 2005 7:42:15 PM

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

Per Tropical Haven:
>In no way was it indicated whether the OP was salaried or hourly.

I'm the OP and I'm hourly - aggressively so. I keep a minute-by-minute journal
of my actvities. Any non-productive activity that exceeds 8 minutes goes down
as a 15-minute block of non-billable time.
--
PeteCresswell
Anonymous
April 3, 2005 7:43:45 PM

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

Jerome Zelinske wrote:
> Well, for that matter they do not guarantee outdoor coverage either.
> However, if you complain about an outdoor location within their coverage
> area, they will look at filling it. But, if you complain about an
> indoor location, they will say sorry building penetration is beyond our
> control.

But, it's true about building penetration. There are certain building
materials that are known to allow better penetration of signals.
However, until Cingular gets the final say in what materials and designs
buildings may have, it's not up to them to guarantee anything about
buildings.

TH
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 3:28:34 AM

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

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 19:27:58 -0500, "Turbocane"
<Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> spewed:
>> I've got an old Ericsson T19LX (actually a couple for family members too)
>> and I could swear the reception is getting worse on all of them.
>> Are the shutting down TDMA towers or something now that Cingular has
>> bought AT&T and doesn't use it?
>
>Yep, it happened to us over a year ago. They are switching to GSM it isn't
>just the AT & T thing. We always had our phone with the same service and
>started in 1999. It got worse and worse and we were reassured it was going
>to get better. Our phones stopped working at our house.
>
>It is a long story and it was a long battle. We paid lots of bucks to
>Cingular for over a year for their service. We complained to the BBB.
>One of the CS reps in Arkansas told us the FCC wouldn't let them use the
>towers anymore. This was a lie.
>
>We eventually ported to Verizon as each phone went out of contract. And
>after communication with someone in Altlanta they bought back a GSM phone
>that never worked in our house that we had to bite the bullet on when we
>ported our last phone.
>
>A friend of mine who lives 500 miles away is now going through the same
>thing that we did. Our problems started over 2 years ago.
>
>
Well I'm glad to see it's not my imagination, or only my are.
It seem so totally pointless.
They've already GOT and PAID for the towers. How much can the damn power
be. It doesn't even use the same frequency AFAIK, so you're right, that
was BS.

Of course, it could be to force everybody to buy new phones or some other
greedmongering plot.
--
_____________________________________________________
For email response, or CC, please mailto:see.my.sig.4.addr(at)bigfoot.com.
Yeah, it's really a real address :) 
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 3:28:38 AM

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

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:55:20 GMT, Jerome Zelinske <jeromez1@earthlink.net>
spewed:
> Of course, since all personal calls are made before work, after work,
>during breaks, and during lunch, one doesn't need to be at their desk to
>make them. Therefore having one's wireless carrier's signal reach
>inside to their desk is not needed.
> "If at some time tdma actually does get worse"? Off would be certainly
>worse, but there is no "if" just when. Again, if almost everywhere
>outside there is coverage, then the carriers don't feel there is a
>problem.

You're forgetting about things like employers monitoring phone calls and
emails. Probably not manually, but logged, saved, scanned somewhere.
It DOES happen, and the bigger the biz the more likely.
--
_____________________________________________________
For email response, or CC, please mailto:see.my.sig.4.addr(at)bigfoot.com.
Yeah, it's really a real address :) 
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 3:28:39 AM

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

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 11:27:20 GMT, Jerome Zelinske <jeromez1@earthlink.net>
spewed:
> So, you have a job where they will let you work for free to them on
>your own time, that is your problem. That you try to even it out in
>your mind by cheating your company by doing personal business when you

"cheating" your company by doing personal business at work?
You MUST be a manager or owner of some biz. That's the disgusting
micromanaging greed that's screwing the entire country up.
They've got no problem asking you to work late and you get nothing for it
because you're on salary. And you'll do it, or they'll lay you off for
somebody they can pay less and will, or give 2 jobs to one other person
and "downsize" you, etc. etc.

>are being paid to work, is also your problem. Which your company may
>quite specifically point out to some day. The point was that when you
>are on your break or eating lunch, you do not have to be at your desk,
>so your wireless signal does not have to reach it, for you to make
>personal calls on your own time.

Total disregard for employee satisfaction and this type attitude will NOT
lead to more productivity, ie. more $ for you. Studies have been done
that have proved it. There's a balance, like with everything.

> The blanket statement is that gsm coverage where it matters to the
>carrier is in most cases as good or better than tdma coverage. Again
>the carriers do not care about indoor coverage.

--
_____________________________________________________
For email response, or CC, please mailto:see.my.sig.4.addr(at)bigfoot.com.
Yeah, it's really a real address :) 
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 3:28:41 AM

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

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 12:37:14 GMT, Tropical Haven <user@example.net>
spewed:
>> The blanket statement is that gsm coverage where it matters to the
>> carrier is in most cases as good or better than tdma coverage. Again
>> the carriers do not care about indoor coverage.
>
>It's not that they don't care about it, it's that they don't guarantee
>it. There is a difference. Doctors care about saving your life if the
>opportunity arises, but they don't guarantee it, either.
>
Only if you have insurance.
--
_____________________________________________________
For email response, or CC, please mailto:see.my.sig.4.addr(at)bigfoot.com.
Yeah, it's really a real address :) 
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 3:28:42 AM

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

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 15:43:45 GMT, Tropical Haven <user@example.net>
spewed:
>> Well, for that matter they do not guarantee outdoor coverage either.
>> However, if you complain about an outdoor location within their coverage
>> area, they will look at filling it. But, if you complain about an
>> indoor location, they will say sorry building penetration is beyond our
>> control.
>
>But, it's true about building penetration. There are certain building
>materials that are known to allow better penetration of signals.
>However, until Cingular gets the final say in what materials and designs
>buildings may have, it's not up to them to guarantee anything about
>buildings.
>

Example?
I've had signal in places you'd think there couldn't be, and visa versa.
So, wondering if there's anything non-intuitive about it.
Just curious.
--
_____________________________________________________
For email response, or CC, please mailto:see.my.sig.4.addr(at)bigfoot.com.
Yeah, it's really a real address :) 
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 3:28:44 AM

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

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 16:24:12 -0500, "(Pete Cresswell)" <x@y.z.invalid>
spewed:
>Per Jer:
>>Unless you're on a break, allocating your time during a work day for
>>personal calls *is* tying up company resources for personal use,
>
>Maybe back in the days when people mostly worked 40 hours a week, and got paid
>for overtime; but in today's context of people having to work 50-55 hours a week
>for forty hours pay in order to keep their jobs - can anybody really afford to
>care?

Don't forget the 2hr+ commute time per day.
--
_____________________________________________________
For email response, or CC, please mailto:see.my.sig.4.addr(at)bigfoot.com.
Yeah, it's really a real address :) 
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 3:28:47 AM

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

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 14:49:23 -0400, "(Pete Cresswell)" <x@y.z.invalid>
spewed:
>Per Tropical Haven:
>>In no way was it indicated whether the OP was salaried or hourly.
>
>I'm the OP and I'm hourly - aggressively so. I keep a minute-by-minute journal
>of my actvities. Any non-productive activity that exceeds 8 minutes goes down
>as a 15-minute block of non-billable time.

Glad to see there's minuses to hourly too.
That would make me a nervous wreck having to account for my time that
closely. It also actually costs whoever's paying your salary $ to pay you
for the time to keep track! Nobody ever thinks of that.

--
_____________________________________________________
For email response, or CC, please mailto:see.my.sig.4.addr(at)bigfoot.com.
Yeah, it's really a real address :) 
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 3:28:49 AM

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

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 01:21:12 GMT, Tropical Haven <user@example.net>
spewed:
>>>Unless you're on a break, allocating your time during a work day for
>>>personal calls *is* tying up company resources for personal use,
>>
>>
>> Maybe back in the days when people mostly worked 40 hours a week, and got paid
>> for overtime; but in today's context of people having to work 50-55 hours a week
>> for forty hours pay in order to keep their jobs - can anybody really afford to
>> care?
>
>Yeah, and that lovely new thing where some jobs are now exempt from
>overtime pay "to stimulate" the economy...

That's lovely. What types? Hadn't heard that one yet.
--
_____________________________________________________
For email response, or CC, please mailto:see.my.sig.4.addr(at)bigfoot.com.
Yeah, it's really a real address :) 
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 3:28:50 AM

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

On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 18:21:50 -0600, Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten> spewed:
>>>>>Unless you're on a break, allocating your time during a work day for
>>>>>personal calls *is* tying up company resources for personal use,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Maybe back in the days when people mostly worked 40 hours a week, and got
>>>>paid
>>>>for overtime; but in today's context of people having to work 50-55 hours
>>>>a week
>>>>for forty hours pay in order to keep their jobs - can anybody really
>>>>afford to
>>>>care?
>>>
>>>Yeah, and that lovely new thing where some jobs are now exempt from
>>>overtime pay "to stimulate" the economy...
>>
>>
>>
>> To answer the original question, TDMA has gotten much worse in Hazen, AR.
>> Cingular has a 360' tower within sight of my home. To get a TDMA signal you
>> have to go outside and try to find a place to talk. That's why I switched to
>> GSM, I can talk from anywhere in my home, I have a radio shop out back, a
>> steel building and can use my phone there.
>>
>> Before the "change" I could use my TDMA phone in these same places.
>>
>> bamp
>>
>>
>
>
>Based on the limited information from your comment, I'd guess that TDMA
>is no longer offered from that tower. If that seems odd, one needs to
>understand that TDMA (and AMPS for that matter) aren't offered from each
>and every tower site.

Probably correct deduction.
What is ridiculous, is they already paid for the equip., why not just
leave it on?!

--
_____________________________________________________
For email response, or CC, please mailto:see.my.sig.4.addr(at)bigfoot.com.
Yeah, it's really a real address :) 
May 6, 2005 9:57:28 AM

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

see.my.sig.4.addr@nowhere.com.invalid wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 18:21:50 -0600, Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten> spewed:
>
>>>>>>Unless you're on a break, allocating your time during a work day for
>>>>>>personal calls *is* tying up company resources for personal use,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Maybe back in the days when people mostly worked 40 hours a week, and got
>>>>>paid
>>>>>for overtime; but in today's context of people having to work 50-55 hours
>>>>>a week
>>>>>for forty hours pay in order to keep their jobs - can anybody really
>>>>>afford to
>>>>>care?
>>>>
>>>>Yeah, and that lovely new thing where some jobs are now exempt from
>>>>overtime pay "to stimulate" the economy...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>To answer the original question, TDMA has gotten much worse in Hazen, AR.
>>>Cingular has a 360' tower within sight of my home. To get a TDMA signal you
>>>have to go outside and try to find a place to talk. That's why I switched to
>>>GSM, I can talk from anywhere in my home, I have a radio shop out back, a
>>>steel building and can use my phone there.
>>>
>>>Before the "change" I could use my TDMA phone in these same places.
>>>
>>>bamp
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>Based on the limited information from your comment, I'd guess that TDMA
>>is no longer offered from that tower. If that seems odd, one needs to
>>understand that TDMA (and AMPS for that matter) aren't offered from each
>>and every tower site.
>
>
> Probably correct deduction.
> What is ridiculous, is they already paid for the equip., why not just
> leave it on?!


It's a trade-off situation. Given the limited spectrum availability,
when demand for services shifts from one to another, providers
reallocate resources to satisfy their clients. TDMA is less efficient
than GSM, and converting from one to the other simply requires changing
out the radios and reprogramming the network. Sometimes, a tower site
can best serve demand if it's totally GSM, providing a TDMA signal is
still available from neighbour sites, albeit a weak signal. Signal
strength is measured in the open, not inside buildings, so if a customer
already has weak TDMA coverage inside, and the only TDMA signal is
shifted to another site further away, it's reasonable to predict that
TDMA may no longer be available at all inside. I figure this scenario
has already been repeated in a number of locales, but who can really
know for certain?


--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
May 6, 2005 11:53:38 AM

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

Per see.my.sig.4.addr@nowhere.com.invalid:
>That would make me a nervous wreck having to account for my time that
>closely. It also actually costs whoever's paying your salary $ to pay you
>for the time to keep track!

It was stressful at first, but after awhile it becomes just another refles.

Also, the resulting diaries become valuable for estimating future jobs.
--
PeteCresswell
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 6:05:15 PM

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

<see.my.sig.4.addr@nowhere.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:td1m71dth9ul45v0iq34dhk95vl8causk1@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 19:27:58 -0500, "Turbocane"
> <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> spewed:


> Well I'm glad to see it's not my imagination, or only my are.
> It seem so totally pointless.
> They've already GOT and PAID for the towers. How much can the damn power
> be. It doesn't even use the same frequency AFAIK, so you're right, that
> was BS.

Not having followed this thread all along it makes me wonder what you are
talking about????

MOST of the towers are not owned by the individual carriers.

ALL of the TDMA carriers that are transitioning to GSM are using the same
towers, antennas, and ground/floor space in the compounds/buildings. In some
instances they are adding antennas but typically these are dual band
antennas to handle the newly aquired frequencies of the "bought" company.
AND they are shared between the TDMA and the GSM equipment.

As GSM is added, TDMA is whittled away at. This gives more bandwidth for GSM
and less (eventually none at all) to TDMA.

As for Frequency, the frequency spectrum for a given carrier does not change
because they are transitioning to GSM. They are re-using the same
frequencies/bandwidth and thus the need to dwindle the TDMA and increase the
GSM. One would hope that they are doing this in conjuncton with the traffic
on the site balancing between remaining TDMA customers and new GSM
customers.

As for the cost of the power (I am guessing that you are talking about AC
Power from the local utility) a typical cell site will run about $2000 a
month.

On the other hand, depending on the carrier and the location, the cell site
generates a lot of money. Profits are still marginal for all of the USA
carriers however as they are continually growing and adding and (in the case
of TDMA/GSM - and soon to be WCDMA) changing. All this costs money.

> Of course, it could be to force everybody to buy new phones or some other
> greedmongering plot.

They have no "Greed Mongering PLOT" over and above the natural business
desire to make a profit and sell at a competitive price.

You sound bitter and sound like you expect to get something for nothing.
Won't happen!
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 6:38:34 PM

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

In article <vQKee.6420$GQ5.5016@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"John S" <johndsummers@teraearthlink.net> wrote:

> As for Frequency, the frequency spectrum for a given carrier does not change
> because they are transitioning to GSM. They are re-using the same
> frequencies/bandwidth and thus the need to dwindle the TDMA and increase the
> GSM. One would hope that they are doing this in conjuncton with the traffic
> on the site balancing between remaining TDMA customers and new GSM
> customers.

Judging by the myriad complains of TDMA users, this is the exception.
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 9:12:07 PM

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

see.my.sig.4.addr@nowhere.com.invalid wrote:

>>Based on the limited information from your comment, I'd guess that TDMA
>>is no longer offered from that tower. If that seems odd, one needs to
>>understand that TDMA (and AMPS for that matter) aren't offered from each
>>and every tower site.
>
> Probably correct deduction.
> What is ridiculous, is they already paid for the equip., why not just
> leave it on?!

For the same reason that carriers offering AMPS are ithching for that
day in 2007 when they can turn the equipment off: it takes up bandwidth.

If the old TDMA equipment is left on, that means one or more channels
are going to be devoted to old-school TDMA and unavailable to GSM. GSM,
I presume, uses each channel more efficiently and can pack more users
onto a channel, so it makes sense to "encourage" the veteran users of
TDMA to upgrade.

Over time, the same will be true when UMTS/WCDMA starts to roll out in
force. Cingular will want to "encourage" another migration to be able
to pack in even more users into the limited spectrum they have.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Anonymous
May 7, 2005 1:25:36 AM

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

In article <117nnd8k4vgm447@corp.supernews.com>,
Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote:

> see.my.sig.4.addr@nowhere.com.invalid wrote:
>
> >>Based on the limited information from your comment, I'd guess that TDMA
> >>is no longer offered from that tower. If that seems odd, one needs to
> >>understand that TDMA (and AMPS for that matter) aren't offered from each
> >>and every tower site.
> >
> > Probably correct deduction.
> > What is ridiculous, is they already paid for the equip., why not just
> > leave it on?!
>
> For the same reason that carriers offering AMPS are ithching for that
> day in 2007 when they can turn the equipment off: it takes up bandwidth.
>
> If the old TDMA equipment is left on, that means one or more channels
> are going to be devoted to old-school TDMA and unavailable to GSM. GSM,
> I presume, uses each channel more efficiently and can pack more users
> onto a channel, so it makes sense to "encourage" the veteran users of
> TDMA to upgrade.
>
> Over time, the same will be true when UMTS/WCDMA starts to roll out in
> force. Cingular will want to "encourage" another migration to be able
> to pack in even more users into the limited spectrum they have.

Limited? You must be talking about SprintPCS native coverage.
Anonymous
May 7, 2005 2:44:57 PM

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

Jack Zwick wrote:

>>Over time, the same will be true when UMTS/WCDMA starts to roll out in
>>force. Cingular will want to "encourage" another migration to be able
>>to pack in even more users into the limited spectrum they have.
>
>
> Limited? You must be talking about SprintPCS native coverage.

thanks for proving your illiteracy again, Phillipe.

I was referring to the amount of bandwidth Cingular has available to it.
There isn't any carrier in the US who is willing to divide the
spectrum they have among AMPS, TDMA, GSM *and* WCDMA, all at once.
Cingular in particular will want to turn down AMPS and TDMA if it can,
before fully committing to UMTS,


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
May 7, 2005 7:30:33 PM

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

Isaiah Beard wrote:
> Jack Zwick wrote:
>
>>> Over time, the same will be true when UMTS/WCDMA starts to roll out
>>> in force. Cingular will want to "encourage" another migration to be
>>> able to pack in even more users into the limited spectrum they have.
>>
>>
>>
>> Limited? You must be talking about SprintPCS native coverage.
>
>
> thanks for proving your illiteracy again, Phillipe.
>
> I was referring to the amount of bandwidth Cingular has available to it.
> There isn't any carrier in the US who is willing to divide the spectrum
> they have among AMPS, TDMA, GSM *and* WCDMA, all at once. Cingular in
> particular will want to turn down AMPS and TDMA if it can, before fully
> committing to UMTS,

According to my Cingular pals, they're installing UMTS equipment all
over the place as I hammer out this message. As to how that impacts any
particular coverage of AMPS or TDMA, I haven't a clue.



--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
!