Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

virgin phones & sprint pcs

Last response: in Network Providers
Share
April 18, 2004 2:29:05 PM

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

Question, maybe a stupid one. If I was to buy one of those pre pay kyocera
slider phones for virgin, could I hook I swap a phone number from a sprint
pcs phone to the slider and have it on my pcs plan? I know they share the
towers so I was wondering. Thanks.


Capt.
Anonymous
April 18, 2004 7:36:34 PM

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

In article <10857lon0k0l14@corp.supernews.com>,
"Captain" <capn@charter.net> wrote:

> Question, maybe a stupid one. If I was to buy one of those pre pay kyocera
> slider phones for virgin, could I hook I swap a phone number from a sprint
> pcs phone to the slider and have it on my pcs plan? I know they share the
> towers so I was wondering. Thanks.

Virgin uses the SprintPCS network. SprintPCS only uses phones sold by
SprintPCS. You could have a SprintPCS phone number ported to Virgin
for use on a Virgin phone with a Virgin set of prepaid minutes.


I wonder about those slider phones. Why slide and protect the keys,
wouldn't it be more prudent to have the screen hidden and protected?
Anonymous
April 18, 2004 7:38:12 PM

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

"Captain" <capn@charter.net> wrote in message
news:10857lon0k0l14@corp.supernews.com...
> Question, maybe a stupid one. If I was to buy one of those pre pay kyocera
> slider phones for virgin, could I hook I swap a phone number from a sprint
> pcs phone to the slider and have it on my pcs plan? I know they share the
> towers so I was wondering. Thanks.
>
>
> Capt.

No, if I understand you right. SPCS will not allow any phones that don't
have ESNs in their database. They will not allow non branded SPCS phones in
their system either.

Bob
Related resources
Anonymous
April 19, 2004 3:29:50 AM

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

Agreed. The technology is obviously compatible, but Sprint won't do it.
Too bad that CDMA doesn't use SIM cards, then again, perhaps that is why
less mobiles are stolen in the US than in Europe.

Stu
"Bob Smith" <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Ehxgc.19664$A_4.16371@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "Captain" <capn@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:10857lon0k0l14@corp.supernews.com...
> > Question, maybe a stupid one. If I was to buy one of those pre pay
kyocera
> > slider phones for virgin, could I hook I swap a phone number from a
sprint
> > pcs phone to the slider and have it on my pcs plan? I know they share
the
> > towers so I was wondering. Thanks.
> >
> >
> > Capt.
>
> No, if I understand you right. SPCS will not allow any phones that don't
> have ESNs in their database. They will not allow non branded SPCS phones
in
> their system either.
>
> Bob
>
>
April 19, 2004 3:29:51 AM

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

question then, why won't sprint do it? if the technology is the same and you
don't need to unlock anything, then what the hell is the deal?

Capt.

"Stuart Friedman" <stu@nospam.na> wrote in message
news:o bEgc.9640$oE1.706@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...
> Agreed. The technology is obviously compatible, but Sprint won't do it.
> Too bad that CDMA doesn't use SIM cards, then again, perhaps that is why
> less mobiles are stolen in the US than in Europe.
>
> Stu
> "Bob Smith" <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:Ehxgc.19664$A_4.16371@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "Captain" <capn@charter.net> wrote in message
> > news:10857lon0k0l14@corp.supernews.com...
> > > Question, maybe a stupid one. If I was to buy one of those pre pay
> kyocera
> > > slider phones for virgin, could I hook I swap a phone number from a
> sprint
> > > pcs phone to the slider and have it on my pcs plan? I know they share
> the
> > > towers so I was wondering. Thanks.
> > >
> > >
> > > Capt.
> >
> > No, if I understand you right. SPCS will not allow any phones that don't
> > have ESNs in their database. They will not allow non branded SPCS phones
> in
> > their system either.
> >
> > Bob
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
April 19, 2004 4:58:41 AM

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

"Captain" <capn@charter.net> wrote in message
news:10864tdg0h2ibd1@corp.supernews.com...
> question then, why won't sprint do it? if the technology is the same and
you
> don't need to unlock anything, then what the hell is the deal?
>
> Capt.

Because Virgin uses phones that SPCS doesn't sell or support ... that's what
the hell the deal is!

Bob
April 19, 2004 11:35:05 AM

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

"Captain" <capn@charter.net> wrote in message news:<10864tdg0h2ibd1@corp.supernews.com>...
> question then, why won't sprint do it? if the technology is the same and you
> don't need to unlock anything, then what the hell is the deal?
>
> Capt.
>

Virgin Mobile is a joine venture between Sprint PCS and VIrgin
Records. Sprint supplies the network and that end, while Virgin
supplies the end-user equipment and support.

I'm sure it's somewhere in the agreement that Sprint cannot take VM
phones to be used on their plans (and vice versa), and I think Virgin
would be pretty upset if Sprint did activate one on their plan (they
spent the money but won't get the revinue).
Anonymous
April 19, 2004 6:44:45 PM

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

In article <7e761144.0404190635.3802bdb8@posting.google.com>,
pcsguy@bellsouth.net (TechGeek) wrote:

> "Captain" <capn@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:<10864tdg0h2ibd1@corp.supernews.com>...
> > question then, why won't sprint do it? if the technology is the same and
> > you
> > don't need to unlock anything, then what the hell is the deal?
> >
> > Capt.
> >
>
> Virgin Mobile is a joine venture between Sprint PCS and VIrgin
> Records. Sprint supplies the network and that end, while Virgin
> supplies the end-user equipment and support.
>
> I'm sure it's somewhere in the agreement that Sprint cannot take VM
> phones to be used on their plans (and vice versa), and I think Virgin
> would be pretty upset if Sprint did activate one on their plan (they
> spent the money but won't get the revinue).

However if the FCC ruled that carriers had to allow compatible phones on
their system, all this would change; which is why there is the campaign
on to have the FCC do exactly that.
Anonymous
April 19, 2004 8:07:02 PM

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

"Robert M." <rmarkoff@msn.com> wrote in message
news:rmarkoff-032942.09444519042004@news02.east.earthlink.net...
> In article <7e761144.0404190635.3802bdb8@posting.google.com>,
> pcsguy@bellsouth.net (TechGeek) wrote:
>
> > "Captain" <capn@charter.net> wrote in message
> > news:<10864tdg0h2ibd1@corp.supernews.com>...
> > > question then, why won't sprint do it? if the technology is the same
and
> > > you
> > > don't need to unlock anything, then what the hell is the deal?
> > >
> > > Capt.
> > >
> >
> > Virgin Mobile is a joine venture between Sprint PCS and VIrgin
> > Records. Sprint supplies the network and that end, while Virgin
> > supplies the end-user equipment and support.
> >
> > I'm sure it's somewhere in the agreement that Sprint cannot take VM
> > phones to be used on their plans (and vice versa), and I think Virgin
> > would be pretty upset if Sprint did activate one on their plan (they
> > spent the money but won't get the revinue).
>
> However if the FCC ruled that carriers had to allow compatible phones on
> their system, all this would change; which is why there is the campaign
> on to have the FCC do exactly that.

I believe that's a bad thing to do. As previously mentioned, it puts the
burden on the carriers to support phones they've never sold, or had software
and hardware designed to access their systems ... all of their systems. What
about java vs. brew phones? Porting numbers is one thing. Making carriers
support products they do not sell is another.

Bob
Anonymous
April 19, 2004 9:24:48 PM

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

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Bob Smith <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> I believe that's a bad thing to do. As previously mentioned, it puts the
> burden on the carriers to support phones they've never sold, or had software
> and hardware designed to access their systems ... all of their systems. What
> about java vs. brew phones? Porting numbers is one thing. Making carriers
> support products they do not sell is another.
>
> Bob
>

I would have to disagree with you here. Sprint PCS would only have to
support phones it sells. The rest can be told outright that use of
those phones on their system are without performance warrantee and
without support. There is significant precedence for this now in the
broadband arena. Cable Modems all use DOCSIS now and yet the cable
companies only support modems they have issued. DSL routers (often
mistermed as modems) now mostly run DMT and can be used with many
providers, but providers only support modems issued by them (i.e. a
Cisco 677 will work on QWest DSL, but QWest will refuse to support it).

So, I believe support is a non-issue.

- --

Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFAhAtf1p0e3NXsrtERAhaAAJ91qIcRto1MzIKav7/Z5Vl6HV3/CwCfV3K3
+4zJqRPug21nlsj3t3LhHm4=
=52os
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Anonymous
April 19, 2004 9:24:49 PM

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

Thomas T. Veldhouse <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I would have to disagree with you here. Sprint PCS would only have to
> support phones it sells. The rest can be told outright that use of
> those phones on their system are without performance warrantee and
> without support.

This will only piss customers off. Hell, when I worked for an ISP I had
someone get angry with me because I told him we didn't support the KA9Q
TCP/IP DOS Packet Communications program. It was already several years old
and he was using a *beta* version on top of that. I maintain that I told him
the right thing, the owner of the company and the other tech support people
agreed with me, but it still irritated him.


--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
"someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy
slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003
Anonymous
April 19, 2004 11:39:00 PM

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

On 19 Apr 2004 17:24:48 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>I would have to disagree with you here. Sprint PCS would only have to
>support phones it sells. The rest can be told outright that use of
>those phones on their system are without performance warrantee and
>without support.

This has a comparison in the OS world. OEM versions of software are
sold, but they are sold with the understanding that the company that
produced the software doesn't provide support - the end user has to
contact the company that sold them the OEM software.

Of course, everybody gets mad at the company that actually wrote the
software, and not the OEM.
Anonymous
April 26, 2004 12:04:21 PM

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

In article <40840b60$0$171$892e0abb@auth.newsreader.octanews.com>,
veldy71@yahoo.com says...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Bob Smith <usirsclt_No_Spam_@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > I believe that's a bad thing to do. As previously mentioned, it puts the
> > burden on the carriers to support phones they've never sold, or had software
> > and hardware designed to access their systems ... all of their systems. What
> > about java vs. brew phones? Porting numbers is one thing. Making carriers
> > support products they do not sell is another.
> >
> > Bob
> >
>
> I would have to disagree with you here. Sprint PCS would only have to
> support phones it sells. The rest can be told outright that use of
> those phones on their system are without performance warrantee and
> without support. There is significant precedence for this now in the
> broadband arena. Cable Modems all use DOCSIS now and yet the cable
> companies only support modems they have issued. DSL routers (often
> mistermed as modems) now mostly run DMT and can be used with many
> providers, but providers only support modems issued by them (i.e. a
> Cisco 677 will work on QWest DSL, but QWest will refuse to support it).
>
> So, I believe support is a non-issue.
>

I think cell phones are bit more complex than that analogy allows.
At least with CDMA, coverage and capacity are both determined by
communication with the phones on a command level. Among other
things, too, of course.

The point is that there's more of a two-way here than with Cable or
DSL. Or POTS, for that matter.

--
RØß
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them
!