Re: AT&T didn't do well because... in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r21515517 en Wed, 02 Dec 2009 00:34:33 EDT Wed, 02 Dec 2009 00:34:33 EDT Re: AT&T didn't do well because... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21517071 en102 : :(I'm a hold out for a decent device (attempting to have work replace my Blackberry 7100i Nextel - yuck for something better... probably iPAQ 910.
My current 'sacrifice' might be a tilt (purchase for $99 - 1 year contract :p ) - I just don't like the screen.
I'd probably have a G1 on T-Mobile by now if it has a remote desktop client. It has SSH client (needed for me)
and nearly same screen size (3.2" vs 3.5" for iPhone) and same resolution - 320x480 (tilt = 240x320 :( )
Many newer devices are 640x480, but small 2.8" viewable.
Pictures will look sharp, but difficult size for SSH client.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21517071 Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:08:05 EDT Re: AT&T didn't do well because... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21517048 HappyBunny : I remember you as well! I no longer have the Razer as my main phone... I am loving my new Sony Ericsson TM506 (in green!) It is a really good phone!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21517048 Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:03:06 EDT Re: AT&T didn't do well because... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21516563 en102 : Yup - I remember your posts on HoFo as well :p
Moving from T-Mobiles very well built/mature GSM 1900 only network to the former AT&T Wireless GSM/TDMA/AMPS network which had extensive use of AMR half rate was bad.
I was one of the lucky few with a Motorola seem edited phone for AMR-Full rate.
I'd be picking a G1 if I could get my corp discounts on T-Mo.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21516563 Tue, 02 Dec 2008 17:32:30 EDT Re: AT&T didn't do well because... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21515517 HappyBunny :
said by en102 See Profile :

They have a botched 3G network in many places.
Eg. Southern California, they have deployed 1/4 of their spectrum for 3G services on 1900MHz (while 850MHz would do a better coverage job).
This resulted in many seeing low signal (3G iPhone) and many dropped calls on 3G devices (how much voice + data can you push over a single 5MHz carrier in an area like Los Angeles?).
Well why should that be a surprise? I was a customer when Cingular (now AT&T) rolled out the 850 band in LA and it was an utter disaster. Constant dropped calls, calls that were misrouted and calls that went silent on one end. Th Long Beach area was so bad I was able to terminate my contract early and go to the carrier ranked number two in this survey, T-Mobile. I love them, the service is excellent. Why Apple didn't choose them for the iPhone is beyond me :(]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21515517 Tue, 02 Dec 2008 14:26:28 EDT AT&T didn't do well because... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21515125 en102 : They have a botched 3G network in many places.
Eg. Southern California, they have deployed 1/4 of their spectrum for 3G services on 1900MHz (while 850MHz would do a better coverage job).
This resulted in many seeing low signal (3G iPhone) and many dropped calls on 3G devices (how much voice + data can you push over a single 5MHz carrier in an area like Los Angeles?).

They've finally started deploying a 2nd 3G carrier on 850 MHz around here, and guess what... my 3G dropped calls have effectively stopped, and the browser now works.

AT&T CS Reps blame the phone or SIM card on every issue (they aren't technical... just first line of defense)
I did warranty exchange 3x with no fix.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21515125 Tue, 02 Dec 2008 13:23:05 EDT