 
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ | That's great but Please don't force GSM on those of us who are happy with CDMA, which is clearly superior where it matters - reliability. | |
|
 | 
81399672
Premium
join:2006-05-17
Los Angeles, CA | Re: That's great but I disagree, GSM works just as good as CDMA. | |
|
| | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | Re: That's great but I disagree. cDMA is a lot less spectrum-heavy than gSM, and CDMA, particuarly on the SMV codec, sounds landline-qality. GSM...meh. | |
|
| | |
| | |
81399672
Premium
join:2006-05-17
Los Angeles, CA
| Re: That's great but said by Eat Me  :said by 81399672 :I disagree, GSM works just as good as CDMA. Then why is GSM moving to CDMA? I am not seeing at&t and tmobile moving to cdma.
--
i am not a lawyer but I do play one on the internet | |
|
| | | | k1ll3rdr4g0n
join:2005-03-19
Homer Glen, IL
1 edit | Re: That's great but said by 81399672 :said by Eat Me :said by 81399672 :I disagree, GSM works just as good as CDMA. Then why is GSM moving to CDMA? I am not seeing at&t and tmobile moving to cdma. Friends, friends! Lets not bicker! We all know the most reliable technology is 2CAAS (2-cup-and-a-string).  .
But really each technology will be better/worse in different areas. I won't repeat my last example but choose which provider is good in your area and use them. | |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | 
Matt
Gone playing Dragon Age Origins
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC | Re: That's great but Fortunately, AT&T is migrating to LTE which uses OFDM, not UMTS. | |
|
| | | | | | 
RiseAbove
IreCruitU
Premium
join:2004-01-30
| Re: That's great but said by Matt :Fortunately, AT&T is migrating to LTE which uses OFDM, not UMTS. True but OFDM has roots in CDMA. It's all just one big circle of technology in the end.
Verizon is also moving to LTE and will probably have their network up way before ATT. I think they are eyeing a 2010 to be in 250 top markets by then.
--
Need some IT work? Hit me up, I'm now in IT recruiting and looking for ways to give back to the DSLreports community for all the years of support. | |
|
| | | |
| | | |
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
 ·PenTeleData
 ·Future Nine Corpor..
·VOIPo
·Vonage
| Re: That's great but said by r81984 :I do know that some cdma carriers in canada are planning to switch to gsm. My gsm phone gets signals where cdma does not. gsm has much more coverage than cdma in the us and goes through walls a lot better. Having to call people on verizon sucks when they are indoors. Obviously since you live in Canada you are unqualified to talk about what happens here in the US, so let me educate you.
Fact - coverage has nothing to do with CDMA vs GSM. However, those on the Verizon network have substantially more coverage in many areas than those on AT&T or T-Mobile. Since Sprint users can roam on verizon, they have that too.
In areas I primarily travel, i.e. the Eastern Seaboard of the US, Verizon wins hands down in terms of coverage. However, I find that with a weak signal I can still make a call on Verizon's CDMA network and have people understand me. On GSM when the signal is low, people sound like they're underwater and it goes rapidly downhill from there.
CDMA is also more spectrum efficient. GSM's old standard was based on TDMA, which allocates time slices for each user. CDMA has them all transmitting at once which makes more efficient use of spectrum since they're really not taking turns like on CDMA. | |
|
| | | | | 
r81984
Thread is
Premium
join:2001-11-14
St John'S, NL
·magicjack.com
 ·Cox HSI
·Insight Communicat..
·AT&T Midwest
| Re: That's great but said by Eat Me :said by r81984 :I do know that some cdma carriers in canada are planning to switch to gsm. My gsm phone gets signals where cdma does not. gsm has much more coverage than cdma in the us and goes through walls a lot better. Having to call people on verizon sucks when they are indoors. Obviously since you live in Canada you are unqualified to talk about what happens here in the US, so let me educate you. Fact - coverage has nothing to do with CDMA vs GSM. However, those on the Verizon network have substantially more coverage in many areas than those on AT&T or T-Mobile. Since Sprint users can roam on verizon, they have that too. In areas I primarily travel, i.e. the Eastern Seaboard of the US, Verizon wins hands down in terms of coverage. However, I find that with a weak signal I can still make a call on Verizon's CDMA network and have people understand me. On GSM when the signal is low, people sound like they're underwater and it goes rapidly downhill from there. CDMA is also more spectrum efficient. GSM's old standard was based on TDMA, which allocates time slices for each user. CDMA has them all transmitting at once which makes more efficient use of spectrum since they're really not taking turns like on CDMA. I live in the US, I am in Canada for 6 months for work.
Fact - GSM gets more coverage across the US, I know I have driven across the US many times.
Fact - weak signals are terrible on CDMA
Fact - when you are in a highly populated area CDMA calls quality drops because the tower lowers call quality to take on more calls.
Fact - GSM gets a much better connection in low signal.
Fact - GSM gets better coverage from New York all the way to florida ( I have driven it with both CDMA and GSM phones)
Fact - I have never had a call on my GSM phone sound like it is underwater. Now I know you are lying. This is possible on CDMA since the tower will lower quality as more people connect to the tower.
Fact - I have lived in Indiana, Louisiana, and Florida. I am in Canada for work. Sorry to ruin your Canada bashing fun.
In Canada the CDMA providers are looking into switching to GSM.
--
For those of you playing a drinking game.... MY FRIENDS! | |
|
| | | | | | nnaarrnn
join:2004-09-30
Nitro, WV
·Vonage
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Suddenlink
1 edit | Re: That's great but I've never called someone on AT&T that the call quality doesn't suck, or get dropped. Landlines/Voip/CDMA calls are crystal clear. I don't know which way you're driving, but I drive from The middle of WV to Orlando all the time and the only time I have less than 5 bars is going through the 2 mile tunnel into VA, and even then I DONT DROP THE CALL, when any passenger with me with ATT looses signal.
FACT- All you're facts are based on YOUR opinion.
Edit-Not to mention the GSM interference with any audio equipment when the phone is about to ring, or is processing a lot of data. | |
|
| | | | | | | 
DivineDark
join:2001-08-30
Oklahoma City, OK
clubs: | Re: That's great but This is like that Wendy's commercial. FACT! | |
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | 
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA | FACT: people who insist that their personal experience of a subject represents a complete, conclusive statement about the whole are not good sources of information.
--
Come let us reason together. | |
|
| | | | | | 
M A R K
St. Ides Heaven
Premium
join:2001-06-15
Long Island
clubs: | Try using CDMA in EU
--
See you in Villains | |
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
M A R K
St. Ides Heaven
Premium
join:2001-06-15
Long Island
clubs:
| Re: That's great but said by Eat Me :said by M A R K :Try using CDMA in EU I live in America. I don't care about Europe. In Europe they live closely packed together and GSM works fine for them there. But here in America we live more spaced out, as a result GSM doesn't work as well here. "In Europe they live closely packed" What? Humm, i guess all that open space and farms i saw were just in my dreams. I live more tightly packed here on Long Island.
--
See you in Villains | |
|
| | | | | | | | | 
chlen
Ethically Challenged
Premium
join:2001-01-16
Albany, NY | Re: That's great but Every EU nation has a CDMA carrier, ever Russia has CDMA carriers. Stop talking out of your ass. SE Asia does as well, particularly Japan and Australia. | |
|
| | | | | | 
ReVeLaTeD
Premium
join:2001-11-10
San Diego, CA
| said by r81984 :said by Eat Me :said by r81984 :I do know that some cdma carriers in canada are planning to switch to gsm. My gsm phone gets signals where cdma does not. gsm has much more coverage than cdma in the us and goes through walls a lot better. Having to call people on verizon sucks when they are indoors. Obviously since you live in Canada you are unqualified to talk about what happens here in the US, so let me educate you. Fact - coverage has nothing to do with CDMA vs GSM. However, those on the Verizon network have substantially more coverage in many areas than those on AT&T or T-Mobile. Since Sprint users can roam on verizon, they have that too. In areas I primarily travel, i.e. the Eastern Seaboard of the US, Verizon wins hands down in terms of coverage. However, I find that with a weak signal I can still make a call on Verizon's CDMA network and have people understand me. On GSM when the signal is low, people sound like they're underwater and it goes rapidly downhill from there. CDMA is also more spectrum efficient. GSM's old standard was based on TDMA, which allocates time slices for each user. CDMA has them all transmitting at once which makes more efficient use of spectrum since they're really not taking turns like on CDMA. I live in the US, I am in Canada for 6 months for work. Fact - GSM gets more coverage across the US, I know I have driven across the US many times. Fact - weak signals are terrible on CDMA Fact - when you are in a highly populated area CDMA calls quality drops because the tower lowers call quality to take on more calls. Fact - GSM gets a much better connection in low signal. Fact - GSM gets better coverage from New York all the way to florida ( I have driven it with both CDMA and GSM phones) Fact - I have never had a call on my GSM phone sound like it is underwater. Now I know you are lying. This is possible on CDMA since the tower will lower quality as more people connect to the tower. Fact - I have lived in Indiana, Louisiana, and Florida. I am in Canada for work. Sorry to ruin your Canada bashing fun. In Canada the CDMA providers are looking into switching to GSM. Sorry but Verizon smokes T-mobile and AT&T out this way in terms of network availability. While others are struggling to keep a call stable in our building, my Storm handles it without incident. In fact I didn't even notice they were having problems until they mentioned it. | |
|
| | | | | elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
join:2006-08-30
Toronto, ON
| Interesting you say that.. I was at the Grand Canyon last year, and on the top my GSM phone(who ever I was roaming with at the time) didn't work.
However I saw a good number of people chatting away, so I can only assume they were using Verizon and/or a CDMA provider.
It really is 6 of one and half a dozen of the other. I guess the advantage of GSM is that it's used in Europe and Asia. My phone is unlocked so I can swap sim cards very quickly.
My understanding is that CDMA phones cannot be "unlocked" | |
|
| | | | | |
r81984
Thread is
Premium
join:2001-11-14
St John'S, NL
·magicjack.com
·Cox HSI
·Insight Communicat..
·AT&T Midwest
| Re: That's great but said by elwoodblues :Interesting you say that.. I was at the Grand Canyon last year, and on the top my GSM phone(who ever I was roaming with at the time) didn't work. However I saw a good number of people chatting away, so I can only assume they were using Verizon and/or a CDMA provider. It really is 6 of one and half a dozen of the other. I guess the advantage of GSM is that it's used in Europe and Asia. My phone is unlocked so I can swap sim cards very quickly. My understanding is that CDMA phones cannot be "unlocked" Was your phone 850 mhz and 1900 mhz GSM?
There are some GSM phones that do not work with both frequencies.
The map for CDMA for the grand canyon does not show any better coverage than GSM.
Anyways CDMA does not have better coverage than GSM. Now if you have a CDMA and AMPS phone then you would get better coverage than GSM.
--
For those of you playing a drinking game.... MY FRIENDS! | |
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | DarnellP
join:2004-10-12
Las Vegas, NV
| said by r81984 :My gsm phone gets signals where cdma does not. gsm has much more coverage than cdma in the us and goes through walls a lot better. GSM having more coverage in the US than CDMA? Nope, sorry you are wrong there. As for GSM penetrating walls better, that is debatable, but I find the claim dubious at best. IMO any difference in wall penetration between the technologies would be negligible. | |
|
| | | | |
r81984
Thread is
Premium
join:2001-11-14
St John'S, NL
·magicjack.com
·Cox HSI
·Insight Communicat..
·AT&T Midwest
| Re: That's great but said by DarnellP :said by r81984 :My gsm phone gets signals where cdma does not. gsm has much more coverage than cdma in the us and goes through walls a lot better. GSM having more coverage in the US than CDMA? Nope, sorry you are wrong there. As for GSM penetrating walls better, that is debatable, but I find the claim dubious at best. IMO any difference in wall penetration between the technologies would be negligible. I am right I have GSM and my girlfriend has CDMA. She looses signal in her house. I get perfect signal. She loses signal cross country in remote areas, I do not. She has gone through 3 phones and it does not make a difference.
Anywhere she has a signal I do, but the CDMA phone does not get a signal everywhere GSM does.
I am sorry, but between seattle, chicago, new york, florida, texas, louisiana GSM has better coverage than CDMA.
--
For those of you playing a drinking game.... MY FRIENDS! | |
|
| | | | | |
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| Re: That's great but said by r81984 : She has gone through 3 phones and it does not make a difference. It's the phone. You can believe what you want but it's the phone. For every example you can give where CDMA got signal indoors and GSM didn't I can give you one where my CDMA phone did better than a GSM phone.
--
Come let us reason together. | |
|
| | | | | | glinc
join:2009-04-07
New York, NY
 ·Verizon FIOS
| maybe ur gf is using those small cdma companies? i.e. metropcs and others.
Myself having gone through every single carrier and working in cellphone business will stay in CDMA and Verizon is by far the best. Also that depends how much money each company invest money in their towers and Verizon is by far the one who spend the most. | |
|
| | | | | | |
r81984
Thread is
Premium
join:2001-11-14
St John'S, NL
·magicjack.com
·Cox HSI
·Insight Communicat..
·AT&T Midwest
| Re: That's great but said by glinc :maybe ur gf is using those small cdma companies? i.e. metropcs and others. Myself having gone through every single carrier and working in cellphone business will stay in CDMA and Verizon is by far the best. Also that depends how much money each company invest money in their towers and Verizon is by far the one who spend the most. Yes, she does have one of those small CDMA companies it is called Verizon.
I guess Verizon wasted their money because they did not optimize their towers to get better coverage than GSM.
--
For those of you playing a drinking game.... MY FRIENDS! | |
|
| | | | | | | | DarnellP
join:2004-10-12
Las Vegas, NV
| Re: That's great but said by r81984 :Yes, she does have one of those small CDMA companies it is called Verizon. I guess Verizon wasted their money because they did not optimize their towers to get better coverage than GSM. Well you will believe what you wish to believe and that's fine, but as a whole CDMA has more coverage in the US than GSM. VZW has more coverage than any single GSM carrier including at&t. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | DarnellP
join:2004-10-12
Las Vegas, NV
| Re: That's great but said by r81984 :said by DarnellP :VZW has more coverage than any single GSM carrier including at&t. That might be so, but since you can roam on any GSM network ATT has more coverage than Verizon. And the CDMA carriers can roam on one another, so I'm sorry, but you're still wrong. | |
|
| | | | | | | margaf77
join:2000-12-22
Bayonne, NJ
·Optimum Online
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by glinc :maybe ur gf is using those small cdma companies? i.e. metropcs and others. Myself having gone through every single carrier and working in cellphone business will stay in CDMA and Verizon is by far the best. Also that depends how much money each company invest money in their towers and Verizon is by far the one who spend the most. In NYC Verizon is the ONLY choice. ATT's network is horrible. The only weak spot I run into is on some parts of the N. Shore of LI. | |
|
| | | | | | | |
r81984
Thread is
Premium
join:2001-11-14
St John'S, NL
·magicjack.com
·Cox HSI
·Insight Communicat..
·AT&T Midwest
| Re: That's great but said by margaf77 :said by glinc :maybe ur gf is using those small cdma companies? i.e. metropcs and others. Myself having gone through every single carrier and working in cellphone business will stay in CDMA and Verizon is by far the best. Also that depends how much money each company invest money in their towers and Verizon is by far the one who spend the most. In NYC Verizon is the ONLY choice. ATT's network is horrible. The only weak spot I run into is on some parts of the N. Shore of LI. I was just in NYC and I did not have a problem with my GSM phone.
--
For those of you playing a drinking game.... MY FRIENDS! | |
|
| | | | | | | | | margaf77
join:2000-12-22
Bayonne, NJ
·Optimum Online
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: That's great but said by r81984 :said by margaf77 :said by glinc :maybe ur gf is using those small cdma companies? i.e. metropcs and others. Myself having gone through every single carrier and working in cellphone business will stay in CDMA and Verizon is by far the best. Also that depends how much money each company invest money in their towers and Verizon is by far the one who spend the most. In NYC Verizon is the ONLY choice. ATT's network is horrible. The only weak spot I run into is on some parts of the N. Shore of LI. I was just in NYC and I did not have a problem with my GSM phone. Well we should all take your view after a few days here instead of all the people in NYC who say different. | |
|
| | | | | | flyingjoey
join:2005-11-07
Jersey City, NJ | Time for a new girlfriend? | |
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
join:2006-08-30
Toronto, ON | Telus and Bell here in Canada are both CDMA but are preparing a GSM overlay, so that they can compete with Rogers and it's subsidary Fido,which are the ONLY 2 GSM carriers (right now) in Canada. | |
|
| | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | |
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| said by r81984 :W-CDMA and CDMA are not even close to the same thing. W-CDMA is closer to GSM than CDMA2000. Phones that use W-CDMA will also work on GSM as a fallback to where W-CDMA is not running. I'm not going to claim to be an expert on this as you appear to be insinuating you are; but I don't think you're understanding how GSM relates to WCDMA.
The particular implementation of WCDMA you're speaking of appears to be designed to work around the existing TDMA GSM system and use the existing GSM equipment from the tower to the provider; however it does in fact appear to be a CDMA type system.
In other words GSM is a TDMA system but WCDMA (the brand name, perhaps more accurately called UMTS) is a WCDMA (the wireless networking topology) system which would actually be a type of CDMA networking topology). Thus all the things you attribute to problems with CDMA are going to be present in WCDMA.
--
Come let us reason together. | |
|
| | | 
pkarlos_76
join:2004-08-24
Edmonton, AB
| said by Eat Me :said by 81399672 :I disagree, GSM works just as good as CDMA. Then why is GSM moving to CDMA? Noone is, in fact everyone is moving to GSM in North America, including any Canadian Companies using CDMA, they are joining the rest of the world on GSM and NEW GSM products has come a long way when compared to CDMA products nowadays. GSM is a protocol (method) for handling signals, and since its introduction has a had a few upgrades to the specification. I'm not saying GSM is superior to CDMA, because I don't have the knowledge to compare the latest variations of each protocol, but I do know GSM is way better then it was a few years ago. | |
|
| |
| | |
| | |
pkarlos_76
join:2004-08-24
Edmonton, AB
| Re: That's great but said by Eat Me :said by mlerner :said by Eat Me :Please don't force GSM on those of us who are happy with CDMA, which is clearly superior where it matters - reliability. GSM might be poor in your area but it's the best we got in Canada. Typically I find the sound quality better than a landline. You also have rationed healthcare in Canada. I don't want us to be like Canada. What a bunch of misinformation, we have public healthcare accessible by ALL, we just might have to wait a bit longer for non-serious illness or injuries. | |
|
| |
pkarlos_76
join:2004-08-24
Edmonton, AB | Telus is beginning its GSM transition in 2010. | |
|
| 
C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium
join:2001-10-03
Davenport, FL
·Verizon FIOS
| If there's one thing I particularly find annoying with GSM phones, is particularly that buzzing that happens as you're receiving a message or a call whenever the phone is within any sort of proximity to computer speakers (other speakers do it too, but pc speakers seem to suffer the worst per my experience). Never had that happen when I used a CDMA phone.
--
Front Line Force Fortress Forever | |
|
| |
M A R K
St. Ides Heaven
Premium
join:2001-06-15
Long Island
clubs: | Re: That's great but The buzz is gone with 3G on my iPhone
--
See you in Villains | |
|
| | |
pkarlos_76
join:2004-08-24
Edmonton, AB | Re: That's great but Yep gone with my 3G phone too.... | |
|
|
| 
Bit
Premium
join:2009-02-19
00000
·VOIPo
·Cox HSI
| Re: Common Carriage No it's not because Ma Bell was the only game in town. They were a monopoly in voice telecom.
Cellular is anything but a monopoly. If you don't like AT&T you are free to go to any other carrier you want to buy a different phone. Don't like Sprint, you are free to go to any other carrier and buy something other than the Pre.
--
POKE 65495,1 | |
|
|
|
See 13 replies to this post |
|
Bit
Premium
join:2009-02-19
00000
·VOIPo
·Cox HSI
4 edits | Awesome! GDP to grow 6% this year!?! Unemply below 5%!?!?! The budget crisis is solved, the economy fixed, healthcare problems over, energy crisis over, all the troops are home...
At least it must be since only after the PRIORITIES these asswipes are supposed to be working on are completed should they spend 1 G-D second worried about what distributor carries a particular product.
What is next? They are going to bitch that Transformers came out on HBO only instead of Starz? That you have to subscribe to cable to get On Demand? Exclusive distribution deals happen every day in nearly every industry.
If the iPhone or the Pre were the only phones on the planet, sure, it could be a problem but theses are just a couple of the a zillion handsets in a hugely competitive marketplace.
--
POKE 65495,1 | |
|
|
See 12 replies to this post |
|
texans20
Weapons of Masturbation
Premium
join:2002-09-28
Texas!
clubs:
| Stupid Nobody is forcing the American people to buy an iPhone. Apple has a right to put their phone on the network of their choice. Last time I checked this is a free country where people and businesses are free to make the decisions they want. More anti-businesses idealism that will drive the cost of goods and services higher and will slow down innovation.
--
Farming the Tard | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
romulusnr
join:2007-08-01
Federal Way, WA
| Network SIM lock is anti-GSM Network SIM lock was a late addition to the GSM specification. The main benefit of the SIM card is to smooth interoperability and interchangeability between subscription and handset. SIM locking obliterates the whole point of having a SIM card. Whereas Euro markets saw the SIM-based model as great for competitiveness and consumer choice, the business-tilted American market sees it as damaging to corporate bottom line.
Am I alone in thinking that a carrier should be measured by its QoS and not by what handset and content partnerships it can wrangle? | |
|
| |
| | 
tangojoker
Peace
join:2004-01-25
Beaverton, OR | Re: Network SIM lock is anti-GSM Vodaphone gives unlocked phones in UK.
At least all mine were | |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Did I miss the "AT&T held a gun to Apple's head" story? I just love the way these stories are framed.
"Kill handset exclusivity".
Umm... there's no law or regulation called "handset exclusivity" that needs to be "killed".
What you are really wanting to say is:
"Senators propose new regulations forbidding carriers and phone manufacturers to voluntarily enter into business relationships"
Not as catchy, but much more accurate.
The senators propose NOT to KILL some bad law, but to ADD new laws/regulations further restricting these businesses from freely entering into business arrangments.
And.... I really don't get the anti-trust/anti-competition slant to this. Last I checked, iPhone had less than 20% of the market. How could it possibly be an anti-trust issue? Consumers have lots of choice -- if someone has to have an iPhone and nothing else, that's their deal. | |
|
| fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20 | Re: Did I miss the "AT&T held a gun to Apple's head" story? Very good post.. | |
|
Flibbetigibbet
@bellsouth.net | I'd drop ATT like a bad habit and go back to T-Mobile If I had a wife's-iPhone-friendly option to do so (no, jailbreaking does not count), I'd drop the Death Star in a heartbeat. They suck-diddley-uck, Flanders. | |
|
Fireblade
join:2008-08-27
St Catharines, ON
·Cogeco Cable
·Vonage
1 edit | Telus vs. Rogers/Fido I've been a Rogers customer for 2 years, I switched to Telus because they had superior deals on Data/Smartphones. I can tell you without any bias that Rogers voice quality is better than Telus. In voice quality, I would give Rogers a 10 and Telus an 8 - for the ones that don't know, Rogers uses GSM, Telus uses CDMA.
When comparing reliability and price, hands down to Telus.
--
I love fish sticks. I love putting fish sticks in my mouth. | |
|
|
ravensfan55
join:2008-06-16
Severna Park, MD
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
·Cingular Wireless
1 edit | This has sprinkles of socialism This is completely anti-Capitalist. The economy is a survival of the fittest, and that's exactly why GM and Chrysler are going down the pooper right now. Why did AT&T and Verizon become behemoths in the telco industry? Because they spent the money, and made the deals to get customers to use their services.
With all the sh*t going on in the world right now, what moron started this discussion in the chambers? | |
|
| 
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| Re: This has sprinkles of socialism said by ravensfan55 :This is completely anti-Capitalist. The economy is a survival of the fittest, and that's exactly why GM and Chrysler are going down the pooper right now. Why did AT&T and Verizon become behemoths in the telco industry? Because they spent the money, and made the deals to get customers to use their services. With all the sh*t going on in the world right now, what moron started this discussion in the chambers? John Kerry.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|
| | ravensfan55
join:2008-06-16
Severna Park, MD
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
·Cingular Wireless
| Re: This has sprinkles of socialism said by GOLFnSUN :said by ravensfan55 :This is completely anti-Capitalist. The economy is a survival of the fittest, and that's exactly why GM and Chrysler are going down the pooper right now. Why did AT&T and Verizon become behemoths in the telco industry? Because they spent the money, and made the deals to get customers to use their services. With all the sh*t going on in the world right now, what moron started this discussion in the chambers? John Kerry. Figures | |
|
| 
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
1 edit | said by ravensfan55 :Why did AT&T and Verizon become behemoths in the telco industry? Because they spent the money, and made the deals to get customers to use their services. Bringing up Verizon or ATT and mentioning them as examples of capitalism is more than a wee bit revisionist. ATT and Verizon benefited from years of being granted natural monopoly status by the government.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" | |
|
Austinloop
join:2001-08-19
Austin, TX | Follow the money We probably need to check the contributions to the congress critters that are pushing this. I bet it would be really interesting. | |
|
BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs:
·Cox HSI
| While they're at it I want the Martha Stewart collection to be carries at Wal-Mart and Target as well, K-Mart exclusivity is a crime and Congress needs to save us from it.
Somebody please send Congress on a 10 year vacation before they help drive this country into the ground.
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition."
Beyond AM. Beyond FM. XM | |
|
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
1 edit |  Don't take the damn subsidy and walk...
Seriously, it isn't that hard of a concept.
Now, if providers start trying to dictate what people do with devices they pay full price for, then we have a problem. However, if you take that subsidy on the phone you just have to have, remember, you are that cell phone company's bitch...
Title was for a different topic. Fixed it.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" | |
|
| compton
join:2002-02-08
Brooklyn, NY
| Re: Don't take the damn subsidy and walk... said by NetAdmin :If people really want to be able to use an iPhone or a Pre on another network, the trick is simply to pay full price for the device and not get locked into a contract. Seriously, it isn't that hard of a concept. Now, if providers start trying to dictate what people do with devices they pay full price for, then we have a problem. However, if you take that subsidy on the phone you just have to have, remember, you are that cell phone company's bitch... Title was for a different topic. Fixed it.
They do that now. They tell you what you can or can't do with your smart phone wither you buy it full price or not. You can't buy an iPhone from AT&T, G1 from TMobile or Palm Pre from Sprint without a data plan. | |
|
| |
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| Re: Don't take the damn subsidy and walk... said by compton :They do that now. They tell you what you can or can't do with your smart phone wither you buy it full price or not. You can't buy an iPhone from AT&T, G1 from TMobile or Palm Pre from Sprint without a data plan. That only applies if you use it on their network. ATT can't tell you what plan you need if you cancel your service with them and try to use the iPhone on T-Mobile... But I see what you are saying.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" | |
|
majortom1029
join:2006-10-19
Lindenhurst, NY
| hmm ATT can handle MMS . ALL other phones do this on their network. The problem is that so many people got on their network at once for the iphone that it would put a lot of strain on the network.
If you did this to verizon i am sure thier network would have problems also.
Also the one carrier thing I think was apples doing not att's since apple went to verizon first.
I think people arent looking at this objectively and are blaming att since they dont want to place any blame on apple. | |
|
GPSrob
join:2007-05-21 | repeater after me... "carterfone"
It's only a matter of time... | |
|
compton
join:2002-02-08
Brooklyn, NY
| I don't see a problem with exclusive phone deals. I am taking a neutral position. I don't see exclusive deals as a hindrance to innovation. As a matter of fact, Sprint, TMobile and AT&T all have very good and cutting edge smart phones, and they all have exclusive phone deals. It seems that this is a solution looking for a problem. However, I wouldn't have a problem if these exclusive deals are banned. | |
|
| 
PGHammer
join:2003-06-09
Accokeek, MD
clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: I don't see a problem with exclusive phone deals. The real issue is that the iPhone is exclusive to AT&T, *and* that the Storm is exclusive to VZW. Two specific smartphones, each exclusive to a different cell provider. Never mind that there are other BlackBerries (some of which are, in fact, exclusive to AT&T Mobility, such as the BlackBerry Bold), and that the Storm/VZW deal is in *direct response* to the iPhone/AT&T Mobility deal extension. I've been a VZW (CDMA) customer, and a Virgin Mobile customer, and I know several AT&T Mobility and Sprint customers. When reliable coverage has mattered (especially in the area between the Carolinas and NYC), VZW wins hands-down. VZW actually kicked both their butts in Las Vegas, too. If a carrier isn't reliable, it doesn't matter what features the handset has. And it's reliability that VZW gets right. | |
|
DivineDark
join:2001-08-30
Oklahoma City, OK
clubs:
| Great idea Carrier's wouldn't want to have compete on coverage if they no longer could compete with handsets. They each know their type of technology has its own weaknesses. No longer having their competition based on who has what handset would scare them and force them to concentrate on network building. Sounds horrible!!!  I can buy downy at both Target and Wal-mart and the grocery stores didn't implode. LOL | |
|
FastiBook
join:2003-01-08
Newtown, PA
·Verizon FIOS
| Not all carriers.... Pass the apple test. If iPhone was on vz, would i go to vz from att.... hell no never ever. Sprint? NO. I am 110% satisfied with att & have been with them 4 years & plan to stay with them till it make sense to move on. I'd like to see smaller carriers deal with the data traffic.
Honestly, if apple sold to everyone, it would be a CR nightmare, and how would apple keep up with demand? Apple does not make 68 dollar phones, they make the iPhone. I don't think the model would work unless you had a flagship launch partner, like att. Att soaking up phone costs to increase customer base is hardly anti-competitive. Can you imagine the nightmare of some craigslist or ebay folk thinking they got a GSM phone when it ended up being CDMA?
I think apple has done a good job, not perfect, but good at making the iPhone a success. If other carriers were to get them, you'd need a carrier brand marking to be sure of what network it will work on. It just opens a can of worms/Pandora's box. I can see apple having 1 or 2 other partners in the future in combo with att, but i think people need to realize the price that att is paying to bring these to the masses.
I hear people say oh this carrier sucks, that carrier sucks. Guess what, it's both device, and location centric. What works here on the east coast for att will not wotk on the saturated cingular network out west. When att wireless was folded into cingular, they got both cingular and att towers on the east coast, out in the west it's different. The ground infrastructure, towers, intra-tower and tower-backbone lines are not nearly as robust or built up out west compared to the east coast. Where i live, VZ and alltel share towers, sprint and boost share the small number of sprint towers. ATT towers host t-mobile in this area, so bandwidth and data per hour capacity is not some issue here. Out west t-mobile has their own towers, and cigular towers were never numerous, spaced closely enough, or hooked up enough to backbone fiber to get the job done without issue.
I would love to see att's iphone specific traffic vs their other traffic, compare it to other carriers market by market. I think you will see how much att has invested in the east coast. The main issues are out west, and need to be taken care of vs focusing all their money on their half assed response to FIOS. ATT is at a disadvantage out west, if they fix it i see better data rates and less lag time soon, all it takes is some transponders on towers, and some additional cables connecting to backbone, and perhaps additional backbone capacity here and there.
It's a lot like rail transportation. It could be amazing and great for this country once again, but some serious improvements, investments, and a social consciousness for it to be a priority before it happens. All you need is time and money. Be patient.
- A
--
LETS GO METS! | |
|
|
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| Re: Not all carriers.... said by FastiBook :Vaguely related to story anecdote. Apple commercial. What I would like to know is do you think you're being subtle or are you fully aware that everyone knows every post you make is just a conduit for you to repeat the Apple talking points.
--
Come let us reason together. | |
|
SSidlov
Other Things On My Mind
Premium
join:2000-03-03
Pompton Lakes, NJ
·Optimum Online
·Cingular Wireless
| Not Exclusive? Pay $$$$ for the phone! We can all bemoan the inability to have the iPhone or other kewl electronic piece of junk on our favorite network but without exclusive contracts, and phones to partially differentiate the carriers, we are all going to be paying $500 and up for the phone of our choice.
Maybe this is what is needed. It would go something like this, Apple sells the iPhone to any carrier for $600 (to cover costs and the loss of the contract money + the percentage of the data plan they are getting making $400 to cover expenses/profit), they (the carrier) sells it to you for $1200 (100% markup is not unusual in electronics). They make $600 up front, plus the voice/data/message plan (at whatever cost point they sell it at, $5/mo or $99/mo). The carriers are MORE PROFITABLE since they no longer have to subsidize the phones and get a nice chunk of money up front.
This will also prevent the griping about not being able to get a new iPhone for 99 cents and a new contract. Maybe then the phones of all types will be better made, have better OS on them, etc. and you'll keep them for more than 2 years.
Why doesn't everyone check out the prices of the UNLOCKED phones already on the market? GSM phones CAN be purchased world wide without a carrier's involvement, the pricing is SKY HIGH. With the exception of the iPhone most phones are sold by the mfgr's at a small margin.
MAYBE the carriers will compete more on prices for the voice/data/messaging - but I doubt it, there's only a few hundred dollars difference a year between any of them, and the non-GSM carriers are not 'world' phone capable (except for a few special models), meaning the cell phone mfgr's will want to have the broadest market to sell to.
--
»www.Warpstock.org
| |
|
|
upstateny518
@taconic.net
| Re: Not Exclusive? Pay $$$$ for the phone! im going to have to disagree with that statement... in the areas of NY including upstate and the metro nyc area at&t has had poor results all along after the iphone came out. they had a pretty decent network until the iphone. i had a cingular 8525 when the iphone came out and day one the network crashed for weeks in albany and even when i went to nyc. you couldnt call tech support because the lines were so busy because everyone was having DATA/VOICE and TXT issues. my phone would tell me that the data network was down, and that my last text message could not be sent. phone calls were dropped multiple times and these problems still exist going into the 3rd generation of iphone. i have tried many more phones also and they all have the same problem. at&t's backbone sucks in the northeast and the CSR's will tell you that.
the iphone is a cool device, just not implemented very well. when LTE comes out and ATT&VERIZON roam on each other the iphone will be great because it can roam on both networks and balance the strain on the networks.
i have many friends with the iphones and i love to watch them drop calls and have failed txt messages. because my verizon phone never does that.. the inauguration for obama in january i went with the local school as a chaperone. at&t had no voice/data or txt coverage after 11am. the network crashed completely. i was on the web, sending picture messages to flickr, uploading videos to youtube and texting all the kids in my group [who thankfully had verizon] to keep track of everyone. never one dropped call or failed txt.
i live in a rural area, i have 0 bars with at&t and 4/4 with verizon. plus BROADBAND ACCESS data Rev. A in my area.. wait u mean they put 3.5G services in rural areas? yes verizon does... at&t ahahahahahah. thats what they say when you ask them about even 2.5G/3G services in a rural area... | |
|
| | geonap
lolatidiots
join:2005-12-14
Glendale, CA
·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: Not Exclusive? Pay $$$$ for the phone! i've got verizon and tmobile. i've had sprint also, tmobile and att suck in LA, as far as others who i've spoken to, the benefit of tmobile and the 8900 i have is UMA, wifi phone calls. i've converted so many people over from ATT (gsm) to verizon and they now admit that they regret not doing it sooner.
gsm may be better in other area's but NOT IN the valley/LA.
i'm sitting 3 feet from the window and i have no reception on tmobile, admit it could be the 8900, i also had the older curve titanium with tmo and it wouldn't work, vzw has full reception... VZW works in the garage, TMO doesn't, ATT doesn't either when i look at my friends iphone
--
Operation Northwoods
"Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious" -Oscar Wilde
»www.whatreallyhappened.com/
»tinyurl.com/pxq278
»www.snopes.com/quotes/goering.asp | |
|
|
|
|
Senators Look To Kill Handset Exclusivity
·
Real competition after the LTE convergence takes place
First define who owns the handset and when!
Before the lawmakers deal with handset exclusivity they should deal with who owns the handset and when. The Handset Manufactures are increasing the complexity of handset locks under the order of the Wireless Carriers. Carriers take the position that the subscriber owns the handset if it breaks and must pay to repair or replace it. The carrier typically claims ownership of the handset if the subscriber wants to move the handset to a different carrier. The lawmakers should address that issue.