Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 34 of 34
  1. #21  
    In general, when compared to GSM, CDMA gives you better battery life, higher network capacity, faster data access, better voice quality, and a more sophisitcated defense against cloning. When looking at these two technologies pound for pound, those are the major benefits CDMA is able to offer just becasue of the more superior technology it employs. Whether the user experiences these benefits is not a given and can depend on the geographic area, the carrier, the phone being used, etc. There are also other numerous other small benefits/advancements that CDMA has and GSM doesn't but the ones I just listed are the major ones (I probably missed one or two). I was reluctant to list those benefits previously because I know someone will then want them explained/proved. So before you ask, I'm definitely not getting into the technical (or any kind of) details as to why these CDMA benefits are what they are (too lengthy and the information is readily available with a little research on the web). GSM has its benefits when compared to CDMA (sim card, for example) but overall, the CDMA standard offers more significant benefits when compared to GSM (such as the ones listed above) just because it uses newer, more advanced technology.

    Marty
  2. #22  
    I live about 40 miles North of Atlanta and I use CDMA. Not because it is superior technology over GSM, but because it has superior coverage. I also use a StarTAC 7868W which is TriMode. This allows me to use Analog as well. I travel about another 65 miles North of home and suddenly I am on an Analog signal. Irritating, but necessary. It is for this reason that I have chosen CDMA. TDMA coverage is available, but not as good in my opinion. GSM is available in more Urban areas, but around here there are to many dead spots. CDMA is excellent. I almost always have coverage of some sort, something GSM just cannot offer.

    The problem I have is not which system is superior, it is why we need so many? I can choose Analog, TDMA, CDMA, GSM, Sprint PCS (which is CDMA, but different from Verizon). Give me a break.

    The problem is, the only standard we have is knowing we are non-Standard in everything, except 2Liter Soda Bottles.
    In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. JOHN 14:2
  3. #23  
    Originally posted by GSR13
    The problem I have is not which system is superior, it is why we need so many?
    You don't need so many. The situation with cellphone coverage in the US is a pretty clear example of how an unfettered free market doesn't deliver the best for the consumer. (It's probably not even in the best interests of the companies, either.)

    Someone will probably pop up to say we've done things in a dreadful "communist" way in Europe, but strict regulation of technical standards is what's made sure we don't have the same mess over here, and instead have well over 50% of the population with GSM cellphones in many countries.

    There's no need for kludges like analogue fallback when you've got pretty near full digital coverage.

    Nigel.
  4.    #24  
    All I am worried about with Handspring releasing only a GSM version of the phone and planning to release the CDMA version "later" is that they are going to alienate the majority of the American mobile phone market. GSM dominates the world market, so logically a GSM version of the Treo is necessary. However, CDMA dominates the American market, Handspring's domestic market, so they should release CDMA too. By waiting until later, they are taking the chance that another handheld company will release a CDMA version in the States first. If that happens, they lose the early foothold into PDA/phone (that is feasable, none of this giant qualcomm stuff) sales. I hope the GSM world buys lots of Treo's or this model is up the creek.
    DLPanther
    "When All Else Fails, Improvise!"
  5. #25  
    Originally posted by DLPanther
    However, CDMA dominates the American market, Handspring's domestic market, so they should release CDMA too.
    For now. At&T & Cingular are moving to GSM (Verizon?).
    By waiting until later, they are taking the chance that another handheld company will release a CDMA version in the States first.
    Samsung did, it's pretty nice. Color, too.
  6. #26  
    I would like to say that this is just the BEST thread I've ever read! Talk about entertaining!
    I'd like to share my view of CDMA vs GSM, and the relationship they have on handheld devices.
    First, I'd like to say that I entered the wireless world two years ago with a Samsung SCH-3500 with Sprint PCS service (CDMA), a visor solo, and an annoying, inconvenient cable for connecting the two. I thought this was great. I was "sold" on the CDMA network by Sprint, Samsung, etc.
    That was the biggest waste of money I have ever seen. Not only were my calls dropped nearly everytime I used the phone, no matter my location, no matter CDMA or analog. The customer service sucked too. The coverage maps suck, and the features and operating systems of the CDMA phones JUST PLAIN SUCK!Technology is one thing, practicality is another.

    I have now moved into the new century and have found a solution. GSM service on a Nokia 8290 with a Prism. I ditched the connector cable in favor of the infrared port. I ditched the crummy CDMA for GSM, which, by the way, doesn't cost extra for internet access like CDMA. I also have SMS, a superior form of encryption should I ever need it, etc. I also get more minutes and more coverage than I did with Sprint.

    These are, of course, my observations, and as was previously said, your mileage will vary. But let's talk why Handspring has chosen GSM over CDMA.
    First, and most importantly, the SIM card. No one is going to use a visor phone or a treo as their main phone. It's a compromise. It will always be a compromise. You simply can't have a functional handheld in the size of a Nokia 8290. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that most people will want the convenience of swapping the sim chip between their treo and their GSM phone. I know I do. I know everyone I know does.
    Second, no extra charges for internet acces. Third, if you want it, GPRS is here. By this time next year, 3G is here and LOOK OUT!
    Fourth, and I think absolutely most importantly, the best phones are offered in GSM. Why? Because the best phones are made by foreign manufacturers---and they all have GSM overseas. All they have to do is change the bandwidth.

    Now, I have avoided the technical argument thus far, I am not some geek that claims to know everything about the two networks, but I'll tell you what: Don't listen to some guy that can't back up his own claims about CDMA superiority. Don't go to a biased web page written by Sprint's CEO, etc. Go somewhere where the geeks hang out and discuss things fair and square: http://www. howardforums.com. Anything you ever wanted to know about cell phones, service providers, mobile internet, gossip, the latest news and rumors, technical facts and comparisons, coverage, etc. It's all there. Decide for yourself. I think I read the whole damn thing and I ended up with a GSM provider, if that's worth anything to you.
    Dan
  7. #27  
    First of all, many people will be using the Treo as their main phone. One of the main reasons the VP was not as successful as HS would have liked it to be was because it turned the Visor into a brick. HS has effectively taken care of this problem by making the Treo roughly the size of a Motorola Star-Tac.

    Next, Cingular charges for data access so some will have to pay for that. Also, not completely sure, but I believe Voicestream is charging extra for use of its GPRS network so data access on GSM is not totally free as you have suggested.

    It is also a well-known FACT that CDMA has superior coverage to GSM in the US so your observation that you get superior coverage with GSM is basically, well, a fluke. And why do you get more minutes with GSM? Because carriers like Voicestream know they have substantially less digital coverage than the TDMA/CDMA providers so they have to attract customers somehow.

    Also, the best phones most certainly are not always offered in GSM, at least not in the US anyways. I'll admit the Eurpoean/Asian market has some pretty compelling phones but thats definitely a function of there being only GSM in use, NOT because GSM is so technologically superior that it allows phone manufacturers to produce such phones. Take the Samsung I300, the Kyocera 6035, the Motorola Star-Tac, just to name a few. These all have CDMA and/or TDMA versions available, but not GSM. And even the popular GSM phones like the Nokia 8290 have CDMA and/or TDMA counterparts (even the VP now has a technologically superior CDMA sister). But that's all besides the point...

    Finally, I will reiterate this one more time since you seem to have totally missed my point: my purpose/point is not to get anyone to switch to from GSM to CDMA or to influence you to pick a certain type of network over another for your wireless phone coverage. A poster made some statements/comparisons that I knew to be false/inaccurate so I corrected them. Unfortunately, it turned into a full-blown debate over which is the better technology. So since you seemingly missed my point despite reading the whole thread without apparently taking any of it in, I will say this one more time: CDMA is TECHNOLOGICALLY superior to GSM. It provides better battery life, better voice quality, faster data speeds, higher network capacity, and a more sophisticated defense against cloning. Now, that doesn't mean you should pick CDMA over GSM for your wireless phone coverage, just that when comparing the two technologies side by side on their TECHNICAL merits ALONE, a CDMA network is able to offer those advantages over a GSM network. Of course, this will vary based on the geographic area, phone, and carrier you are using among other things.

    And FYI, Qualcomm has actually built in the ability to use SIM cards into its CDMA standard, it just hasn't been implemented.

    Marty
  8. #28  
    Motorola StarTac? There was an old thing called that on the TACS network (analogue UK) years ago.

    Now we have lots of dinky little Motorola GSM models, like the MicroTac, and the v66.

    And they're all junk - Motorola simply don't understand what people do with GSM phones, and they produce rubbish with some of the most appalling interfaces known to mankind.

    About the only reason people I know would buy one is because it's the cheapest way to get tri-band GSM. For a couple of years now they've been saying they'll sort out the interface, and they've failed.

    Last Motorola I used, you compose an SMS (without the luxury of T9 entry), then realise you don't know the number. So you quit to the top level to look it up, and find that the text you've laboriously entered has now been deleted!

    They really should make sure their software designers use the damn things...

    Nigel.
  9. #29  
    Okay, you keep listing the few things that you believe are advantages over GSM, but there are certainly advantages to the GSM network as well. I'm not here to argue GSM superiority, as I really don't care. All I know is that it is superior from a user standpoint.
    As far as my experience being a fluke, no. Go to the Howard Forums, as I suggested last, and go look thru the Sprint PCS pages. You won't find many where people aren't complaining about the horrendous voice quality, poor coverage, and ridiculous amounts of dropped calls. I was certainly not alone.
    For what it is worth, there are also complaints on GSM coverage, but I can't help but notice the nature of complaints is different. People seem to experience a lack of coverage, largely due to a young GSM network, rather than dropped/crummy quality calls.
    As for the quality phones you listed, well, whatever. The cutting edge phones are GSM/GPRS.
    As far as faster data speeds, according to voicestream the 9.6 data rate that is FREE is in the process of being upgraded to 14.4, which is what the CDMA runs at.
    In addition, I hear that ATT has reached a tentative agreement allowing VS and ATT to roam on each other's networks when ATT rolls out GSM coverage.
    So, it seems, any coverage or data problems are due to young networks.
    Say what you want about CDMA, but the future is in GSM.
    And, for your info, the GPRS on voicestream is priced by how much data you download, in blocks.
  10. #30  
    That's fine if you want to say GSM is superior from a user standpoint, which may be all that really matters. But again, what my original/only point was was that CDMA is technologically superior to GSM, that's all. Look at the technical merits alone of each technology side by side and you will see CDMA is the superior of the two in that sense. That's all I'm pointing out and if you would take a minute to ready my posts carefully, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

    Again, you seem not to read very carefully. If you look at my response to your first post, you will see that I said that you experiencing increased coverage with GSM was a fluke, not the other supposed problems with CDMA you inferred. And you have confirmed this observation in your last post.

    I won't even begin to argue which network has the more advanced phones because it really doesn't matter. The wireless standard a phone manufacturer chooses for a given phone in no way is a direct measurement of that standard's superiority over another. This is illustrated by there being technologically advanced phones available on all networks. And once again, the compelling phones you see available in European/Asian GSM markets are a direct result of there being only standard there, so phone manufacturers can waste less time on making there phones compatible with a particular standard and more on producing an awesome phone. They are NOT a result of GSM supposedly being the superior technology, as you have suggested. Again, I pointed this out in my previous post but you seem to have not even taken notice.

    Finally, thank you for confirming that Voicestream charges you to use their GPRS network, whether its by the amount of data you download or not. Either way, when you combine it with Cingular charging for data access, GSM data access is not free, which is what I was pointing out.

    So before you start typing your response, think about what you are going to say, read my post again, then hopefully you will be able to make an enlightened response.

    Marty
    Last edited by mmendo1; 11/20/2001 at 06:08 PM.
  11. #31  
    Yo, Marty.

    elevate them guns a little lower.

    We're reading your posts, but it's getting harder to do so when they're so belligerent.
  12. #32  
    I make no apologies or excuses for my posts. When someone attacks me directly ("Don't listen to some guy that can't back up his own claims...") and then follows up with more junk, I will respond in a manner I feel is appropriate. My two previous posts were not directed at you "dietrichbohn" so I wouldn't take anything I said in those posts personally. In fact, I would ignore them becasue, again, they weren't meant for you. No one is forcing you to read them...

    Marty
  13. #33  
    I'm wondering if Cingular is GSM because I suspect it will the service provider in Southern California. I owe them a bundle (dot com fallout). I'll need to hustle to pay it off if this is going through them in January. If Cingular isn't likely to be the Treo service provider in So. Calif., who might be instead?

    Any ideas?

    Humbly,

    paul_moshay@pacbell.net
    Last edited by pmoshay; 11/21/2001 at 07:55 AM.
  14. #34  
    Ya, Cingular should be the provider in California unless Voicestream service is available there and even then Cingular should still be offerring service for the Treo.

    Marty
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions