Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1.    #1  
    Anyone with experience ? i am currently with tmob. is cing "better"? Verizon?

    I have had all the above plus sprint in the past, but the service was on simpler phones then my new 650. My feeling is the 650, while generally an extremely useful device may not have quite as good a reception and call quality as past phones- nokia, samsung. I can't easily make comparisons any longer. i would appreciate any comment from those with experience both with a treo AND the various mentioned providers in s cal.
    thanx
  2. #2  
    In making this choice you need to approach it as if coverage is a matter of microclimates. Everyone had dead zones but if you look at their coverage maps life is glorious.

    You probably don't care about the T-Mobile dead zone that I hit about 3/4 mile south of the beginning of the 110 Freeway in South Pasadena. I do.

    You'll have to test drive every carrier. A friend on Sprint test-drove T-Mobile and got vastly fewer deadzones. Then he tried Verizon and all is Happy, Happy, Joy, Joy because he has no deadzones for the places he goes.

    Plus get bought a 700w. That made him grin.

    So go sign up and do the test drives. My friend's experience is tempting me to bail out from T-Mobile.
  3.    #3  
    Thanks- here is an experiment i just did
    in san diego - In a huge ( Horton Plaza ) indoor parking structure, I compared cing and Tmob. Tmob on my 650.
    As i went "deeper" into the structure the Tmob was quickly, decisively defeated, by Cing. Thinking it could be the phone itself, I made the effort to borrow another Cing ( Cing sales person !! ) ph, and again, the Cing defeated My TMob as i went into the structures thick walls.

    Neither Cing phone was a Treo. I don't know how much the ph itself plays into this ( a little ?? ).

    The Cing salesman's ( warning ) explanation was Cing operates on multiple bands! The Tmob does not!!??

    I have had ALL the 4 major carriers here ( Not Nextel though ). But different time periods and different phones muddied the objectivity.

    Why only one response, I do not understand; anyone else?
    Thank you for your response Tasteepeppers
    Last edited by telephonitis; 08/08/2006 at 03:50 AM.
  4. #4  
    In areas of south to central OC, I've found that Cingular seems to have better coverage over Sprint and Verizon. What parts of OC are you talking about?
    at&t Treo 680, SW 2.11-ATT
    Cingular Treo 650 Unlocked, SW 1.17-CNG/FW 1.51
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by telephonitis
    Thanks- here is an experiment i just did
    in san diego - In a huge ( Horton Plaza ) indoor parking structure, I compared cing and Tmob. Tmob on my 650.
    As i went "deeper" into the structure the Tmob was quickly, decisively defeated, by Cing. Thinking it could be the phone itself, I made the effort to borrow another Cing ( Cing sales person !! ) ph, and again, the Cing defeated My TMob as i went into the structures thick walls.

    Neither Cing phone was a Treo. I don't know how much the ph itself plays into this ( a little ?? ).

    The Cing salesman's ( warning ) explanation was Cing operates on multiple bands! The Tmob does not!!??

    I have had ALL the 4 major carriers here ( Not Nextel though ). But different time periods and different phones muddied the objectivity.

    Why only one response, I do not understand; anyone else?
    Thank you for your response Tasteepeppers
    T-Mobile is a 1900 Mhz system. It has roaming capabilities with Cingular's 850 Mhz system. But T-Mobile won't let you roam in areas where it has towers.

    That's why I think you lost T-Mobile so fast. The 1900 Mhz signal didn't penetrate as deeply into the building. The Cing phone however, on 850 Mhz, was able to penetrate more deeply.

    Now. If our only problem was how to get coverage inside buildings.

    The BIG problem of course is dead zones. The phone companies can't put towers everywhere. In amongst the patchwork there are little holes where there is little or no coverage.

    Mostly we humans are at work, at home, and maybe a few other places on a regular basis. So for me the big test is coverage at those places. All of the other holes are essentially random events.

    The T-Mobile tower is on a high rise on the next block down from my office. I get great coverage on T-Mobile at home except for some &&%(*^@ reason data speed is about as fast as growing an oak tree from an acorn. I belong to a tennis club about 2 miles up the hill from my house and until recently T-Mobile coverage didn't exist. Now I get reliable voice and data connections sitting by the pool. This is very good. Those are my regular places.

    I live up near the San Gabriel Mountains. Everyone's coverage sucks the f@rts out of dead seagulls the closer you get to the mountains. There's a good reason for that -- there aint' that many customers up there, so why build a lot of expensive towers? So I just concede defeat if I head too far uphill.

    I believe that T-Mobile's coverage in Southern California is quite good, at least compared to other parts of the country. They got the old ATT network in Southern California, which used to be L. A. Cellular (at least around here) back in the stone age analog days.

    I'm happy enough with T-Mobile. I rarely get dropped calls, I get decent data speed on my T650, and I have the bundled wifi so I can sit in Starbucks with my laptop like a porch monkey (well, if Starbucks stores had porches I would be a porch monkey).

Posting Permissions