Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 70
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by treo_monkey
    Functionally, the only major difference is the ability to use the GSM in other countries if that matters to you. The GSM is also has slightly longer battery life, but I have yet to go through a day with my Sprint 650 without having ample battery charge left.

    I would suggest going for the best plan, which right now happens to be Sprint. I don't see any advantage to going with GSM outside of international usability.
    Agreed. Local coverage trumps cost of service but cost of service is way ahead of whatever is third.

    Sell P1.
  2. #22  
    Let me break it down for you even more simply.....

    My......GSM phone ....will ....have ....higher....resell...value....than....the.... CDMA....ever.....will......because.......a-n-y-o-n-e .... in.... the... planet... can....
    I have detailed files.
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by treo_monkey
    All that matters is that you have good coverage where it matters to you....
    True. However, I cannot predict on Monday morning where that might be the rest of the week. I like the Cingular EDGE coverage map. That I cannot expect to have Sprint data when I get off the plane is a deal breaker.

    Buy Sprint or Cingular; sell P1.
  4. #24  
    Whatever... GSM/CDMA. I think Sprint is better because they got the Treo first and the data plans are cheaper. I say screw all this and ask yourself...

    Which provider offers better service? GSM providers or Sprint?

    The answer... NONE. They all suck. I nearly got kicked out of my local Sprint store the other day because they are pompus bastards that don't know ****! After not honoring a warranty issue I lost it. That being said, all cell companies suck on customer service and this post is as pointless as the above ramblings.

    But it does feel good to vent!
  5. Minsc's Avatar
    967 Posts
    Global Posts
    974 Global Posts
    While a higher resale value is certainly nice, it's probably number 12 on a top-ten list of things to look for in a carrier/technology.
  6. #27  
    And I would make up that $40 difference in how many months of cheaper data service costs?

    There's more to life than technology....but not a whole lot more
  7. #28  
    This pissing contest is going nowhere. Next thread.....
  8. #29  
    Treominator you're embarrassing yourself
  9. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by helpermonkey.
    Sorry I am just tired of people passing off poor info as fact. CDMA might be better where you describe in your area, but don't assume it everywhere else. Also are you talking about analog roaming on your Sprint phone? Of highway coverage is great in many areas on GSM - maybe just not where you live. All major areas should be covered by GSM.

    Maybe you should read before you attack, sir. I said the coverage is better in areas that are NOT MAJOR AREAS. No, I am not talking about analog roaming. The 650 doesn't support that. I am talking CDMA vs. GSM period. GSM is getting better, but is not anywhere near the coverage of CDMA. When I used my VZW 7135 in these rural areas, it rarely accessed an analog cell. It stayed on CDMA digital nearly all of the time. When it did switch, it would be only for a few seconds. So, before you start condemning other info as bad, maybe you ought to check your own facts first.

    First let me say - sndtubes I am not attacking you. I said I am tired of people passing off poor info as fact. I know what you said - your CDMA coverage is better in non-major areas than GSM (although do you have a GSM phone to actually know - there are two carriers too by the way. I don't have a CDMA phone to compare). You also were saying that that was why CDMA was better. The point I was trying to make was, just because it is better for you where you are does not make it better in all areas. Sprint is a smaller carrier than Cingular and has a smaller coverage footprint than Cingular does. Simple as that, so in some areas GSM coverage is going to be better no matter what. Does that mean it is better for someone that doesn't get coverage where they need it? No. That was my point, maybe I was a little clearer this time I hope.

    You say CDMA coverae is better than GSM, can you provide something to back that up?

    Here is where I am getting my Cingular GSM coverage info from. (BTW - I couldn't get the image to show up in the window, can someone tell me why?)

    I understand your being angry at what you felt was an attack, but can you tell me where I was wrong? I did notice I had a type-o and said "of" when I intended to say "off", but other than that, I don't think I am wrong in anything I said.
    Treo 650 GSM
  10. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by Minsc
    While a higher resale value is certainly nice, it's probably number 12 on a top-ten list of things to look for in a carrier/technology.

    Ummm....the question raised in this thread is comparing two almost exactly similar devices.

    How is the fact that one is worth 80% or more of its value down the road due to its universal acceptance not an important point??

    I guess its irrelevant that I got my Treo 600 for FREE because I bought 3 at the $399 price and sold them to a German and a Swiss to make enough for mine and then some bucks on top of that.

    I guess it is pointless that I now have my current Treo 600 on ebay expecting $300 + on it so I can add $200 and get me a major uprade via the Treo 650?

    Since when did being an early adopter of technology equate to flushing money down the toilet??
    Last edited by Treominator; 02/05/2005 at 11:33 AM.
    I have detailed files.
  11. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by Joebar
    Treominator you're embarrassing yourself
    Thanks for your insightfully cliched one liners
    I have detailed files.
  12. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by Ohmster
    And I would make up that $40 difference in how many months of cheaper data service costs?

    I "pay" $19.99 for unlimited Media Works package including 1500 SMS and 400 MMS / month (my company pays for it).

    Show me how your data package deal is a vast improvement....
    I have detailed files.
  13. #34  
    I found this SITE a while back when I was trying to decide which carrier to chose.

    In then end I decided to switch from ATT GSM to Sprint CDMA about a yr ago. First because when I had my Nokia ATT GSM I could not get signals inside some of the mall stores compared to my friends Sprint Sanyo and Verizon LG. I would always have to borrow their phones or I have to go outside the store. Second I hardly travel international to take advantage of the sim card and always found other means of transferring contacts from phone to phone. Third is because when I walked into that Sprint store and saw the T600, I just fell inlove with it and had to have it. ATT was barely getting it and couldn't wait. Mind you I have never spent this amount of money on a phone ever in my life. But I couldn't resist. It was love at first sight. Since the switch I've been very pleased with the coverage in my area (California bay area). I donot recall having no signal on my T600 nor my current 650. And I no longer worry that I will miss a call when I walk into any stores compared to when I use to have ATT. Oh and I've also had Cingular and they have the worse coverage for me in my area.

    I think the argument can go on and on because it's going to be different for each individual or area or tower coverage. Even though geographically ATT is supposed to have a better area map coverage in my area, Sprint for me is able to hold on to signals much better.
    Last edited by aznmode; 02/05/2005 at 12:07 PM.
  14. #35  
    Talking about what carrier has better coverage in your area doesn't tell anyone what is better about on tech or another... Many keep reverting back to that discusion though.

    aznmode, thanks for the link. I will be reading it when I get a chance.

    That page was an interesting read, but it does ignore (or just not talk about) some important things. In any case, what was your take on reading it? I think that some of the missing information could lead one to come to incorrect (or possibly incorrect) conclusions aout the capactiy of a GSM system (not its spectral efficiency - which is really no ones concern but the provider who payed for the specrum).
    Last edited by helpermonkey; 02/05/2005 at 12:52 PM.
    Treo 650 GSM
  15. #36  
    For prior generations of Treos, i.e., 270 vs. 300 and GSM 600 vs. CDMA 600, the CDMA options had significantly higher SAR ratings. For the 600s, some people here said or guessed that the bulb on the CDMA earpiece was required to get their test scores under the FCC ceiling. This SAR differential was important to me and influenced my GSM choice. Now it appears from the early shots I've seen that the Cingular 650 also has the bulb, and its SAR rating is in fact as high as Sprint's 650, so this is no longer a reason to go with GSM -at least not Cingular's 650.
    You may be right; I may be crazy. But, the Treo may be just the device I've been looking for.
  16. #37  
    Rodolfo, don't expect palm to redesign the 650 for different GSM carriers.

    Also, currious why you care what the radiation output on the phone is if it is within acceptable limits?
    Treo 650 GSM
  17. #38  
    I wish I could get back these five minutes just wasted reading many (not all) of these posts...holy cow. Do you have the Treo 650? Do you like it? Can you send and receive calls? WHO CARES how much you can make on it down the road Mr. Crafy Man, if that were important we would all drive Honda Accords. Enjoy your phone, and try to stop this "my dad is bigger than your dad" crap....I for one dropped Verizon for Sprint and I love my 650...when the next one comes out I will hopefully be in a position to get it too...but I won't rub it in anyone's face that I had something, take it out to the playground kids.
    I wish I had a dime for every dime I have
  18. #39  
    mark - why even post then and add to the time wasting for others to read your thread?

    Treo 650 GSM
  19. #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by helpermonkey
    Here is something that might matter - Coverage. Why does no one think that their local coverage is important? All carriers are not equal in all markets. Everyone always acts like just becuase they have good coverage in their house or office, that that carrier has good coverage in everyone's home or office? GSM has the largest share of the world market by far, that means more *(hopefully better / cooler) mobiles, SIM - changing phones WITh your phone book included is a snap, Cingular is the largest US carrier with the most coverage nationwide. Those are just a few examples.

    Sorry I am just tired of people passing off poor info as fact. CDMA might be better where you describe in your area, but don't assume it everywhere else. Also are you talking about analog roaming on your Sprint phone? Of highway coverage is great in many areas on GSM - maybe just not where you live. All major areas should be covered by GSM.

    This info is not correct either. GSM, TDMA, Analog, CDMA - none of these technologies has some sort of special in building coverage advantage. In building penatration is effected most by spectrum 850Mhz can go through walls and matterial like that better than 1900Mhz can, it's a fact. Power setting on the local cell sites also effect building coverage etc...

    I have seen this said before, and I am not sure if it is true, but it is probably close anyway. Honestly though, who cares if there is more CDMA in this country? If so, it can't be by much, it isn't as if there is a HUGE difference. There is more GSM coverage on Cingular though, than any other carrier in the US. Whatever, just wanted to make that point too.

    scaredpoet - care to explain to us what in that link leads you to believe CDMA has less of a capacity crunch? Different technologies are used differently, so a CDMA network is not even designed the same way a GSM network is. Capacity is part of the system design and any well designed system has enough capacity, simple as that. Also I would like to point out that page you link to is only talking about 850Mhz cellular and makes no mention of PCS at all. Nor does it mention the actual use of the technologies, simple channel, channel size, number of users per freq. (which on GSM also looked to be wrong - 24? Where did that number come from? Anyone? I only know of a max of 8 -16 per channel), etc.

    Man, Monkey! Do you have a stake in how well GSM performs? You just seem to have gotten awfully agitated. In many ways you are right. It is a matter of personal preference, and what works best for what you need. So personally, you can take your GSM and shove it! I think it's the SHI##IEST technology on the planet. Having said that, everything has pros and cons. I'd love to have the option to "swap" my sim into a smaller phone sometimes, but that's about it. I realize once the GSM/CDMA war is upon us (I was actually enjoying it's abscence until I realized the GSM unit hadn't come out yet. For a few weeks I thought we'd all done a lot of growing up since the 600.) there is no stopping it, but there's no winning it either. Some people are die hard one way (appears you are for GSM) and some people are die hard another (I KNOW I am for CDMA, Sprint specifically.) and some people don't know the difference and wouldn't care if they did.
    Go here if you're tired of being .
    It'll be fun.
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions