In alt.cellular.verizon John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
> What matters is the actual service, not the technology, and there is
> very good digital coverage in many areas for both CDMA and GSM.
> I personally don't see much benefit to analog coverage -- I used to
> carry an old D-AMPS phone in my car for emergencies (since 911 calls go
> through even on an unactivated phone), but no longer.
>
> The key is to go with the best combination of coverage in areas you
> actually care about, features, and value, according to your own
> particular needs, which you seem to be doing. No one service is best
> for all people, even in a given area.
>

This is EXCELLENT advice. The only thing I would differ on is that if you
spend time out in the boonies, it is still worth having an AMPS capable phone
in your car as there are still many holes with digital [all services] and
murphy's law virtually assures that if you car breaks down, it will be in one
of those holes.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

I think everyone agrees that no carrier has coverage
everywhere and that all carrier's coverage does not
coincide. So one should first decide what your priorities
are, who offers it, and if more than one carrier then
consider price and plans.

-Quick

Nick Danger wrote:
> I fear I might start a flame war with this ... well,
> actually I don't fear it; it might even be entertaining.
>
> A couple weeks ago, I finally decided it was time to move
> up from my two old AT&T TDMA phones. I also needed a
> third phone, so that required some sort of a new plan. I
> got three Razr phones with a Cingular family plan (550
> minutes). One handy feature that my old phones didn't
> have was the ability to sound a tone whenever it passes
> in or out of a no-service area. While driving home one
> day on the secondary roads, I found that I was in a
> no-service area for almost half of my 25-mile commute.
> During this time, I saw other people talking on their
> phones, so it appears someone was getting service. Also,
> I found that almost all of our friends had Verizon and
> claimed that they got great service everywhere. This is
> in Northern Westchester County, NY.
> Given that Verizon apparently had better coverage and we
> would have someone to talk with with our "In" minutes, I
> finally decided to sign up for Verizon and do some
> comparisons. I ordered three Razr phones from Verizon and
> they arrived today - V3M model. I spent a lot of time
> driving around the Danbury area and northern Westchester,
> and I have to report, to my surprise, that Cingular has
> had better coverage, better signal strength, and much
> clearer sound. It's difficult to tell from looking at the
> phones. The Cingular phone goes up to five bars; the
> Verizon phone goes up to four. Sometimes I was able to
> get a clear signal on Verizon with zero bars; other times
> I got a very staticy poor quality signal with four bars.
> The quality of the sound coming from the Cingular phone
> has been generally comparable to the number of bars. If
> you have zero bars, you can be quite certain that you
> have no service. In fact, it seems I rarely get a bad
> signal from Cingular; it's all or nothing.
> Verizon's 700-minute plan costs about the same as
> Cingular's, but I doubt we'll ever use that many minutes,
> so for us, the 550-minute plan is a better deal. The V3M
> has more features and a more refined looking user
> interface, but I'm really going to miss the ability to
> transfer photos and [url=http://www.unlimitedcomplimentaryringtones.com]Ringtones[/url] by Bluetooth. International
> roaming with GSM sounds like a nice thing to have, but in
> reality, it's entirely possible that I might never leave
> the USA during the lifetime of this phone. And even if I
> do, roaming is so expensive that I wouldn't want to do it
> even if I could. I do wonder how much of a contribution
> the analog towers make to Verizon's much-vaunted superior
> coverage. In rural areas, it appears much of the coverage
> is analog, which would do me no good with an all-digital
> phone.
> Based on what I've seen (and heard) so far, I honestly
> have to say that Cingular is winning. Could it be that
> Verizon's better coverage is all a myth, perpetuated by a
> well-orchestrated advertising campaign? I won't have time
> to travel around extensively to test the two thoroughly
> before one set of phones has to go back.

On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 18:19:57 -0500, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
<veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote in
<gIKdnesvka4AfS_ZnZ2dnUVZ_rudnZ2d@giganews.com>:

>In alt.cellular.verizon John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>> What matters is the actual service, not the technology, and there is
>> very good digital coverage in many areas for both CDMA and GSM.
>> I personally don't see much benefit to analog coverage -- I used to
>> carry an old D-AMPS phone in my car for emergencies (since 911 calls go
>> through even on an unactivated phone), but no longer.
>>
>> The key is to go with the best combination of coverage in areas you
>> actually care about, features, and value, according to your own
>> particular needs, which you seem to be doing. No one service is best
>> for all people, even in a given area.
>
>This is EXCELLENT advice. The only thing I would differ on is that if you
>spend time out in the boonies, it is still worth having an AMPS capable phone
>in your car as there are still many holes with digital [all services] and
>murphy's law virtually assures that if you car breaks down, it will be in one
>of those holes.

If coverage in the boonies is really important, then I think you need
either a satellite phone or a PLB -- AMPS isn't really enough, since
there are lots of places with no AMPS service.

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:27:55 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <44b2aa3d$0$96238$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>Nick Danger wrote:
>
>> Based on what I've seen (and heard) so far, I honestly have to say that
>> Cingular is winning. Could it be that Verizon's better coverage is all a
>> myth, perpetuated by a well-orchestrated advertising campaign?
>
>In suburban and urban areas the coverage should be about the same. Even
>though you need more GSM towers than CDMA towers to cover a given area,
>in suburban and urban areas there will be more than the minimum in order
>to have sufficient capacity.

GSM and CDMA actually have comparable coverage areas.

>I have both Cingular GSM (on an MVNO) and Verizon, in the San Francisco
>Bay Area. If I'm in a major city in the area, the Cingular coverage is
>just fine. However when I get out into some of the suburbs to visit
>friends and relatives, it's often the case that Cingular's coverage is
>aporadic. I always find it amusing, that about 2 km from Cingular's
>western regional HQ in Pleasanton, at my nephew's house, there is no
>Cingular coverage, and it's not a condo, and not up in the hills.

Cingular coverage is actually better than any other carrier in that
general area.

>The other issue with Verizon, is that if you get a tri-mode phone, then
>nationwide you have about an order of magnitude more coverage than you
>get with an all-digital phone from Cingular. Now this coverage is often
>out in the boonies, and may not matter much to you, but in my area, I
>can drive about ten minutes from my house up into the surrounding
>greenbelt, and have no GSM coverage, spotty CDMA coverage, but excellent
>analog coverage. When I drive to Lake Tahoe, via the road past one the
>largest ski resorts, there is only analog coverage for much of the way
>through the mountains. I suppose that if you have Cingular (or a Verizon
>dual band phone), any you're worried about the lack of coverage, then
>you can plan your routes such that you don't travel through the
>no-coverage areas.

Or simply keep a dirt cheap D-AMPS phone (and lighter adapter) in the
car, which can call 911 even if unactivated. [yawn]

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

In alt.cellular.verizon Nick Danger <yourname@yourdomain.com> wrote:
> 1. What good is unlimited IN airtime with all your friends if you break up
> so badly that no one can understand what you're saying?

Good question. Quite valid.

> 2. What good is a good clear signal if no one wants to talk with you because
> you're eating into their anytime minutes?
>

Personally, I find this question nearly irrelavent for the average user. Most
people keep track of close friends and family and know who they use and who is
a free call ... but a large amount of the remaining calls one makes is without
thought as to who the carrier might be ... or even if the recipient is on a
cell phone or a land line. The fact is, you use a cell phone to make a call
as a matter of convenience (e.g. in your car, out in the yard, on vacation,
business travel, etc) or to receive calls no matter where you are and no so
much to get free calls between people you know using the same provider.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

In alt.cellular.cingular John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
> If coverage in the boonies is really important, then I think you need
> either a satellite phone or a PLB -- AMPS isn't really enough, since
> there are lots of places with no AMPS service.
>

For emergency service it is a far better safety net than any digital service
available [via cellular/PCS]. There is no such thing as a free 911 call on a
satellite phone if I am not mistaken. I have been to only one place in more
than 10 years where I had no coverage what-so-ever ... and that was two weeks
ago up in the Gunflint Trail in the boundry waters of the Minnesota Arrowhead
region. I am in locations that have no digital coverage several times per
year.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

Quick wrote:
> I think everyone agrees that no carrier has coverage
> everywhere and that all carrier's coverage does not
> coincide. So one should first decide what your priorities
> are, who offers it, and if more than one carrier then
> consider price and plans.

As long as you don't fall for the illogic that since no carrier has 100%
coverage, that all carriers are equal. It's not binary, as some shills
would like people to think.

On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 19:25:50 -0500, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
<veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote in
<bfWdnWE3tPWTbS_ZnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@giganews.com>:

>In alt.cellular.cingular John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>> If coverage in the boonies is really important, then I think you need
>> either a satellite phone or a PLB -- AMPS isn't really enough, since
>> there are lots of places with no AMPS service.
>
>For emergency service it is a far better safety net than any digital service
>available [via cellular/PCS].

But still not complete enough to be any sort of real safety net.

>There is no such thing as a free 911 call on a
>satellite phone if I am not mistaken.

The FCC mandated 911 calls on satellite phones starting in February 2005
(as you would undoubtedly have learned with a tiny bit of checking.

>I have been to only one place in more
>than 10 years where I had no coverage what-so-ever ... and that was two weeks
>ago up in the Gunflint Trail in the boundry waters of the Minnesota Arrowhead
>region. I am in locations that have no digital coverage several times per
>year.

I'm often in places with no cellular coverage whatsoever. All it takes
is a drive in the mountains.

--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

It is alleged that Quick claimed:

> My 7135 switches to analog quite well. 2 or 3 golf courses
> a bit out in the boonies are analog only coverage. Works
> great. Downside is that it only works for about 6 hours...
> but that's a different issue.

That is and always was the biggest advantage of digital over AMPS - the
power consumption.

> I'm still in denial and refuse to start planning for my inevitable
> migration (probably to a Treo).

Upgrading from a 7135 to a PalmOS Treo is relatively painless, no worse
than upgrading between any other Palm pair made by different companies.
I do miss the flip bit, though. Even with the so-called "Keyguard"
active, unless I keep it in a holster or a full case, it WILL turn on
in my pocket.

--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol

"How many times do I have to tell you, Please don't shoot the nuclear
weapon!" (Major Deakson "Broken Arrow")

What Dick said is true. It depends upon the areas where you live, work, and
travel. No one service is best. It might be Cingular for you, Verizon for
Joe Schmuck, and Sprint for me. You need to test the phone in the areas
where you live, work, and travel.


"Dick" <w6ccd@k7yca.org> wrote in message
news:f4c5b2lfkea6ecfmgr3iae5oe8teoue3dq@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:48:13 -0400, "Nick Danger"
> <yourname@yourdomain.com> wrote:
>
>>I fear I might start a flame war with this ... well, actually I don't fear
>>it; it might even be entertaining.
>
>>
>>Based on what I've seen (and heard) so far, I honestly have to say that
>>Cingular is winning. Could it be that Verizon's better coverage is all a
>>myth, perpetuated by a well-orchestrated advertising campaign? I won't
>>have
>>time to travel around extensively to test the two thoroughly before one
>>set
>>of phones has to go back.
>>
>
> It all depends upon where you live and travel. It's impossilbe to
> make a generalization about the two services. Sometimes one is
> better. Sometimes the other.
>
> Dick