I'm new to T-Mobile and wondering about coverage in Phoenix, AZ?
The maps show great EDGE coverage for my area (zip 85018, near Thomas
and 44th street) but I'm showing only one bar on my Blackberry Pearl
Flip and often when I access the web I get a "not in a coverage area"
message which usually doesn't appear when I re-try but it seems
coverage is VERY marginal for me?
FWIW, a few months back I checked T-Mobile's coverage map and it showed
a huge dead spot southwest of me, my house appeared right in the edge
of the dead area. Current maps show no dead spot, just a very strong
EDGE signal here so.... am I going to be able to use T-Mobile at all or
must I go back to my previous carrier which shows a very strong signal
here?
BTW, anyone know anything about the Lake San Marcos area in California?
It's in zip 92069. Again, T-Mobile shows good signal there but so did
my old carrier and I got no service there at all....
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 09:45:49 -0700, XS11E <xs11e@mailinator.com> wrote
in <Xns9C256352353CAxs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1>:
>I'm new to T-Mobile and wondering about coverage in Phoenix, AZ?
>
>The maps show great EDGE coverage for my area (zip 85018, near Thomas
>and 44th street) but I'm showing only one bar on my Blackberry Pearl
>Flip and often when I access the web I get a "not in a coverage area"
>message which usually doesn't appear when I re-try but it seems
>coverage is VERY marginal for me?
Or you have a defective phone. Does it get strong signal in other
areas? If so, you've answered your own question. If not, get it
replaced.
>FWIW, a few months back I checked T-Mobile's coverage map and it showed
>a huge dead spot southwest of me, my house appeared right in the edge
>of the dead area. Current maps show no dead spot, just a very strong
>EDGE signal here so.... am I going to be able to use T-Mobile at all or
>must I go back to my previous carrier which shows a very strong signal
>here?
See above.
>BTW, anyone know anything about the Lake San Marcos area in California?
>It's in zip 92069. Again, T-Mobile shows good signal there but so did
>my old carrier and I got no service there at all....
Are you sure the phone had the correct frequency band?
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://wireless.navas.us>
John FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
"XS11E" <xs11e@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9C256352353CAxs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1. ..
> I'm new to T-Mobile and wondering about coverage in Phoenix, AZ?
>
> The maps show great EDGE coverage for my area (zip 85018, near Thomas
> and 44th street) but I'm showing only one bar on my Blackberry Pearl
> Flip and often when I access the web I get a "not in a coverage area"
> message which usually doesn't appear when I re-try but it seems
> coverage is VERY marginal for me?
I've found T-Mo's coverage maps to be an order of magnitude more accurate
than other carriers, almost as if T-Mo was afraid to overstate their
coverage at all.
Are you looking at the right map? There are separate maps for
contract/monthly coverage and prepaid/flexpay. They differ slightly in some
areas.
> FWIW, a few months back I checked T-Mobile's coverage map and it showed
> a huge dead spot southwest of me, my house appeared right in the edge
> of the dead area. Current maps show no dead spot, just a very strong
> EDGE signal here so.... am I going to be able to use T-Mobile at all or
> must I go back to my previous carrier which shows a very strong signal
> here?
You might try a different phone just as a test if you can beg, borrow or
steal one. Target and Walmart have fairly liberal return policies and sell
low end Nokias (with excellent reception, BTW!) for $20 or so- you might
even keep it as a backup if it works, and just switch ffrom the 'Berry to
the Nokia when you expect to be in weak reception areas.
> On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 09:45:49 -0700, XS11E <xs11e@mailinator.com>
> wrote in <Xns9C256352353CAxs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1>:
>>The maps show great EDGE coverage for my area (zip 85018, near
>>Thomas and 44th street) but I'm showing only one bar on my
>>Blackberry Pearl Flip and often when I access the web I get a "not
>>in a coverage area" message which usually doesn't appear when I
>>re-try but it seems coverage is VERY marginal for me?
>
> Or you have a defective phone. Does it get strong signal in other
> areas?
Of course, I checked that first. I'm still concerned about this:
> FWIW, a few months back I checked T-Mobile's coverage map and it
> showed a huge dead spot southwest of me, my house appeared right in
> the edge of the dead area. Current maps show no dead spot, just a
> very strong EDGE signal here.
I'm wondering if that dead spot still exists but doesn't show on
coverage maps? I need to go into that area and check signal, it's a
direction I seldom go...
>>BTW, anyone know anything about the Lake San Marcos area in
>>California? It's in zip 92069. Again, T-Mobile shows good signal
>>there but so did my old carrier and I got no service there at
>>all....
>
> Are you sure the phone had the correct frequency band?
Of course, I've been through a bunch of phones there from my ancient
E815 on AirTouch Cellular to my current Samsung Flipshot on what's
now VerizonWireless.
I know VerizonWireless has no coverage in that one small area (I can
go 1/4 a block away and get 4 bars, it's just a dead spot) and I
KNOW Sprint gets 4 bars in that exact same spot that Verizon is dead
but my question is T-Mobile, not Sprint or VerizonWireless.
What I need is for someone on T-Mobile who lives in the area to let
me know if there's a signal there, if they're willing, I can email
them the exact address.
IMPORTANT: I still have until June 20th to return the phone and cancel
the service and if I can't get answers I'll have to do that and
continue with Verizon but T-Mobile's data plan is soooooooo attractive
and the Blackberry Pearl Flip is sooooooooo nice.... I'd really hate to
do that.
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
>
> "XS11E" <xs11e@mailinator.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9C256352353CAxs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1. ..
>> The maps show great EDGE coverage for my area (zip 85018, near
>> Thomas and 44th street) but I'm showing only one bar on my
>> Blackberry Pearl Flip and often when I access the web I get a
>> "not in a coverage area" message which usually doesn't appear
>> when I re-try but it seems coverage is VERY marginal for me?
> Are you looking at the right map? There are separate maps for
> contract/monthly coverage and prepaid/flexpay. They differ
> slightly in some areas.
Yes, but in that specific area the maps are exactly the same, I checked
them both.
>> FWIW, a few months back I checked T-Mobile's coverage map and it
>> showed a huge dead spot southwest of me, my house appeared right
>> in the edge of the dead area. Current maps show no dead spot,
>> just a very strong EDGE signal here so.... am I going to be able
>> to use T-Mobile at all or must I go back to my previous carrier
>> which shows a very strong signal here?
>
> You might try a different phone just as a test if you can beg,
> borrow or steal one.
Not an option, I have only 10 more days to figure out coverage or take
back the phone and cancel the plan w/o penalty and SWMBO has scheduled
very little free time for me during that period... I'm afraid that's
very likely what I'm going to have to do but I like the phone
(Blackberry Pearl Flip), I like the price (free!) and I like the cost
of T-Mobile's plan ($39.99/mo) none of which matters if I don't have
coverage...
I'm headed out now to check the south west areas from my house.
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 12:07:35 -0700, XS11E <xs11e@mailinator.com> wrote
in <Xns9C257B5B3C671xs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1>:
>XS11E <xs11e@mailinator.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm headed out now to check the south west areas from my house.
>
>Well, I defined the dead zone, it's MY HOUSE! :-(
>
>I gain about 1 1/2 bars of signal strengh when I get 1/4 block away!
>
>Weird....
Not really -- cellular is line of sight, and you could be in a signal
"shadow".
> On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 12:07:35 -0700, XS11E <xs11e@mailinator.com>
> wrote in <Xns9C257B5B3C671xs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1>:
>>Well, I defined the dead zone, it's MY HOUSE! :-(
>>
>>I gain about 1 1/2 bars of signal strengh when I get 1/4 block
>>away!
>>
>>Weird....
>
> Not really -- cellular is line of sight, and you could be in a
> signal "shadow".
You have a really unique way of stating the obvious! ;-)
What's weird is I expected a specific location and size of the dead
zone based on T-Mobile's earlier maps but the current dead area isn't
at all what I'd expected.
The dead zone is probably going to result in returning the phone and
cancelling the plan but it was fun while it lasted... <sigh>
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
> The maps show great EDGE coverage for my area (zip 85018, near
> Thomas and 44th street) but I'm showing only one bar on my
> Blackberry Pearl Flip and often when I access the web I get a "not
> in a coverage area" message which usually doesn't appear when I
> re-try but it seems coverage is VERY marginal for me?
"NexTel32708" on Howard Forums suggested that I could use WiFi while in
my house, of course it works perfectly as long as I'm in range of my
router.
I checked tower location for T-Mobile and Verizon and found that T-
Mobile has two towers* located nearer to my house than does
VerizonWireless but my Verizon phone gets 2-3 EVDO bars and 3-4 1X bars
while the BB gets 1 or 2 bars, usually one.
I've never heard of Blackberries having poor reception, any ideas about
this?
NOTE: The T-Mobile towers are situated to create an almost perfect
equilateral triangle with the towers forming the base and my house
forming the peak, I'm guessing it would be difficult for a tall
building to block both but that might be what's happening???? There
are some buildings between me and either tower but neither are very
tall so who knows?
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:11:44 -0700, XS11E <xs11e@mailinator.com> wrote
in <Xns9C2667B723E31xs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1>:
>I checked tower location for T-Mobile and Verizon and found that T-
>Mobile has two towers* located nearer to my house than does
>VerizonWireless but my Verizon phone gets 2-3 EVDO bars and 3-4 1X bars
>while the BB gets 1 or 2 bars, usually one.
>
>I've never heard of Blackberries having poor reception, any ideas about
>this?
Try a different T-Mobile phone, preferably one known for good radio
performance.
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://wireless.navas.us>
John FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
XS11E schrieb:
> [...] but my Verizon phone gets 2-3 EVDO bars and 3-4 1X bars
> while the BB gets 1 or 2 bars, usually one. [...]
These bars can mean anything, there is absolute no common standard that
defines how many bars correspond to how many dBm of signal level. This
becomes even more true when you compare two entirely different systems
like Verion's CDMA and T-Mobile's GSM.
> XS11E schrieb:
>> [...] but my Verizon phone gets 2-3 EVDO bars and 3-4 1X bars
>> while the BB gets 1 or 2 bars, usually one. [...]
>
> These bars can mean anything, there is absolute no common standard
> that defines how many bars correspond to how many dBm of signal
> level. This becomes even more true when you compare two entirely
> different systems like Verion's CDMA and T-Mobile's GSM.
You're correct but they do accurately measure *relative* signal
strength, i.e. more bars = stronger signal.
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
> On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:11:44 -0700, XS11E <xs11e@mailinator.com>
> wrote in <Xns9C2667B723E31xs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1>:
>
>>I checked tower location for T-Mobile and Verizon and found that
>>T- Mobile has two towers* located nearer to my house than does
>>VerizonWireless but my Verizon phone gets 2-3 EVDO bars and 3-4 1X
>>bars while the BB gets 1 or 2 bars, usually one.
>>
>>I've never heard of Blackberries having poor reception, any ideas
>>about this?
>
> Try a different T-Mobile phone, preferably one known for good
> radio performance.
Thanks, that'll be my next step, unfortunately I'm not sure how easy
that'll be. I'm going to call the store and ask about that, we'll see
what happens. Unfortunately I have time problems as well, SWMBO has me
pretty much scheduled for the next 4-5 days.
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
> XS11E schrieb:
>> [...]
>> You're correct but they do accurately measure *relative* signal
>> strength, i.e. more bars = stronger signal. [...]
>
> Yes, as long as you keep measuring with one phone, but I would not
> draw any conclusions from the difference in bars between two
> different phones.
There's no reason not to. One bar on a phone means it's getting a very
weak signal, three bars on another means it's getting a fairly strong
signal.
The signal strength indicator works just like the gas gauge on a car,
if car A shows Full and car B shows Empty you don't know how much gas
either car has in it's tank but you do know that the driver of car B
better do something soon! <G>
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:21:12 -0700, XS11E <xs11e@mailinator.com> wrote
in <Xns9C267DAA5C1A8xs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1>:
>Wilfried Anders <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> XS11E schrieb:
>>> [...]
>>> You're correct but they do accurately measure *relative* signal
>>> strength, i.e. more bars = stronger signal. [...]
>>
>> Yes, as long as you keep measuring with one phone, but I would not
>> draw any conclusions from the difference in bars between two
>> different phones.
>
>There's no reason not to. One bar on a phone means it's getting a very
>weak signal, three bars on another means it's getting a fairly strong
>signal.
>
>The signal strength indicator works just like the gas gauge on a car,
>if car A shows Full and car B shows Empty you don't know how much gas
>either car has in it's tank but you do know that the driver of car B
>better do something soon! <G>
Not necessarily -- there are things that can cause misleading signal
strength readings. For example, phones may report a strong signal from
a foreign network when the signal for the home network is weak
..
The 3G-capable Sony Ericsson TM506 would be a good phone to test signal
strength in your area -- I've got one, and it has exhibited very good
radio performance.
> The 3G-capable Sony Ericsson TM506 would be a good phone to test
> signal strength in your area -- I've got one, and it has exhibited
> very good radio performance.
Apparently not an option, I talked to the store and they aren't willing
to loan a phone nor do I know anyone else who has T-Mobile.
I'll go in tomorrow as they suggested and see if they have any ideas
but apparently I'm not going to be able to borrow a phone.
They suggested a different SIM card but I don't see how that would help
any???
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
XS11E schrieb:
> [...]
> There's no reason not to. One bar on a phone means it's getting a very
> weak signal, three bars on another means it's getting a fairly strong
> signal.
> The signal strength indicator works just like the gas gauge on a car,
> if car A shows Full and car B shows Empty you don't know how much gas
> either car has in it's tank but you do know that the driver of car B
> better do something soon! <G>
It's not that easy. Let's assume the tank in a car can take 20 gallons
and the warning light comes on at about 2 gallons. In that case, the
working range of the fuel gauge is about a factor of 10.
A cell phone needs to work over a dynamic range of about -50dBm (10^-8W)
to about -120dBm (10^-15W), that is a factor of 70dB or 10 million.
Instead of the fuel gaube, I'd rather comapare the signal bars to the
speedometer. In this case a speedometer that ranges from 10mph to 100
million mph. Where does "fast" start on this speedo? 50mph? 500mph?
20000mph?
The same goes for your cell phone, what is a weak signal? -100dBm?
-90dBm? Where does "decent signal" start? At -80dBm, or does it start at
-70dBm?
If you put two different phones next to each other and take them through
the coverage area of a cell tower, you will quite often find them show a
different number of bars.
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 13:31:08 -0700, XS11E <xs11e@mailinator.com> wrote
in <Xns9C26898617A47xs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1>:
>John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> The 3G-capable Sony Ericsson TM506 would be a good phone to test
>> signal strength in your area -- I've got one, and it has exhibited
>> very good radio performance.
>
>Apparently not an option, I talked to the store and they aren't willing
>to loan a phone nor do I know anyone else who has T-Mobile.
>
>I'll go in tomorrow as they suggested and see if they have any ideas
>but apparently I'm not going to be able to borrow a phone.
>
>They suggested a different SIM card but I don't see how that would help
>any???
A different SIM is unlikely to have any effect.
If you can afford it, you could buy a low-end Nokia phone, use it for
testing, and then return it.
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:27:50 -0700, XS11E <xs11e@mailinator.com> wrote
in <Xns9C269322D4BB0xs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1>:
>John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 13:31:08 -0700, XS11E <xs11e@mailinator.com>
>> wrote in <Xns9C26898617A47xs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1>:
>
>>>They suggested a different SIM card but I don't see how that would
>>>help any???
>>
>> A different SIM is unlikely to have any effect.
>
>I can't see any way it would, either.
The only case where a new SIM could improve reception is when a carrier
has added network capability that requires a new SIM, as when Cingular
(now AT&T) added ENS to merge the Cingular and ATTWS networks, but that
generally takes a new handset as well.
> On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:27:50 -0700, XS11E <xs11e@mailinator.com>
> wrote in <Xns9C269322D4BB0xs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1>:
>
>>John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 13:31:08 -0700, XS11E <xs11e@mailinator.com>
>>> wrote in <Xns9C26898617A47xs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1>:
>>
>>>>They suggested a different SIM card but I don't see how that
>>>>would help any???
>>>
>>> A different SIM is unlikely to have any effect.
>>
>>I can't see any way it would, either.
>
> The only case where a new SIM could improve reception is when a
> carrier has added network capability that requires a new SIM, as
> when Cingular (now AT&T) added ENS to merge the Cingular and ATTWS
> networks, but that generally takes a new handset as well.
One other possibility is that there might be something wrong with the
existing SIM but since I can get the signal up to 4 bars by going a
couple of blocks away that's very unlikely....
BTW, I'm showing -93dbm to -107dbm inside the house, pretty poor but I
already knew that. I can't find anyway to make the Verizon phone give
me this information?
I'll be running around later, I'll try to remember to keep checking the
signal..
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:32:00 -0700, XS11E <xs11e@mailinator.com> wrote
in <Xns9C269E0405468xs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1>:
>John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>> The only case where a new SIM could improve reception is when a
>> carrier has added network capability that requires a new SIM, as
>> when Cingular (now AT&T) added ENS to merge the Cingular and ATTWS
>> networks, but that generally takes a new handset as well.
>
>One other possibility is that there might be something wrong with the
>existing SIM but since I can get the signal up to 4 bars by going a
>couple of blocks away that's very unlikely....
If there were something wrong with the SIM that affected the radio then
your phone almost certainly wouldn't work at all.
>BTW, I'm showing -93dbm to -107dbm inside the house, pretty poor but I
>already knew that. I can't find anyway to make the Verizon phone give
>me this information?
If your phone has an external antenna connector (as many do), you could
get an external antenna to improve reception inside your home.
> If your phone has an external antenna connector (as many do), you
> could get an external antenna to improve reception inside your
> home.
I wish it did, it'd be worth a try but it probably wouldn't work, low
signal area extends for a block or more, I haven't tried going up
higher to see if a roof mount antenna would help and I won't until I
can figure how to climb a ladder with my mobility scooter! <G>
When I called the store yesterday the salesman, a T-Mobile Blackberry
user, said he lives in a basement apartment and has to use his WiFi
connection in order to get a good signal. As I mentioned before, my
WiFi connection works very well and the range almost covers the entire
poor reception area! The sales guy says his WiFi is always on, I
suppose I could wire my router and cable modem to be always on? I hate
to give more bucks to the electric company so my computer is off when
not in use but moving a couple of plugs will make the router and modem
always on and it's probably my best solution if I want to keep the
phone. Meanwhile, I did start a trouble ticket with T-Mobile and I'll
see what happens there.
Meanwhile, here's something to try, use Google Maps or any mapping
software to find 3620 E. Thomas Road, Phoenix, Arizona, 85018 (T-Mo
tower) and 4920 E. Thomas Road, same zip (T_Mo tower.) Now look at the
intersection of 44th street and Osborn Road (about the middle of the
dead zone and very near my house) and tell me how in HECK I can get a
weak signal so close to two towers?
Anyway, thanks for all the ideas and suggestions, I'm always pleased
with how fast folks can respond with help, if Usenet does die
eventually as everyone seems to be predicting, I'll miss it!
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
> On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:32:00 -0700, XS11E wrote:
>>
>> BTW, I'm showing -93dbm to -107dbm inside the house, pretty poor
>> but I already knew that.
>
> A stucco house? Bad news that, in a fringe area.
I'm in Phoenix, Arizona. My house, like most older homes, is a typical
concrete block with wood/plaster interior walls and who knows what kind
of fiberglass shingles on the roof.
Newer homes are wood frame stucco which always puzzled me here in the
termite capital of the universe????
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
In <Xns9C2754F8E8B7Dxs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1> XS11E <xs11e@mailinator.com> writes:
>suppose I could wire my router and cable modem to be always on? I hate
>to give more bucks to the electric company so my computer is off when
>not in use but moving a couple of plugs will make the router and modem
>always on and it's probably my best solution if I want to keep the
>phone.
The typical cable modem and router pull about five watts each. If you
leave them both on for a month, that's [10 watts times 720 hrs]
==> 7.2 kw-hr.
In the higher priced regions of, say, $0.25 (25 cents)/kw-hr,
that's a bit under two dollar/month. (Throw in 50 cents more
if you're air conditioning/cooling that room).
Annoying, but not critical.
--
__________________________________________________ ___
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
At 11 Jun 2009 15:29:35 +0000 danny burstein wrote:
> >suppose I could wire my router and cable modem to be always on? I hate
> >to give more bucks to the electric company so my computer is off when
> >not in use but moving a couple of plugs will make the router and modem
> >always on and it's probably my best solution if I want to keep the
> >phone.
>
> The typical cable modem and router pull about five watts each. If you
> leave them both on for a month, that's [10 watts times 720 hrs]
> ==> 7.2 kw-hr.
>
> In the higher priced regions of, say, $0.25 (25 cents)/kw-hr,
> that's a bit under two dollar/month. (Throw in 50 cents more
> if you're air conditioning/cooling that room).
>
> Annoying, but not critical.
And likely cheaper than switching carriers to improve reception!
On Thu, 11 Jun 2009 08:21:11 -0700, XS11E <xs11e@mailinator.com> wrote
in <Xns9C2754F8E8B7Dxs11emailinatorcom@127.0.0.1>:
>John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> If your phone has an external antenna connector (as many do), you
>> could get an external antenna to improve reception inside your
>> home.
>
>I wish it did, it'd be worth a try but it probably wouldn't work, low
>signal area extends for a block or more, I haven't tried going up
>higher to see if a roof mount antenna would help and I won't until I
>can figure how to climb a ladder with my mobility scooter! <G>
A good external antenna has considerable gain (signal boost) over the
small antenna in your handset and may work well in an area where the
internal antenna can't hack it, even without placing it up on your roof.
<http://www.wpsantennas.com/desktop-portable-cell-phone-antennas.aspx>
It's important to get one that matches the frequency of your carrier.
>When I called the store yesterday the salesman, a T-Mobile Blackberry
>user, said he lives in a basement apartment and has to use his WiFi
>connection in order to get a good signal. As I mentioned before, my
>WiFi connection works very well and the range almost covers the entire
>poor reception area! The sales guy says his WiFi is always on, I
>suppose I could wire my router and cable modem to be always on?
Sure -- most people do that.
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://wireless.navas.us>
John FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
Coverage? 
Linear Mode
