Re: Consumer Reports survey on Customer Service

karlkrandall@sbcglobal.net wrote:
> Cingular ranks low, and identical to JD Power rankings earlier this
> year, SprintPCS ranks lower.
>
> http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/busine...lphones05.html

It wasn't a customer service survey, it's their annual survey of carriers.

While it's not surprising that Verizon ranked first in 14 out of 20
areas, and second in the rest, I'm surprised that T-Mobile beat them in
three cities. No doubt T-Mobile's policy of discouraging new sign-ups
for people with no coverage at their home and work locations plays a
part in their good ratings. Alltel has always been a good carrier in the
cities that it serves, and it does well in roaming because it's CDMA.

As I predicted, Verizon did decline in their ratings over last year. In
last year's survey, Verizon was top-rated in 17 out of 18 metro areas,
this year it's only 14 out of 20, with a tie in a 15th area.

In some cities the differences are small, only one or two points
difference, but in many the differences were significant, i.e. Alltel
and Verizon were 14 points ahead of Cingular in Phoenix. Verizon
continues to be the best carrier in the San Francisco Bay Area by a wide
margin, with the three other carriers tied for 2nd through 4th, seven
points behind Verizon. This result echoes the experiences of all the
users I know personally, though some have chosen Cingular because they
want to roam internationally with their U.S. number.

It's pretty amusing that Consumer Reports joined the chorus in
criticizing Cingular's "fewest dropped calls" ads, since it's
demonstrably untrue, only Sprint had any cities with more dropped call
than Cingular, with Verizon and T-Mobile having the fewest dropped calls.

On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 17:00:50 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <45761641$0$82536$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>karlkrandall@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>> Cingular ranks low, and identical to JD Power rankings earlier this
>> year, SprintPCS ranks lower.
>>
>> http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/busine...lphones05.html
>
>It wasn't a customer service survey, it's their annual survey of carriers.
>
>While it's not surprising that Verizon ranked first in 14 out of 20
>areas, and second in the rest, I'm surprised that T-Mobile beat them in
>three cities. No doubt T-Mobile's policy of discouraging new sign-ups
>for people with no coverage at their home and work locations plays a
>part in their good ratings. Alltel has always been a good carrier in the
>cities that it serves, and it does well in roaming because it's CDMA.
>
>As I predicted, Verizon did decline in their ratings over last year. In
>last year's survey, Verizon was top-rated in 17 out of 18 metro areas,
>this year it's only 14 out of 20, with a tie in a 15th area.
>
>In some cities the differences are small, only one or two points
>difference, but in many the differences were significant, i.e. Alltel
>and Verizon were 14 points ahead of Cingular in Phoenix. Verizon
>continues to be the best carrier in the San Francisco Bay Area by a wide
>margin, with the three other carriers tied for 2nd through 4th, seven
>points behind Verizon. This result echoes the experiences of all the
>users I know personally, though some have chosen Cingular because they
>want to roam internationally with their U.S. number.

Cingular actually has excellent coverage in the Bay Area. Verizon is
demonstrably worse in a number of areas.

Stop trolling here. Take your Verizon advocacy to more appropriate
forums.

>It's pretty amusing that Consumer Reports joined the chorus in
>criticizing Cingular's "fewest dropped calls" ads, since it's
>demonstrably untrue, only Sprint had any cities with more dropped call
>than Cingular, with Verizon and T-Mobile having the fewest dropped calls.

The Cingular claim hasn't been challenged successfully.

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

Sprint dedicated $7 billion to network enhancements in 2006.
Sprint is investing more than $2 billion into the Nextel National
Network and adding more than 1,600 new cell sites to expand
coverage and increase capacity across the country.
Sprint leads the industry in mobile broadband coverage and
rollout of EVDO and EVDO Rev A. By the fourth quarter of 2007,
Sprints entire mobile broadband network will be upgraded to
EV-DO Revision A. Once the network is upgraded, Sprint will
also expect to begin offering in early 2008 high performance
walkie-talkie services over the EV-DO Revision A network.
Don't forget 4G, Sprint's planned buildout of the 4G WiMAX
network will be the standard for future mobility products and services.



The hallmark of Sprint Nextel is innovation.
Sprint's ranked #1 in the telecommunications industry in the
area of innovation in the FORTUNEs 2006 Most Admired Companies list.
Sprint Nextels impressive portfolio of assets includes a
high-speed data network, Sprint Power Vision, which empowers
customers to do what they want, when they want it, where
they want it. Sprint was the first carrier to offer live TV and
today we offer more than more than 50 video channels that
feature live and on-demand programming.

Popular price plans are available to Sprint customers to help
prevent them from paying high overage charges
and paying for minutes they do not use. Nights start at 7 p.m., This
gives customers two more hours of free calling. Sprint also offers
plans with Free Incoming Calls - in which calls from any of the
networks are free. Another item other co's don't offer.
We Have Saved The Best for Last = Upgrade Fees Eliminated:
Sprint recently eliminated device upgrade fees for existing customers
when they purchase a new device either through telesales or
online at www.sprint.com

---All Fact!!!

The big, really big, question is whether or not Sprint can pull all this
off. The technical, financial, and business risks are truly huge. Thus
far this is mostly vaporware, with Sprint mostly selling the Same Old
Stuff (including iDEN). Only time will tell. But I wouldn't want to be
a shareholder.

On 5 Dec 2006 17:23:27 -0800, "Andrew267@gmail.com"
<Andrew267@gmail.com> wrote in
<1165368207.660856.219300@80g2000cwy.googlegroups. com>:

>Sprint dedicated $7 billion to network enhancements in 2006.
>Sprint is investing more than $2 billion into the Nextel National
>Network and adding more than 1,600 new cell sites to expand
>coverage and increase capacity across the country.
>Sprint leads the industry in mobile broadband coverage and
>rollout of EVDO and EVDO Rev A. By the fourth quarter of 2007,
>Sprints entire mobile broadband network will be upgraded to
>EV-DO Revision A. Once the network is upgraded, Sprint will
>also expect to begin offering in early 2008 high performance
>walkie-talkie services over the EV-DO Revision A network.
>Don't forget 4G, Sprint's planned buildout of the 4G WiMAX
>network will be the standard for future mobility products and services.
>
>The hallmark of Sprint Nextel is innovation.
>Sprint's ranked #1 in the telecommunications industry in the
>area of innovation in the FORTUNEs 2006 Most Admired Companies list.
>Sprint Nextels impressive portfolio of assets includes a
>high-speed data network, Sprint Power Vision, which empowers
>customers to do what they want, when they want it, where
>they want it. Sprint was the first carrier to offer live TV and
>today we offer more than more than 50 video channels that
>feature live and on-demand programming.
>
>Popular price plans are available to Sprint customers to help
>prevent them from paying high overage charges
>and paying for minutes they do not use. Nights start at 7 p.m., This
>gives customers two more hours of free calling. Sprint also offers
>plans with Free Incoming Calls - in which calls from any of the
>networks are free. Another item other co's don't offer.
>We Have Saved The Best for Last = Upgrade Fees Eliminated:
>Sprint recently eliminated device upgrade fees for existing customers
>when they purchase a new device either through telesales or
>online at www.sprint.com
>
>---All Fact!!!

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

John Navas wrote:
> The big, really big, question is whether or not Sprint can pull all this
> off. The technical, financial, and business risks are truly huge. Thus
> far this is mostly vaporware, with Sprint mostly selling the Same Old
> Stuff (including iDEN). Only time will tell. But I wouldn't want to be
> a shareholder.
>


Exactly what I think, that is why I truly believe in my thread of R&D

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.c...c475110b94cfa9

Down the road the Money will have to come from somewhere, Will it be
T-Mobile?

Andrew267@gmail.com wrote:

> Popular price plans are available to Sprint customers to help
> prevent them from paying high overage charges
> and paying for minutes they do not use. Nights start at 7 p.m., This
> gives customers two more hours of free calling. Sprint also offers
> plans with Free Incoming Calls - in which calls from any of the
> networks are free. Another item other co's don't offer.
> We Have Saved The Best for Last = Upgrade Fees Eliminated:
> Sprint recently eliminated device upgrade fees for existing customers
> when they purchase a new device either through telesales or
> online at www.sprint.com
>
> ---All Fact!!!

Maybe so, but Sprint is still hemorrhaging customers with their high
churn and fewer additions. Poor handset selection is one reason for
their troubles.

Rumor is that Comcast is interested in Sprint, in order to compete
against package deals from AT&T.

> Poor handset selection is one reason for their troubles.
>

Soon that will be a thing of the past;

http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/zoom.php?p=1078&g=2

http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/phone.php?p=953

:-) Happy Holidays.

John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in
news:i16cn255bq40uk9gj37p4vsekflirk4i7l@4ax.com:

> On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 17:00:50 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote in <45761641$0$82536$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
>

>
>>It's pretty amusing that Consumer Reports joined the chorus in
>>criticizing Cingular's "fewest dropped calls" ads, since it's
>>demonstrably untrue, only Sprint had any cities with more dropped call
>>than Cingular, with Verizon and T-Mobile having the fewest dropped
>>calls.
>
> The Cingular claim hasn't been challenged successfully.
>

It would appear that the Consumer Reports report did just that, Novice.

John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in
news:e57cn25iu7aus2slokturpn2f0pi8g2rtp@4ax.com:

> The big, really big, question is whether or not Sprint can pull all this
> off. The technical, financial, and business risks are truly huge. Thus
> far this is mostly vaporware, with Sprint mostly selling the Same Old
> Stuff (including iDEN). Only time will tell. But I wouldn't want to be
> a shareholder.
>

There you have it, folks- financial analysis by the Cingular kool aid
supplier himself.

I particularly like the "mostly vaporware" portion of the post. Would that
include the new EVDO rev A data network they are currently rolling out and
iDen PTT, which both kick the crap out of Cingular in terms of users and
performance? Or maybe it refers to the successful integration of iDen and
CDMA platforms in a single device, already rolled out in 24 markets?

The only vapor involved in this thread is that which occupies the space
between your ears.

At 05 Dec 2006 17:00:50 -0800 SMS wrote:

> While it's not surprising that Verizon ranked first in 14 out of 20
> areas, and second in the rest, I'm surprised that T-Mobile beat them in
> three cities. No doubt T-Mobile's policy of discouraging new sign-ups
> for
> people with no coverage at their home and work locations plays a part in
> their good ratings.


I think you're being a little unfair- T-Mo isn't the new kid on the
block anymore- they've matured and have built out an excellent network in
a number of cities. Like Sprint, they've focused on covering population
rather than geography, and have used roaming agreements to fill in the
gaps.

Here in southwest Denver, T-Mo (and Sprint) hit places Cingular (and
sometimes Verizon) don't.

T-Mo's been around for a good number of years now and have invested a lot
in their network. It's a little disingenuous to say that their rating
was based on discouraging customers that have no coverage at home or work!





--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 01:31:30 GMT, John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com>
wrote:
: The big, really big, question is whether or not Sprint can pull all this
: off. The technical, financial, and business risks are truly huge. Thus
: far this is mostly vaporware, with Sprint mostly selling the Same Old
: Stuff (including iDEN). Only time will tell. But I wouldn't want to be
: a shareholder.
:
: On 5 Dec 2006 17:23:27 -0800, "Andrew267@gmail.com"
: <Andrew267@gmail.com> wrote in
: <1165368207.660856.219300@80g2000cwy.googlegroups. com>:
:
: >Sprint dedicated $7 billion to network enhancements in 2006.
: >Sprint is investing more than $2 billion into the Nextel National
: >Network and adding more than 1,600 new cell sites to expand
: >coverage and increase capacity across the country.
: >Sprint leads the industry in mobile broadband coverage and
: >rollout of EVDO and EVDO Rev A. By the fourth quarter of 2007,
: >Sprints entire mobile broadband network will be upgraded to
: >EV-DO Revision A. Once the network is upgraded, Sprint will
: >also expect to begin offering in early 2008 high performance
: >walkie-talkie services over the EV-DO Revision A network.
: >Don't forget 4G, Sprint's planned buildout of the 4G WiMAX
: >network will be the standard for future mobility products and services.
: >
: >The hallmark of Sprint Nextel is innovation.
: >Sprint's ranked #1 in the telecommunications industry in the
: >area of innovation in the FORTUNEs 2006 Most Admired Companies list.
: >Sprint Nextels impressive portfolio of assets includes a
: >high-speed data network, Sprint Power Vision, which empowers
: >customers to do what they want, when they want it, where
: >they want it. Sprint was the first carrier to offer live TV and
: >today we offer more than more than 50 video channels that
: >feature live and on-demand programming.
: >
: >Popular price plans are available to Sprint customers to help
: >prevent them from paying high overage charges
: >and paying for minutes they do not use. Nights start at 7 p.m., This
: >gives customers two more hours of free calling. Sprint also offers
: >plans with Free Incoming Calls - in which calls from any of the
: >networks are free. Another item other co's don't offer.
: >We Have Saved The Best for Last = Upgrade Fees Eliminated:
: >Sprint recently eliminated device upgrade fees for existing customers
: >when they purchase a new device either through telesales or
: >online at www.sprint.com
: >
: >---All Fact!!!

On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 01:04:31 -0700, Todd Allcock
<elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:
: At 05 Dec 2006 17:00:50 -0800 SMS wrote:
:
: > While it's not surprising that Verizon ranked first in 14 out of 20
: > areas, and second in the rest, I'm surprised that T-Mobile beat them in
: > three cities. No doubt T-Mobile's policy of discouraging new sign-ups
: > for people with no coverage at their home and work locations plays a
: > part in their good ratings.
:
:
: I think you're being a little unfair- T-Mo isn't the new kid on the
: block anymore- they've matured and have built out an excellent network in
: a number of cities. Like Sprint, they've focused on covering population
: rather than geography, and have used roaming agreements to fill in the
: gaps.
:
: Here in southwest Denver, T-Mo (and Sprint) hit places Cingular (and
: sometimes Verizon) don't.
:
: T-Mo's been around for a good number of years now and have invested a lot
: in their network. It's a little disingenuous to say that their rating
: was based on discouraging customers that have no coverage at home or work!

I guess I read SMS's comments a little differently. I thought he was pointing
out that T-Mobile was being honest about their coverage areas and trying to
avoid selling their service to customers who were sure to be dissatisfied and
drag down their ratings. To me that's a sound business practice that all
carriers should emulate.

Bob

Robert Coe wrote:

> I guess I read SMS's comments a little differently. I thought he was pointing
> out that T-Mobile was being honest about their coverage areas and trying to
> avoid selling their service to customers who were sure to be dissatisfied and
> drag down their ratings. To me that's a sound business practice that all
> carriers should emulate.

Yes, that's what I intended. However I should also point out that out in
the western region, T-Mobile is different than the old Voicestream that
people back east are used to. Originally, T-Mobile did a swap with
Cingular, where Cingular let T-Mobile use their 1900 MHz western
network, and T-Mobile let Cingular use their 1900 MHz NY network. The
1900 MHz GSM network out west was particularly bad (I had it for a
year), and it still isn't the greatest. When Cingular took over AT&T
Wireless, T-Mobile got the Cingular 1900 MHz network. Because Cingular,
formerly Pacific Bell Wireless was so late to the party, they had too
problems, first they couldn't put towers in all the prime locations that
AT&T and Verizon had towers, and second they were stuck at the less
desirable 1900 MHz, which is big disadvantage in terms of coverage.
Voicestream had a much longer history, and had good coverage in much of
the country.

I think that one reason why T-Mobile did so well in the CR survey, at
least in many regions, is that unlike Sprint and Cingular, who will sell
service to anyone with a pulse, T-Mobile actually checks to see if the
potential subscriber will have coverage, and if they don't, then they
discourage the potential subscriber from signing up. This policy results
in a lot fewer unhappy customers. With roaming on Cingular, in
non-T-Mobile areas, T-Mobile has pretty good nationwide coverage.

It's rather surprising how poorly Cingular fared, considering that their
network is much larger than T-Mobile's. I'm most familiar with the San
Francisco Bay Area, where Cingular has a lot less coverage than Verizon,
especially in non-urban areas, but T-Mobile also has a lot less coverage
than Verizon in the Bay Area, and was actually ranked the same as
Cingular, and far below Verizon.

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:457779d3$0$82538$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> Robert Coe wrote:
>
>> I guess I read SMS's comments a little differently. I thought he was
>> pointing
>> out that T-Mobile was being honest about their coverage areas and trying
>> to
>> avoid selling their service to customers who were sure to be dissatisfied
>> and
>> drag down their ratings. To me that's a sound business practice that all
>> carriers should emulate.
>
> Yes, that's what I intended. However I should also point out that out in
> the western region, T-Mobile is different than the old Voicestream that
> people back east are used to. Originally, T-Mobile did a swap with
> Cingular, where Cingular let T-Mobile use their 1900 MHz western network,
> and T-Mobile let Cingular use their 1900 MHz NY network. The 1900 MHz GSM
> network out west was particularly bad (I had it for a year), and it still
> isn't the greatest. When Cingular took over AT&T Wireless, T-Mobile got
> the Cingular 1900 MHz network. Because Cingular, formerly Pacific Bell
> Wireless was so late to the party, they had too problems, first they
> couldn't put towers in all the prime locations that AT&T and Verizon had
> towers, and second they were stuck at the less desirable 1900 MHz, which
> is big disadvantage in terms of coverage. Voicestream had a much longer
> history, and had good coverage in much of the country.
>
> I think that one reason why T-Mobile did so well in the CR survey, at
> least in many regions, is that unlike Sprint and Cingular, who will sell
> service to anyone with a pulse, T-Mobile actually checks to see if the
> potential subscriber will have coverage, and if they don't, then they
> discourage the potential subscriber from signing up. This policy results
> in a lot fewer unhappy customers. With roaming on Cingular, in
> non-T-Mobile areas, T-Mobile has pretty good nationwide coverage.
>
> It's rather surprising how poorly Cingular fared, considering that their
> network is much larger than T-Mobile's. I'm most familiar with the San
> Francisco Bay Area, where Cingular has a lot less coverage than Verizon,
> especially in non-urban areas, but T-Mobile also has a lot less coverage
> than Verizon in the Bay Area, and was actually ranked the same as
> Cingular, and far below Verizon.

I live in NYC and was with T-Mobile since the days it was Omni Point and was
relatively happy with my service.
Granted the old Verizon service that my wife had at that time was better in
many respects than O-P/VoiceStream.
However for the past 2-3 years my T-Mobile service was in my opinion
excellent.

I just switched to Cingular 2 months ago and I am very happy with the
service. I have not had any dropped calls and only 2 calls going into voice
mail after one or two rings. I find the customer service just as good as
T-Mobile which I consider to be excellent.

The only reason I switched to Cingular was because I was very frustrated by
a lack of coverage in Virginia when I go to visit relatives that live there.
I loved the fact the T-Mobile always gave me the unlock code for any phone
that I owned so I could use local SIM cards when I traveled overseas which
was quite often.

So far after only 2 months I would rate Cingular a the equal to T-Mobile

Double Tap

Double Tap wrote:

> The only reason I switched to Cingular was because I was very frustrated by
> a lack of coverage in Virginia when I go to visit relatives that live there.
> I loved the fact the T-Mobile always gave me the unlock code for any phone
> that I owned so I could use local SIM cards when I traveled overseas which
> was quite often.
>
> So far after only 2 months I would rate Cingular a the equal to T-Mobile

AT&T Wireless had big capacity problems in NYC, which Cingular inherited
when they acquired them. Fortunately these problems seem to have been
solved. I was in NYC earlier this year, in Cingular was fine. I was also
in Washington DC where Verizon is still much, much better than Cingular,
with one of the major advantages being coverage in the metro.

I choose Sprint because it works for ME wherever i've ever wanted it to
for the past 7 years and they have the best wireless data of ANY
carrier in the nation.


On 2006-12-05 20:00:50 -0500, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> said:

> karlkrandall@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>> Cingular ranks low, and identical to JD Power rankings earlier this
>> year, SprintPCS ranks lower.
>>
>> http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/busine...lphones05.html
>
> It wasn't a customer service survey, it's their annual survey of carriers.
>
> While it's not surprising that Verizon ranked first in 14 out of 20
> areas, and second in the rest, I'm surprised that T-Mobile beat them in
> three cities. No doubt T-Mobile's policy of discouraging new sign-ups
> for people with no coverage at their home and work locations plays a
> part in their good ratings. Alltel has always been a good carrier in
> the cities that it serves, and it does well in roaming because it's
> CDMA.
>
> As I predicted, Verizon did decline in their ratings over last year. In
> last year's survey, Verizon was top-rated in 17 out of 18 metro areas,
> this year it's only 14 out of 20, with a tie in a 15th area.
>
> In some cities the differences are small, only one or two points
> difference, but in many the differences were significant, i.e. Alltel
> and Verizon were 14 points ahead of Cingular in Phoenix. Verizon
> continues to be the best carrier in the San Francisco Bay Area by a
> wide margin, with the three other carriers tied for 2nd through 4th,
> seven points behind Verizon. This result echoes the experiences of all
> the users I know personally, though some have chosen Cingular because
> they want to roam internationally with their U.S. number.
>
> It's pretty amusing that Consumer Reports joined the chorus in
> criticizing Cingular's "fewest dropped calls" ads, since it's
> demonstrably untrue, only Sprint had any cities with more dropped call
> than Cingular, with Verizon and T-Mobile having the fewest dropped
> calls.

whare are you and what plan and phone do you have iam trying sprint my self
and i get alot of conflicting info about sprint that makes makeing up my
mind to keep or change from sprint hard
thanks

--
AL'S COMPUTERS
"Der.Merovingian" <Der.Mero@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:2006120623513975249-DerMero@NoSpamcom...
> I choose Sprint because it works for ME wherever i've ever wanted it to
> for the past 7 years and they have the best wireless data of ANY
> carrier in the nation.
>
>
> On 2006-12-05 20:00:50 -0500, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> said:
>
> > karlkrandall@sbcglobal.net wrote:
> >> Cingular ranks low, and identical to JD Power rankings earlier this
> >> year, SprintPCS ranks lower.
> >>
> >> http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/busine...lphones05.html
> >
> > It wasn't a customer service survey, it's their annual survey of
carriers.
> >
> > While it's not surprising that Verizon ranked first in 14 out of 20
> > areas, and second in the rest, I'm surprised that T-Mobile beat them in
> > three cities. No doubt T-Mobile's policy of discouraging new sign-ups
> > for people with no coverage at their home and work locations plays a
> > part in their good ratings. Alltel has always been a good carrier in
> > the cities that it serves, and it does well in roaming because it's
> > CDMA.
> >
> > As I predicted, Verizon did decline in their ratings over last year. In
> > last year's survey, Verizon was top-rated in 17 out of 18 metro areas,
> > this year it's only 14 out of 20, with a tie in a 15th area.
> >
> > In some cities the differences are small, only one or two points
> > difference, but in many the differences were significant, i.e. Alltel
> > and Verizon were 14 points ahead of Cingular in Phoenix. Verizon
> > continues to be the best carrier in the San Francisco Bay Area by a
> > wide margin, with the three other carriers tied for 2nd through 4th,
> > seven points behind Verizon. This result echoes the experiences of all
> > the users I know personally, though some have chosen Cingular because
> > they want to roam internationally with their U.S. number.
> >
> > It's pretty amusing that Consumer Reports joined the chorus in
> > criticizing Cingular's "fewest dropped calls" ads, since it's
> > demonstrably untrue, only Sprint had any cities with more dropped call
> > than Cingular, with Verizon and T-Mobile having the fewest dropped
> > calls.
>
>

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:e57cn25iu7aus2slokturpn2f0pi8g2rtp@4ax.com...
> The big, really big, question is whether or not Sprint can pull all this
> off. The technical, financial, and business risks are truly huge. Thus
> far this is mostly vaporware, with Sprint mostly selling the Same Old
> Stuff (including iDEN). Only time will tell. But I wouldn't want to be
> a shareholder.
>
> On 5 Dec 2006 17:23:27 -0800, "Andrew267@gmail.com"
> <Andrew267@gmail.com> wrote in
> <1165368207.660856.219300@80g2000cwy.googlegroups. com>:
>
>>Sprint dedicated $7 billion to network enhancements in 2006.
>>Sprint is investing more than $2 billion into the Nextel National
>>Network and adding more than 1,600 new cell sites to expand
>>coverage and increase capacity across the country.
>>Sprint leads the industry in mobile broadband coverage and
>>rollout of EVDO and EVDO Rev A. By the fourth quarter of 2007,
>>Sprints entire mobile broadband network will be upgraded to
>>EV-DO Revision A. Once the network is upgraded, Sprint will
>>also expect to begin offering in early 2008 high performance
>>walkie-talkie services over the EV-DO Revision A network.
>>Don't forget 4G, Sprint's planned buildout of the 4G WiMAX
>>network will be the standard for future mobility products and services.
>>
>>The hallmark of Sprint Nextel is innovation.
>>Sprint's ranked #1 in the telecommunications industry in the
>>area of innovation in the FORTUNEs 2006 Most Admired Companies list.
>>Sprint Nextels impressive portfolio of assets includes a
>>high-speed data network, Sprint Power Vision, which empowers
>>customers to do what they want, when they want it, where
>>they want it. Sprint was the first carrier to offer live TV and
>>today we offer more than more than 50 video channels that
>>feature live and on-demand programming.
>>
>>Popular price plans are available to Sprint customers to help
>>prevent them from paying high overage charges
>>and paying for minutes they do not use. Nights start at 7 p.m., This
>>gives customers two more hours of free calling. Sprint also offers
>>plans with Free Incoming Calls - in which calls from any of the
>>networks are free. Another item other co's don't offer.
>>We Have Saved The Best for Last = Upgrade Fees Eliminated:
>>Sprint recently eliminated device upgrade fees for existing customers
>>when they purchase a new device either through telesales or
>>online at www.sprint.com
>>
>>---All Fact!!!
>
> --
> Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
> John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

And after all you lecturing about the evils of top posting. Shame on you.

On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 04:51:39 GMT, Der.Merovingian <Der.Mero@NoSpam.com>
wrote in <2006120623513975249-DerMero@NoSpamcom>:

>I choose Sprint because it works for ME wherever i've ever wanted it to
>for the past 7 years

Good reason.

>and they have the best wireless data of ANY
>carrier in the nation.

For you. Not for me, and not for many others. There is no one best
carrier for all needs.

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

On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 18:17:59 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <457779d3$0$82538$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>Robert Coe wrote:
>
>> I guess I read SMS's comments a little differently. I thought he was pointing
>> out that T-Mobile was being honest about their coverage areas and trying to
>> avoid selling their service to customers who were sure to be dissatisfied and
>> drag down their ratings. To me that's a sound business practice that all
>> carriers should emulate.
>
>Yes, that's what I intended. However I should also point out that out in
>the western region, T-Mobile is different than the old Voicestream that
>people back east are used to. Originally, T-Mobile did a swap with
>Cingular, where Cingular let T-Mobile use their 1900 MHz western
>network, and T-Mobile let Cingular use their 1900 MHz NY network.

Actually a joint venture.

>The
>1900 MHz GSM network out west was particularly bad (I had it for a
>year), and it still isn't the greatest.

Actually quite good.

>When Cingular took over AT&T
>Wireless, T-Mobile got the Cingular 1900 MHz network.

Actually a sale to T-Mobile by Cingular, with a purchase base of network
use by Cingular subscribers.

>Because Cingular,
>formerly Pacific Bell Wireless was so late to the party, they had too
>problems, first they couldn't put towers in all the prime locations that
>AT&T and Verizon had towers, and second they were stuck at the less
>desirable 1900 MHz, which is big disadvantage in terms of coverage.

Actually no real disadvantage.

>I think that one reason why T-Mobile did so well in the CR survey, at
>least in many regions, is that unlike Sprint and Cingular, who will sell
>service to anyone with a pulse, T-Mobile actually checks to see if the
>potential subscriber will have coverage, and if they don't, then they
>discourage the potential subscriber from signing up. This policy results
>in a lot fewer unhappy customers. With roaming on Cingular, in
>non-T-Mobile areas, T-Mobile has pretty good nationwide coverage.
>
>It's rather surprising how poorly Cingular fared, considering that their
>network is much larger than T-Mobile's. I'm most familiar with the San
>Francisco Bay Area, where Cingular has a lot less coverage than Verizon,
>especially in non-urban areas, but T-Mobile also has a lot less coverage
>than Verizon in the Bay Area, and was actually ranked the same as
>Cingular, and far below Verizon.

That T-Mobile did so well with less coverage than Cingular, given
network sharing agreements, actually shows the survey to be unreliable.

Cingular actually has the best coverage in the Bay Area. T-Mobile
isn't bad either. Sprint and Verizon are demonstrably worse in a number
of areas, including significant parts of the East Bay.

Take your Verizon advocacy to a more appropriate forum.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

BACKGROUND:

1. Steven has an admitted grudge against Cingular (because of poor
coverage at his wife's workplace), and flames it (and GSM) incessantly,
much of the time with things he simply makes up, as he did here.

2. Studies of carriers, including those he purports to cite, actually
show small differences between carriers (not a "wide margin" as Steven
claims) that are often within the margin of error. For example, recent
JD Powers ratings of major carrier call quality ranged from only +/-2%
to only +/-5% in its six regions.

3. Results for Cingular and Sprint-Nextel are patently distorted by
combining dissimilar technologies and networks (e.g., TDMA/D-AMPS + old
GSM + new GSM; CDMA + iDEN). This is roughly like claiming the average
person has one breast.

4. CU surveys can't be validly generalized because they are a
self-selected sample of a non-representative universe (CR subscribers).
(Usenet of course has a similar problem.)

5. Results showing T-Mobile with better network performance than
Cingular in the West are patently nonsensical, given that Cingular uses
the same network as T-Mobile (the old Cingular "orange" network), plus
the extensive ATTWS ("blue" network).

6. Verizon doesn't have coverage in some of the areas Steven claims;
e.g., large sections of Skyline Blvd, and nearby sections of Page Mill
Road and Big Basin Way.

7. All carriers have coverage holes. There is no one best carrier in
all areas, as Steven claims. I've previously identified some areas
where Cingular coverage is better than Verizon coverage; e.g.,
waterfront parts of Corte Madera.

8. Steven's claim that 1900 MHz takes "4x to 5x" the number of towers as
compared to 800/850 MHz is patently absurd.

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

In article <3u6hn2577n0de3npfu0cvuc1nnpvmoq855@4ax.com>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> 1. Steven has an admitted grudge against Cingular (because of poor
> coverage at his wife's workplace), and flames it (and GSM) incessantly,
> much of the time with things he simply makes up, as he did here.


can you provide any evidence whatsoever that he made anything up,
here or elsewhere?

On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:19:04 -0500, "james g. keegan jr."
<jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote in
<jgkeegan-99E5E6.18190407122006@individual.net>:

>In article <3u6hn2577n0de3npfu0cvuc1nnpvmoq855@4ax.com>,
> John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> 1. Steven has an admitted grudge against Cingular (because of poor
>> coverage at his wife's workplace), and flames it (and GSM) incessantly,
>> much of the time with things he simply makes up, as he did here.
>
>can you provide any evidence whatsoever that he made anything up,
>here or elsewhere?

Search my prior posts with Google.

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

In article <4f8hn2p2jpsdgrcfg4nu10hp67lfv3f8ja@4ax.com>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:19:04 -0500, "james g. keegan jr."
> <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote in
> <jgkeegan-99E5E6.18190407122006@individual.net>:
>
> >In article <3u6hn2577n0de3npfu0cvuc1nnpvmoq855@4ax.com>,
> > John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >
> >> 1. Steven has an admitted grudge against Cingular (because of poor
> >> coverage at his wife's workplace), and flames it (and GSM) incessantly,
> >> much of the time with things he simply makes up, as he did here.
> >
> >can you provide any evidence whatsoever that he made anything up,
> >here or elsewhere?
>
> Search my prior posts with Google.

i'll take that to mean you have none and that you made up your
allegation.

that was kind of clear, anyway.

On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:25:29 -0500, "james g. keegan jr."
<jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote in
<jgkeegan-81C6B0.18252907122006@individual.net>:

>In article <4f8hn2p2jpsdgrcfg4nu10hp67lfv3f8ja@4ax.com>,
> John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:19:04 -0500, "james g. keegan jr."
>> <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote in
>> <jgkeegan-99E5E6.18190407122006@individual.net>:
>>
>> >In article <3u6hn2577n0de3npfu0cvuc1nnpvmoq855@4ax.com>,
>> > John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> 1. Steven has an admitted grudge against Cingular (because of poor
>> >> coverage at his wife's workplace), and flames it (and GSM) incessantly,
>> >> much of the time with things he simply makes up, as he did here.
>> >
>> >can you provide any evidence whatsoever that he made anything up,
>> >here or elsewhere?
>>
>> Search my prior posts with Google.
>
>i'll take that to mean you have none and that you made up your
>allegation.

You are of course free to take it however you want, no matter how
unfounded and silly. Even without Google, my prior post contained ample
evidence of misstatements by Steven that can be verified easily, as you
know.

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

In article <4u8hn21gtsct6g1dk6t98h26c60b8jigqe@4ax.com>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:25:29 -0500, "james g. keegan jr."
> <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote in
> <jgkeegan-81C6B0.18252907122006@individual.net>:
>
> >In article <4f8hn2p2jpsdgrcfg4nu10hp67lfv3f8ja@4ax.com>,
> > John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:19:04 -0500, "james g. keegan jr."
> >> <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote in
> >> <jgkeegan-99E5E6.18190407122006@individual.net>:
> >>
> >> >In article <3u6hn2577n0de3npfu0cvuc1nnpvmoq855@4ax.com>,
> >> > John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> 1. Steven has an admitted grudge against Cingular (because of poor
> >> >> coverage at his wife's workplace), and flames it (and GSM) incessantly,
> >> >> much of the time with things he simply makes up, as he did here.
> >> >
> >> >can you provide any evidence whatsoever that he made anything up,
> >> >here or elsewhere?
> >>
> >> Search my prior posts with Google.
> >
> >i'll take that to mean you have none and that you made up your
> >allegation.
>
> You are of course free to take it however you want

even you must be aware on usenet that unsupported claims are
considered false claims.

i expect most readers took your claim as false from the beginning.

In alt.cellular.t-mobile james g. keegan jr. <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> even you must be aware on usenet that unsupported claims are
> considered false claims.
>

They are not considered false, they are considered unsupported.

> i expect most readers took your claim as false from the beginning.

I doubt that.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0

jgkeegan@gmail.com (james g. keegan jr.) wrote in
news:jgkeegan-AC55C6.18560007122006@individual.net:

> even you must be aware on usenet that unsupported claims are
> considered false claims.

Generally, they're simply considered unsupported, at least at first.

If the claimant refuses to support his assertions, that likely will
change.

--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com

On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 19:47:06 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <457988fb$0$82601$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>james g. keegan jr. wrote:
>
>> even you must be aware on usenet that unsupported claims are
>> considered false claims.
>
>Actually, whether statements are considered true or false has a lot to
>do with the reputation of who is posting them. If they are posted by
>someone with a history of lying and off-topic posting then they are
>often written off as false. This is the problem with Navas, I think that
>he may on occasion post something useful and correct, but the Usenet
>community now automatically discounts anything he writes because of his
>history. No one would think any worse of him if he admitted his errors
>and changed his ways.

'Those who have evidence will present their evidence,
whereas those who do not have evidence will attack the man.'

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

In alt.cellular.sprintpcs John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
> 'Those who have evidence will present their evidence,
> whereas those who do not have evidence will attack the man.'
>

You begin to stutter ... that must explain why you can't quit posting the
alt.cellular.cingular charter to the wrong newsgroup [alt.cellular.attws].

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0

I don't believe that there is anymore attws as it was purchased by Cingular.
Is that correct Tommy T?

"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eSheh.3450$Yy1.3298@textfe.usenetserver.com.. .
> In alt.cellular.sprintpcs John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>> 'Those who have evidence will present their evidence,
>> whereas those who do not have evidence will attack the man.'
>>
>
> You begin to stutter ... that must explain why you can't quit posting the
> alt.cellular.cingular charter to the wrong newsgroup [alt.cellular.attws].
>
> --
> Thomas T. Veldhouse
> Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
>
>